Paragraph 160

Strive therefore to comprehend the meaning of “return” which hath been so explicitly revealed in the Qur’án itself, and which none hath as yet understood. What sayest thou? If thou sayest that Muḥammad was the “return” of the Prophets of old, as is witnessed by this verse, His Companions must likewise be the “return” of the bygone Companions, even as the “return” of the former people is clearly attested by the text of the above-mentioned verses. And if thou deniest this, thou hast surely repudiated the truth of the Qur’án, the surest testimony of God unto men. In like manner, endeavor to grasp the significance of “return,” “revelation,” and “resurrection,” as witnessed in the days of the Manifestations of the divine Essence, that thou mayest behold with thine own eyes the “return” of the holy souls into sanctified and illumined bodies, and mayest wash away the dust of ignorance, and cleanse the darkened self with the waters of mercy flowing from the Source of divine Knowledge; that perchance thou mayest, through the power of God and the light of divine guidance, distinguish the Morn of everlasting splendor from the darksome night of error.

Strive - The most difficult part of this book is not the reading of it, nor the ideas presented, but the work we need to do in reflecting on these ideas and learning how to incorporate them in our heart and in our actions.

In this case, we are asked to strive to understand the meaning of "return", "revelation", and "resurrection". This follows on the previous three paragraphs in which He points out how some people are attached to their understanding of how things will be in the latter days. In the first instance, it was the notion that the Promised One would need to perform a particular miracle. In the second, it is the idea that the "return" could not be someone from a different culture. These are only two examples, of course, that could be used here. Both of them, though, speak to the importance of detachment, that primary quality in Part One.

With these two examples, He asks us to "strive" to understand what is really meant by the "return". When we consider these examples, and struggle to see what they imply, we come to the realization that it is the return of not an individual, but the return of circumstances. It is the return of paradigms. It is the return of the same story arc. Just as we see the eastern sky getting brighter every day with the sunrise, the flowers sprouting each and every spring, we can recognize a similar cycle in the grand scheme of the various religions.

If we are used to seeing our own faith as the pinnacle, then this can be very difficult to accept, for some may see it as the lowering of one faith to be on par with all the others. What those people fail to understand, though, is that it is actually the raising of all the other faiths to be on the same level as your own. We are not lowering one, but raising all.

From here, Baha'u'llah offers us some beautiful imagery to help us better understand His point.

If we want to better understand the unity of all these religions, and more clearly see how they all follow the same pattern, He tell us to "wash away the dust of ignorance... with the waters of mercy flowing from the Source of divine Knowledge". What does this mean? How are we to understand it? What is it that we are ignorant of?

Given the context, it seems to be the idea that there is only one instance of "return", and that it will have certain characteristics that we already know, such as some exact miracle. Once we free ourselves of this prejudicial understanding, this idea that we somehow know what will happen, when we free ourselves of this, then we can better see the light that shines in the actions of each and every Messenger of God. We can better notice the same old attacks by those in power. We can better recognize the heroism and wisdom of the companions. It is through the mercy of God that this is shared, so that we may be able to recognize the Messenger in Their own lifetime. It is through the "Source of divine Knowledge" that these points are made, such as when He retold the stories of the Manifestations of old, such as Noah, and focused solely on what they all had in common, not what made each of them unique.

When we do this, we find ourselves filled with love and awe for each and every faith, and this love shines out from our soul like a light. Too often we have seen interfaith gatherings where some people feel that their job is to teach the ignorant who do not know about the faith they are espousing. They come in and try to convert all around them, not realizing that they are doing no more than alienating others, condemning them for wearing a different team jacket, so to speak. But then there are those others who go to these interfaith gatherings hoping to learn more about other paths. They are eager to see a different perspective. And it is these souls that are filled with light. They make the whole gathering feel loved and respected. Even though they are firm believers in their own path, they understand that everyone has a truth to share, and that they can learn from all. This, to us, seems like a beautiful example of cleansing "the darkened self with the waters of mercy flowing from the Source of divine Knowledge".

Then we come to that little word we have seen so often in this book, "perchance". With luck, by the Will of God, when all this happens, when we begin to understand this grand pattern of recurrence, we will be able to recognize the new Morn, the rise of a new Day, the appearance of another divine Messenger for today.

Paragraph 159

Likewise, Muḥammad, in another verse, uttereth His protest against the people of that age. He saith: “Although they had before prayed for victory over those who believed not, yet when there came unto them He of Whom they had knowledge, they disbelieved in Him. The curse of God on the infidels!” Reflect how this verse also implieth that the people living in the days of Muḥammad were the same people who in the days of the Prophets of old contended and fought in order to promote the Faith, and teach the Cause, of God. And yet, how could the generations living at the time of Jesus and Moses, and those who lived in the days of Muḥammad, be regarded as being actually one and the same people? Moreover, those whom they had formerly known were Moses, the Revealer of the Pentateuch, and Jesus, the Author of the Gospel. Notwithstanding, why did Muḥammad say: “When He of Whom they had knowledge came unto them”—that is Jesus or Moses—“they disbelieved in Him”? Was not Muḥammad to outward seeming called by a different name? Did He not come forth out of a different city? Did He not speak a different language, and reveal a different Law? How then can the truth of this verse be established, and its meaning be made clear?

 

Here it is worth noting the questions asked by the uncle of the Bab, the questions that led to the revelation of this book, particularly the third question. In it the uncle says that the Bab did not appear in conformity to the traditions and reports of the Imams. He specifically says that we cannot interpret these things metaphorically, at the expense of the literal interpretation, for this would just lead to confusion. This, of course, is a great question. It is one that many people have when encountering a new faith.

He begins with the word "Likewise". Likewise to what? To the previous quote, in paragraph 157. They are both of a theme, namely equating those who denied Him to those who denied Moses and Jesus.

In this paragraph Baha'u'llah takes this concept that the uncle questioned and steps it back from the Imams to Muhammad, Himself. He points out in both this quote, and the previous one, that a literal interpretation of what Muhammad said is manifestly impossible. In these quotes from the Qur'an, Muhammad denounces those who have denied the Messengers of God. They are, He says or implies, the same people every dispensation. But as they lived thousands of years apart, this is obviously impossible.

Beyond that, He is also pointing out that Muhammad likens Himself to these other Messengers, but was from a different city, spoke a different language, revealed different laws. How could we call them the same?

It is, in essence, the same question the uncle asked of the Bab, but asked of Muhammad, Whom the uncle already recognizes and reveres. He seems to accept it of Muhammad without realizing it. Here Baha'u'llah gently points out that it is the same question he is asking of the Bab, the same type of question asked of all the Messengers of the past.

He asks us to reflect on this. How can it be? How are we to make sense of it, if we take it literally?

Paragraph 158

Ponder this in thine heart, that the sweet gales of divine knowledge, blowing from the meads of mercy, may waft upon thee the fragrance of the Beloved’s utterance, and cause thy soul to attain the Riḍván of understanding. As the wayward of every age have failed to fathom the deeper import of these weighty and pregnant utterances, and imagined the answer of the Prophets of God to be irrelevant to the questions they asked them, they therefore have attributed ignorance and folly to those Essences of knowledge and understanding. 

"Ponder". Every time we come across this word, or one of its synonyms such as "meditate", we stop and do just that. We ponder.

This time we are asked to ponder in our heart, which is not where we normally consider our ponderings. That is usually reserved for the head. Here, though, we are asked to use our heart, which comes up often in this book, and in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, in general.

But what are we to ponder? It could be the previous statement, "that those people of wickedness were the selfsame people who in every age opposed and caviled at the Prophets and Messengers of God, till they finally caused them all to suffer martyrdom", or the following one which says, "the wayward of every age have failed to fathom the deeper import of these weighty and pregnant utterances, and imagined the answer of the Prophets of God to be irrelevant to the questions they asked them, they therefore have attributed ignorance and folly to those Essences of knowledge and understanding". Whichever way we read it, whichever line we "ponder", we are left to see the similarities between all those who have denied the Messengers of God and caused Their persecution.

As we ponder this recurring tragedy in our heart, though, we are also reminded of the recurring joy in every Revelation. "Rejoice in the gladness of thine heart," He says in the Hidden Words, "that thou mayest be worthy to meet Me and mirror forth My beauty." Is this not what we all desire? To be worthy of meeting Him and mirroring His beauty? Maybe it is this joy that helps us be worthy, for surely this joy is a mirroring of God's love. This would be quite different from a heart that opposes and cavils, and shows anger or hatred. That in no way mirrors God's beauty.

And while there is so much we could say about this paragraph, we will limit ourselves to two more things.

First, the imagery in the winds blowing from the meadows leading us to a garden. Sometimes we find it useful to look at this imagery more closely and see what it is saying. Here we have a strong wind, not a gentle thing, but it is sweet. And what is this very strong wind? It is "divine knowledge". Strong and yet sweet. And like all winds, we can't see it, but we sure know it's there. Then we are told that it is coming across the meadows of mercy. It's not a meadow of retribution or anger, but one of mercy. Can you imagine the flowers that are growing there? Now, like all breezes blowing across a meadow, it's carrying the scent of the flowers there to us, and this sweet scent is coming from "the Beloved's utterance". I don't know about you, but if I smell a beautiful scent on the breeze, I want to go to its source. Here, by following this breeze back, it will lead us to the paradise, the Ridvan, of understanding.

So, a garden, the garden of understanding, has the flowers of His utterance giving off this beautiful perfume. This sweet perfume is carried on a strong wind across the meadows of mercy, and just waiting for us to recognize it and follow it back to its source.

Second, there is the caution of thinking the answers given by the Messengers are somehow irrelevant to the questions being asked. If seen in one way, it would appear to be a caution about this very book. After all, if you think about it, it could seem like He hasn't really answered the uncle's questions about the Bab. Remember, one of those questions was about why the Bab didn't show the sovereignty of the Promised One. Baha'u'llah hasn't answered this question most likely because it's an impossible question to answer. Instead, he has re-framed the question to its essential core as, "How did the Bab show the sovereignty of the Promised One?" The first presumes He didn't do it. The second presumes we don't understand how He did it. And it is this second question He answers. But to the prejudicial eye, they could easily claim that He didn't answer the question at all, completely missing the point.

It reminds us of Manikchi Sahib and "The Tabernacle of Unity". In the first letter we have some of Baha'u'llah's most oft-quoted statements. "Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in..." "Ye are the fruits of one tree, and the leaves of one branch." "Whatsoever leadeth to the decline of ignorance and the increase of knowledge hath been, and will ever remain, approved in the sight of the Lord of creation." But Manikchi Sahib responded saying, basically, "You didn't answer my questions." He doesn't call Baha'u'llah mad or anything, but he definitely doesn't see the connection between his questions and the response. It seems to be the sincerity in his reply, saying "I don't get it", that prompts the next letter in which Baha'u'llah essentially says, "Actually I did", and then shows how each answer was given a very profound response.

The beauty of these two letters is that we not only get the profound replies written by Baha'u'llah, but through the second letter we get to see the original questions. And honestly? If we had written those questions to Baha'u'llah and received that first tablet as a reply, we probably wouldn't have gotten it either.