Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Wolfgang A. Klebel, Baha'u'llah's Most Sublime Vision, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Bahá’u’lláh’s “ Most Sublim e Vision”

Wolfgang Klebel

Introduction
While the concept of Unity in the Bahá’í Faith is central and
well documented and expressed as Unity of God, of Religions
and of Humanity, the phrase ‘Revelation of Unity’ cannot be
found as such in the Writings. In fact, the idea of Unity is a
prevalent topic of teaching and is described as one of the most
important aspects of the Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Who calls
complete and enduring unity the distinguishing feature (G 97) of
His Revelation.
Neither is the inverse statement ‘Unity of Revelation’ as such
expressed in the Bahá’í Writings. Yet, how “Unity” is
understood in this dispensation is of importance, as Bahá’u’lláh
has stated in a prayer: “I entreat Thee, (…) to open the eyes of
Thy people that they may recognize in this Revelation the
manifestation of Thy transcendent unity.” (PM 307`)
This paper investigates the question: What philosophical
viewpoints are necessary to understand what Bahá’u’lláh calls
“Thy transcendent unity” i.e., the concept of unity and oneness,
which are ubiquitous in the Bahá’í Writings? The traditional
understanding of the unity between the whole and its parts, as
presented in philosophy, will be considered in the light of the
Bahá’í Writings. The new vision of the ‘Integral Whole’ (“das
integrale Ganze“) will be used to better understand what the
Writings of Bahá’u’lláh have revealed as the unity and oneness
of the world. This new worldview is more than a political and
social principle and needs to be considered as the heart of the
New World Order (GWB 136) and of The Most Sublime Vision
(ESW 54) of Bahá’u’lláh; therefore it is an ontological and
metaphysical principle. Furthermore, this understanding relates
to the new findings of quantum mechanics, which will be
described in another paper as Entanglement and as a
fundamentally holistic vision of the universe.
It can be said that this paper is written with the intention to
30 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

assist in the correlation of the Bahá'í Faith with current
thoughts, as expressed in philosophy and science, following the
advice of the Universal House of Justice:
Newly enrolled professionals and other experts provide a
great resource for the development of Bahá'í scholarship.
It is hoped that, as they attain a deeper grasp of the
Teachings and their significance, they will be able to assist
Bahá'í communities in correlating the beliefs of the Faith
with the current thoughts and problems of the world.
(SCH 13)
While it is quite obvious that to attempt such an endeavor
today surpasses by far the capacity of any scholar, and while the
understanding of the Bahá’í Revelation will take one millennium
to be fully completed, this paper is a simple beginning to first
raise the question, and then to try finding a provisional answer.
In other words, this paper seeks to find the answer which is
available today, but which will need to be revised over time as
our understanding of the Revelation is relative and progressive
according to the beloved Guardian. About the World Order of
Bahá’u’lláh, he said: “Its teachings revolve around the
fundamental principle that religious truth is not absolute but
relative, that Divine Revelation is progressive, not final.”
(WOB 57) In pointing towards a change in philosophical
thinking that has developed after the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh,
it is hoped that this beginning will open the way to better and
more erudite responses in the future.
The new life of the seeker is described by Bahá’u’lláh, when
He said:
He will find himself endowed with a New Eye, a New Ear,
a New Heart, and a New Mind. (KI 195)
Therefore, this new understanding of “Thy transcendent
Unity” requires in the seeker the endowment of a new eye, ear,
heart and mind. It needs to be understood, right at the outset of
this contribution to the ‘Irfán Colloquia, that this “Most
Sublime Vision” of Bahá’u’lláh can only be appreciated when
the seeker – and that hopefully includes all of us – is “endowed
with a new eye, a new ear, a new heart and a new mind.”

Bahá'u'lláh’s “Most Sublime Vision”
The question is: how can we approach this Vision of
Bahá’u’lláh, which He himself described as being “Most
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 31

Sublime”? The word sublime, used by the beloved Guardian in
his translation, has in English the following meanings: inspiring,
inspirational, uplifting, awe-inspiring, moving, transcendent,
and magnificent – all of which are fitting description of the new
Vision of the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh.
“Awe-inspiring” and “magnificent” indicates the relation of
this vision to Bahá, i.e., ‘Glory,’ which is a key concept in the
Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, Who’s name is translated as the
“Glory of God” and it is part of the Most Holy Name of God,
“Allah-u-Abhá,” translated as “God is the All-Glorious.”(KA
170)
“Inspirational,” “inspiring” and “moving” indicates the effect
this Vision has on the seeker, the person who seeks to find God
through Bahá’u’lláh. And the word “transcendent” indicates the
total otherness and newness of this Vision. Bahá’u’lláh describes
His Vision as ‘most’ sublime, announcing that this Vision has
some likeness to these concepts, but is beyond all of the above
mentioned attributes.
Describing the effect of this Vision, Bahá’u’lláh stated:
“Were the breezes of Revelation to seize thee, thou wouldst flee
the world, and turn unto the Kingdom, and wouldst expend all
thou possessest, that thou mayest draw nigh unto this sublime
Vision.” (ESW 56) This statement can well be compared to
Christ’s parable about the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 13:45-
46): “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man,
seeking goodly pearls: Who, when he had found one pearl of
great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.”
It further must be kept in mind that the Vision of Bahá’u’lláh
is the cause of the seeker’s new ability to understand this very
Vision. It moves, inspires, transcends and renews the seeker’s
capacities. That means that the course of action moving
towards understanding this Vision is a circular and continuing
process: we have to accept the Vision, and then we will be more
and more endowed with the capacity to understand this Vision
with our increasingly renewed ear, eye, heart and mind. In a
previous paper this writer has described this process under the
concept of progressive theology.
This process defies both deductive and inductive logic as we
know it. Therefore, this process has to be first developed in this
paper in order to understand its subject matter. Another equally
important pre-consideration of a move towards this Most
Sublime Vision is the fact mentioned by Bahá’u’lláh that our
32 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

life has to be more and more consonant with this Vision in
order to be able to understand it.
“Purge your hearts from love of the world, and your tongues
from calumny, and your limbs from whatsoever may withhold
you from drawing nigh unto God, the Mighty, the All-Praised.
Say: By the world is meant that which turneth you aside from
Him Who is the Dawning-Place of Revelation, and inclineth you
unto that which is unprofitable unto you. Verily, the thing that
deterreth you, in this day, from God is worldliness in its
essence. Eschew it, and approach the Most Sublime Vision, this
shining and resplendent Seat.” (ESW 54)
The same was expressed by Bahá'u'lláh when He admonishes
philosophers and scientists:
For God doth not ask you of your sciences, but of your
faith and of your conduct. Are ye greater in wisdom than
the One Who brought you into being, Who fashioned the
heavens and all that they contain, the earth and all that
dwell upon it? Gracious God! True wisdom is His. All
creation and its empire are His. He bestoweth His wisdom
upon whomsoever He chooseth amongst men, and
withholdeth it from whomsoever He desireth. (SLH 234)
Furthermore, we have to understand that this Vision can only
be perceived by the “unstopped ear of the inmost heart.” (SLH
86)
It is not accidental; it is rather significant and surprising that
this new life of the seeker is here described in an unmistakable
progression. First is the new ear, which will allow us to hear the
Word of God; then the new eye is mentioned, because God’s
Manifestation can be seen in the whole world and in our own
life after we have perceived the Word of God. The next step in
this process is the new heart, which is the place where this
Vision can become part of the seeker. The last step is the new
mind, a mind that will finally be able to get the picture of this
Sublime Vision, so this vision can become a world vision, a view
of the world, or, we could say, a new “Weltanschauung.” The
terms “hearing of thine heart” for the New Ear (GWB 217), “eye
of thine heart” for the New Eye (KI 57), and “understanding
heart” for the New Mind (GWB 35), are all expressions revealed
by Bahá’u’lláh.
The role of the heart in regards to this Vision is crucial and
will be mentioned in another paper. It is just in the last 30 years
that the role of the heart in the neurological aspect of the body
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 33

and mind is being researched and the findings are rather
surprising. Even in a cursory view into this matter it is clear
that the heart’s function was not understood previously in the
traditional medical neurology. When the human body is only
seen as a mechanical system, the heart is just a pump. The long
tradition to attribute to the heart so many more functions was
totally ignored and never critically researched.
It needs to be stated right in the introduction that this paper
attempts to see the world differently and in a new way. ‘Abdu’l-
Bahá has clearly stated that the Bahá’í Cause is a new beginning,
and the newness encompasses everything that is to be discovered
in the world. We have a new age, and we need to consider the
whole creation as being reborn. For improved clarity, the
following statement is broken down according to the topic
described:
Now the new age is here and creation is reborn…
Arts and industries have been reborn, there are new
discoveries in science, and there are new inventions…
And all this newness hath its source in the fresh
outpourings of wondrous grace and favour from the Lord
of the Kingdom…
… until the old ways, the old concepts, are gone and
forgotten, this world of being will find no peace (SWAB
253)
What is most important about this statement, are these facts:
• This new age will lead to new discoveries in science,
industry and in inventions.
• All this newness is caused by, and is an outpouring from,
the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh.
• The peace of this world is dependent on a change of
understanding of this new worldview and of forgetting the old
understanding.
A new conceptualization of the physical world is also
required by the discovery of quantum mechanics, as Einstein has
said:
This discovery [i.e., the quantum theory] set science a new
task: that of finding a new conceptual basis for all of
physics.
34 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

This new age starts in the heart of the believer and is a
renewal of the spirit and of the understanding of this world, as
Bahá’u’lláh described it in the beginning of His Mission in the
Seven Valleys:
Nor shall the seeker reach his goal unless he sacrifice all
things. That is, whatever he hath seen, and heard, and
understood, all must he set at naught, that he may enter
the realm of the spirit, which is the City of God. (SVFV 7)
This principle – that any change starts in the heart and from
there will eventually renew the world – defines the structure of
the New World Order as initiated by Bahá’u’lláh.
This paper is based on the vision that all that is new and
valuable today, in science, art, technology and philosophy, is
caused and originated by this Revelation. Consequently, and
‘Abdu’l-Bahá clearly stated it, we have to forget the old ways
and old concepts, i.e., we have to reconsider our whole way of
thinking and perceiving this world in order to bring this world
to peace in the New World Order. While this paper attempts to
follow this direction of the Master, it is obvious that this
attempt is only a beginning, at best, in this pathway into a new
age and new world.

Revelation of Unity of God – Religion – World
In this chapter an important question about unity is raised: Is
it the same or something different that is understood by the
word “unity” in the two different contexts of God and of the
world, of the Creator and of the creation? Usually, when we talk
about unity or oneness, we uncritically take for granted that we
all understand what that means, and that there is only one
meaning to these words.
Consider that in the English language the word “unity,”
compared with “oneness,” has a slightly different flavor. Both
words are derived from the English word “one” or from the
Latin word “unus,” which both have the same original meaning
in their respective languages.
The definition of these two words in Webster’s Dictionary is
not the same. This fact is relevant to this paper and will be
presented below.
ONENESS
1. The quality or state or fact of being one
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 35

2. Uniqueness, Singleness
Wholeness, Integrity
Harmony, Concord
Sameness, Identity (numerical), Unity, Union
3. Solitariness (archaic)
Unity, on the other hand, is defined more extensively.
UNITY
1. The quality or state of being one or consisting of one,
Oneness, Singleness
2. A condition of concordant harmony
Continuity without deviation or change, absence of
diversity
3. The quality or state of being made one, unification
A combination of ordering of parts
4. The quality or state of constituting a whole
The totality of related parts, a complex or systematic
whole
(Other meanings are related to mathematics, art, drama, and to
law, which we will not mention here.)
Obviously the definitions are overlapping, but the emphasis
is different. Oneness is the more general and practical term,
while unity is used in a more specific and technical sense, which
is generally true for all duplicated words in the English language
derived either from Anglo or Latin roots, for example liberty
versus freedom. Additionally, Integration is only mentioned
under oneness and Unification is mentioned only under unity.
The relationship of the whole and the parts is only mentioned
under Unity, and the meaning of this relationship is expressed
under different subheadings. Furthermore, the word Unity (of
Latin ‘unus’) has many more derivatives in the English language
such as, Union, Unit, Unite, Unitarian, and other combined
words such as Unification, Uniformity, Universe, Univocal,
Unison, Universal, Unipotent, and many more.
In general we will use these two terms interchangeably, but it
is important to keep the differences in mind. In the English
translation of the Writings the word Unity is more frequently
used, for example in the Gleanings from the Writings of
Bahá’u’lláh, officially translated by Shoghi Effendi, the word
Unity is used five times more often than the word Oneness. We
36 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

have to ask if there are similar differences in the Persian or
Arabic languages, or if the difference was made by the
Guardian, translating the same words differently into English
according to the context. It appears that there are more than
two words in the original language; however Shoghi Effendi
used the two English words, not in correspondence to the
original text, but related to the context.
Contrary to the Bahá’í Writings, Webster excludes diversity
from unity, and uses a similar word only as an entry for “unity
in variety” as an aesthetic principle related to the fusion of
various elements into an organic whole, which definition comes
closest to the Bahá’í use of the phrase “unity in diversity.”
There are two major reasons why we need to look at this
word more closely. One is the social and political use of the
concept of unity, which had vast and potentially devastating
consequences as it was applied during history and especially
during the last century. The different ways of understanding the
word unity was propagated by different political movements in
the past and is still used today. We have a spectrum of
meanings, from uniformity and identity of parts to aggregation
of unrelated parts, i.e. from totalitarian dictatorship to extreme
and almost anarchic individualism. Later, in the philosophical
section, this will be explored more deeply.
The other reason why this word is the topic of this paper is
the fact that the Bahá’í Writings distinguish clearly between the
word unity as it is used in the created world and the same word
when it is applied to the Creator. Without going into details
here, we can already conclude that any application of the word
unity to God is false if it implies any relationship to numbers,
to multiplicity or any separation of parts, or even any
understanding of unity in the way as unity is understood in our
physical world.
We have to consider first the different use of the word unity,
as applied to God, to the Manifestations and to the world of
humanity, as well as to all the religions of God. The separation
of the different meanings of the word unity, or oneness, in
relation to God has been clearly stated by Bahá’u’lláh when He
said in a prayer:
And if I attempt to describe Thee by glorifying the
oneness of Thy Being, I soon realize that such a
conception is but a notion which mine own fancy hath
woven, and that Thou hast ever been immeasurably exalted
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 37

above the vain imaginations which the hearts of men have
devised. (PM 123)
It follows from this verse that oneness or unity can be
understood in different ways, depending if we talk about
created oneness, or the Oneness of the Creator, of God. There
are ways in which applying the concept of unity or oneness to
God is nothing but a vain imagination of the human heart and
an attempt to make God an object of human thinking and
understanding; in other words, trying to make the unknowable
essence of God knowable, thus creating an idol rather than
knowing God.
On the other hand, when the word unity is applied to the
Manifestations of God, we can follow the words of Bahá’u’lláh:
Conceive accordingly the distinction, variation, and unity
characteristic of the various Manifestations of holiness,
that thou mayest comprehend the allusions made by the
Creator of all names and attributes to the mysteries of
distinction and unity, and discover the answer to thy
question as to why that everlasting Beauty should have, at
sundry times, called Himself by different names and titles.
… (GWB 22)
When considering the Manifestations we can legitimately talk
about distinction, variation and unity characteristics. Here we
have a unity that is the unification of variation and of
distinctions, a unity that is the sign of creation. As a matter of
fact, Bahá’u’lláh expresses this in a prayer:
Thy unity is inscrutable, O my God, to all except them
that have recognized Him Who is the Manifestation of
Thy singleness and the Day-Spring of Thy oneness. (PM 57)
It could be said that the Manifestations in their historical
plurality are the manifestation of God’s unity. They alone give
access to the inscrutable unity of God to those that have
recognized them. Clearly it is stated here that the unity of God
is unknowable and can only be recognized in the unity of the
Manifestations. Only when this unity is accepted, only when it
is understood that all the Manifestations are one, can the unity
of God be praised. This understanding is prefaced by the
following words indicating the role “of the spirit within the
innermost chamber of thy heart” in comprehending the Divine
inscrutable unity:
O brother! kindle with the oil of wisdom the lamp of the
38 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

spirit within the innermost chamber of thy heart, and
guard it with the globe of understanding, that the breath
of the infidel may extinguish not its flame nor dim its
brightness. Thus have We illuminated the heavens of
utterance with the splendours of the Sun of divine wisdom
and understanding, that thy heart may find peace, that
thou mayest be of those who, on the wings of certitude,
have soared unto the heaven of the love of their Lord, the
All-Merciful. (KI 61)
The unity of God is frequently expressed in the Bahá’í
Writings but must be understood in this very specific sense. It
is being manifested in the unity of the Manifestations of God.
It is not an abstract or philosophical concept that can be
manipulated and compared with what can be called created
unity. Created unity is always a unity in diversity, or a unity
consisting of parts that need to be unified. This unity brings
with it forever the philosophical and scientific conundrum: how
the relationship of the whole and the parts can be logically
described, and how the physical reality of this world is
composed. In the philosophical section of this paper this issue
will be further developed.
The unity of the world of humanity and the unity of all
religions is another principle of the Bahá’í Faith. It is, one could
say, the most important, most actual and the most emphasized
principle of the Faith, for it undoubtedly is what the world
needs most today. Bahá’u’lláh has expressed this need by
directing us to the situation of our time, when He said:
Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live
in, and centre your deliberations on its exigencies and
requirements. (TU 1.4)
It could here be developed how the understanding of the
relationship between the whole and its parts affects not only the
political and social structures of humanity, but the basic
understanding of this world. One could say that the Christian
theology in its Platonic or Neo-platonic interpretation
emphasizes the unity and degrades the multiplicity of its parts.
Consequently the spiritual is evaluated by devaluating the
material.
This is the reason why the Aristotelian solution that gives the
whole priority over the parts (form over matter), but considers
both as equally real, was so well received in Christian theology
since the time of Thomas Aquinas. This is actually a progress in
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 39

the right direction from the Neo-Platonic understanding that
only the whole is real, and everything partial is derived from it
as an emanation, an overflow, and therefore less real.
The opposite is happening in modern science and modern
philosophy: the material, the parts, the aggregation of the
elements of nature in causality are emphasized, and exclusively
preferred, without consideration of the value of the whole, this
way of thinking devaluates all spiritual aspects of life and
deprives the world of enchantment, of value and meaning. As
will be pointed out in another paper, this is changing since the
findings of quantum mechanics are slowly influencing science.
It appears to this writer that the cosmology inherent in the
Bahá'í Writings gives us a new and revolutionary way of seeing
this relationship. Neither spirit nor matter is devaluated or
negated. The unity of the world is deemed as equally valuable as
the multiplicity and diversity of things material, and both are
seen as elements of the Creation. A problem is only created if
humanity finds one-sided attachment either to the spiritual, as
in some forms of mysticism and in the attempts to reach God in
His unity through meditation, or to the material, in the modern
emphasis on physical reality in all materialistic and
reductionistic systems of thinking. While this new way of
thinking could be developed from the Bahá'í Writings in a
thorough analysis of how they see the relationship between the
one and the many, the spiritual and the material in all aspects of
life, only some samples can be presented here.
The fact that Bahá’u’lláh states that prayer to God and
service to mankind are equally valuable presupposes the fact
that both the spiritual and the material are created by God and
are basically good. Bahá’í spirituality, therefore, needs to be
conceptualized on the idea of unity in diversity, and its
practical development in the future cannot really be seen today.
Shoghi Effendi’s description of the future Bahá'í
commonwealth is based on similar premises, as will be pointed
out below.
What this unity of humanity is and how it should be achieved
and protected in the future is a most important question of
which the beloved Guardian has said:
World unity is the goal towards which a harassed humanity
is striving.
…The unity of the human race, as envisaged by
Bahá’u’lláh, implies the establishment of a world
40 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and
classes are closely and permanently united, and in which
the autonomy of its state members and the personal
freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose
them are definitely and completely safeguarded. (WOB
202)
Describing this unity of the human race and this world
commonwealth, Shoghi Effendi depicts many of its features and
lays down the principles of its organization. However, he states
that the actual structure and the functioning of this world unity
cannot be visualized at this point:
Who can visualize the realms which the human spirit,
vitalized by the outpouring light of Bahá’u’lláh, shining in
the plenitude of its glory, will discover? (WOB 205)

Unity of the Bahá’í Revelation
This is a principle of the Faith that is not stated as such in the
Writings. It is, nevertheless a constituting principle without
which the Faith cannot be conceived, and it further includes the
unity of all Revelations of God throughout history, which is
implied in unity of religion, and is expressed in the Bahá’í
principle of progressive revelation.
Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahá’í Faith, clearly
pointed out the unity of all the Writings when he made the
following statement about the Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-
Bahá and the Kitáb-i-Aqdas of Bahá’u’lláh:
A comparison of their contents with the rest of Bahá’í
sacred Writings will similarly establish the conformity of
whatever they contain with the spirit as well as the letter
of the authenticated writings and sayings of Bahá’u’lláh
and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. (WOB 4)
This is an explicit statement about the unity of the
Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, and it is noted that this conformity is
related to whatever the Writings contain, i.e., to all of the
Writings, and it extends to the spirit as well as to the letter of
the authenticated Writings of the Báb, of Bahá’u’lláh, and of
His official interpreters, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi.
John S. Hatcher in his book about the “Art of Bahá'u'lláh”
approached this Revelation with the tools of literary criticism.
He has adapted these tools to study the context and style of the
“Ocean of Bahá'u'lláh’s Words”, stating:
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 41

The more intimate we become with the art of Bahá'u'lláh,
the more we come to appreciate this context of the
Revelation as having continuity and integrity. And the
more we come to discover this overall unity to the
Revelation, the more we appreciate that no single work
can be fully studied apart from this context any more than
a single passage can be analyzed out of the context of the
work in which it appears.
The concept of progressive revelation expands this
continuity of all Manifestations of God throughout history,
disregarding their need to bring the Message in accordance to
the understanding of their audiences and in consideration of the
fact that their words have not always been transmitted to us in
their original form.
The unity of the Revelation of the Báb, and of Bahá’u’lláh is
rather remarkable, but can be seen only after a meditative
involvement in the Writings. It is not a superficial unity; it is an
integral and pervasive unity. Even though it includes the
obvious and literal meaning, as well as any deeper and spiritual
meaning, it also encompasses the different styles of the
Writings as Bahá’u’lláh has stated:
At one time We spoke in the language of the lawgiver; at
another in that of the truth-seeker and the mystic, and yet
Our supreme purpose and highest wish hath always been to
disclose the glory and sublimity of this station. God,
verily, is a sufficient witness. (ESW 14)

Tabernacle of Unity
Is ther e? Praise of Cr eatio n Pathwa ys True o f Taberna cle
of L ove Thysel f of U nit y
Prayer of Bahá’u’lláh Bahá’u’lláh Bahá’u’lláh Bahá’u’lláh
the Báb (SVFV 2) (SVFV 25) (SVFV 27) Tablet to
(SWB 217) Zoroastrians
5.1
Praise First Fire Lit from Lamp Creature Inwardness Ascent
be God of Preexistence and to (Spiritual) Lightness,
Singleness (“The fire Thou True One Heat (To the
hast kindled in me”) Spirit)
He is First Sun Risen in the True One Firstness Motion
God Heaven of to (Individual) (Active, Form)
Eternity (“From this sun is True One
generated, and unto it
must return, the light
which is shed over all
42 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

thing.”)
All are First Morn Glowed from True One Outwardness Descent (From
His the Horizon of to (Material) the Spirit)
servants Oneness (“Thou didst Creature
illumine my outer being
with the morning light of
Thy favor”)
All abide First Sea Branched from Creature Lastness Stillness
by His the Ocean of Divine to (Collective) Weight,
bidding Essence (“The water with Creature Density
which Thou hast created (Passive,
me”) Matter) Have
come into
being through
the will of the
Lord of all that
has been and
shall be.

Above is a sample of the unity of the Writings that can
certainly be improved upon and changed, but it can give us
some understanding of how all the concepts and thoughts, the
literal and the spiritual meanings of the texts, can be seen in a
unified vision and meditated together.
The first column of the picture is from a prayer of Báb, and
it includes the last four statements of this prayer.
The second column is from the introduction of the Seven
Valleys of Bahá’u’lláh. Other explanatory verses of Bahá’u’lláh
have been added in parentheses to place these terms in context.
The verses directly under the underlined concept are the
explanation given in the original text.
The four Pathways of Love are again from the Seven Valleys
and do not need much explanation; these verses originally
inspired this writer to compare them with the prayer of the Báb,
and this conformity was developed in an unpublished paper and
in many presentations.
The next column is again from the Valley of Unity and is the
topic of a paper by this writer, presented and published in the
Lights of ‘Irfán in 2005.
The final column is from a newly translated early Tablet of
Bahá’u’lláh and again presents four concepts in harmony with
the previous texts. Its importance is explained in the words
following these four ideas, where it is said that they “have come
into being through the will of the Lord of all that has been and
shall be.”
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 43

In the picture below, the Tabernacle of Unity is organized in
a different way, following the organization suggested by the
Seven Valleys and as described in the paper True of Thyself by
this writer. Some elements are omitted to make the picture less
cluttered and the Bahá’í principles of Prayer, Service, Unity, and
Order are added. The organizing elements are what Bahá’u’lláh
calls the four stages of man when He wrote:
And thus firstness and lastness, outwardness and
inwardness are, in the sense referred to, true of thyself,
that in these four states conferred upon thee thou shouldst
comprehend the four divine states, and that the
nightingale of thine heart on all the branches of the
rosetree of existence, whether visible or concealed, should
cry out: ‘He is the first and the last, the Seen and the
Hidden....’ (SVFV 27)
The harmony of the Writings is evident in this comparison. It
is the Most Sublime Vision of Bahá’u’lláh. Its meaning becomes
a proper subject of meditation and allows the believers to
immerse themselves deeper into the Ocean of the Revelation of
Bahá’u’lláh.
The unity of the Bahá’í Faith, in itself and in its Writings, is
not the whole story; it is rather the primary and present day
example illuminating the history of humanity. According to the
principle of progressive revelation and the unity of the
Manifestations, which are especially developed in Bahá’u’lláh’s
early and most significant book, the Kitáb-i-Íqán, all Divine
Manifestations throughout history and all of their Revelations
constitute the Unity of God’s Revelation throughout the history
of humanity. Speaking about all of the Manifestations of God,
Bahá’u’lláh says:
… thou mayest behold them all as the bearers of one Name,
the exponents of one Cause, the manifestations of one
Self, and the revealers of one Truth, and that thou mayest
apprehend the mystic “return” of the Words of God as
unfolded by these utterances. (KI 159)
They not only present the unity of God’s Revelation
throughout history, they all are the Revealers of one Truth, the
Truth of God. This unity of all Manifestations and of the Truth
of their Revelations was described by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Who
indicated that this understanding is new and has not been
mentioned before in any other Revelation:
His Holiness Bahá’u’lláh has announced that the
44 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

foundation of all the religions of God is one; that oneness
is truth and truth is oneness which does not admit of
plurality. This teaching is new and specialized to this
Manifestation. (BWF 246)
That unity or oneness of truth belongs in the same vision as
the unity of all Revelations is here expressed. Yet, according to
some postmodern philosophers, there is no unity of truth, and
truth is totally dependent on the subjective understanding of
the individual expressing it, a concept totally alien to the Bahá’í
Revelation.
Bahá’u’lláh clearly applied this truth to all Revelations and
mentioned Jesus in this context saying:
… Jesus, the Spirit of God, [and] His proclamation of the
unity of God and of the truth of His Message! (GWB 57)
This is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in the Gospel
of John (18:37-38)
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus
answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I
born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I
should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of
the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is
truth?
We can easily understand the doubtful answer of Pilate, and
many post-modernists and modern bible critics would agree
with him. While the philosophical question of “what is truth”
will not be developed here, it is important to indicate that the
Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh has a clear and expressed view of this
issue and stands in the tradition of classical philosophy and its
claim that human reason has the ability to recognize truth.

Unity of God in Christianity, Islam, and the Bahá’í
Faith
In the following, a lengthy paragraph from the Writings of
Bahá’u’lláh will be presented because it brings the questions of
what unity is and how it has to be understood in a new and
surprising focus. We will first quote the whole section, and then
discuss it sentence by sentence. Metaphysics and physics of
consciousness can facilitate this understanding of the Bahá’í
Revelation, if compared to the sacred Writings of the Faith.
He is a true believer in Divine unity who, far from confusing
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 45

duality with oneness, refuseth to allow any notion of
multiplicity to becloud his conception of the singleness of God,
who will regard the Divine Being as One Who, by His very
nature, transcendeth the limitations of numbers.
The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding
Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the
invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and
the same.
By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all
His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth,
should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all
circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with
the Will of God Himself.
This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the
unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man
that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast
in their belief. (GWB 165)
The first paragraph clearly distinguishes the Divine unity
from all created unity. Created unity cannot be conceived other
than as a unity in multiplicity, a unity that forms a whole from
the unification of parts, which parts than can be numbered.
Therefore, any concept of unity consisting of numbers of parts
and elements that form the unit cannot be attributed to the
Divine unity. This understanding of unity excludes the Christian
concept of the Trinity, as it is usually understood as three-in-
one or one essence in three persons.
Even the so-called atom, which means the fundamental part
of all matter that cannot be further divided (a-tomos means
indivisible, not being able to be divided), has been divided in
modern physics, and the last of its parts that are studied have
been found, at least in quantum physics, as not being a-toms
either, or indivisibles, but are perceived as elements that are on
the border between wave and matter, one could say between a
spiritual or physical entity, as some interpreters of these studies
claim.
In the next paragraph Bahá’u’lláh states something surprising
and unexpected. Talking about the essence of belief in Divine
unity, He makes a statement that can be easily mis-understood
in the sense of the Christian Trinitarian theology, especially if
the paragraph before and after this sentence is not understood,
and some crucial words are overlooked.
46 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in
regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him
Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable
Essence as one and the same. (GWB 165)
Let’s imagine that this sentence would have been presented in
the Council of Nicaea, in 325, where the Trinity Theology was
developed, and let’s further replace the Manifestation of God
with Jesus Christ, who certainly is a Manifestation in the Bahá’í
understanding. So the sentence would look like this in this
adapted and shortened form:
The essence of belief in Divine unity consists in regarding
Him, Jesus Christ, and the Divine Essence as one and the
same.
We deliberately left out the fact that Bahá’u’lláh describes
the Divine essence as inaccessible and unknowable. Certainly,
the followers of Athanasius would have agreed, one and the
same is their catchword: “homo-ousios” (of the same substance
or essence). The followers of Arius would have protested. “Not
the same,” they would have screamed, “only of similar
substance, homoi-ousious.” (I am aware that these two words
were actually coined later as the battle cry of these two camps.)
The emperor, who according to Eusebius, entered the council
in his golden splendor, would have agreed as well, even though
he later followed the Arian interpretation. We must consider
that the emperor got baptized only later on his death bed and
that the bishops were probably dressed in simple garments, some
of them still carrying the marks of previous persecutions. The
council had been called by the emperor, and he allowed the
bishops to travel at the government expenses. The bishop of
Rome, too old to travel, sent two priests as his representation
to this council, which was mainly attended by bishops of the
Eastern Roman Empire.
What we left out – the description of the essence of God as
being inaccessible and unknowable – and the next sentence of
Bahá’u’lláh, if it would have been presented in Nicaea, would
probably not have been understood at all at that time. The
bishops might have quoted John 6:60 “Many therefore of his
disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying;
who can hear it?”
Bahá’u’lláh continued to say:
By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 47

His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth,
should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all
circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical
with the Will of God Himself. (GWB 165)
What must be considered is the fact that this sentence does
not limit the previous statement but puts it in the right
perspective. The context of understanding of this statement is
the fact that God is unknowable. So, any sameness or identity
between a creature and God can only be in what is knowable
and pertains to God, i.e., His Word, or His Will and Command,
or, in other words, the Revelations of His Manifestations.
The distinction between unknowable and unknown is usually
not taken very seriously. In the Acts (17:23) Paul is reported to
talk about an unknown God:
For, as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an
altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.
Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto
you.
At the time of Paul, the idea of a god or gods was a well
known and an accepted fact to people in general; only a specific
god could have been unknown in Greece. Paul does not raise the
question if God can be known; that was not a question that
could have been asked at that time, because in the common
sense everyone knew about the gods. It is a question of
importance today, where atheism and agnosticism is widespread,
and was the public policy in a third of the human population
not long ago. It took several centuries to develop this question.
At about the 6th century, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite,
following the Neo-Platonic tradition, developed the “via
negative” and affirmed the fact that we know nothing about
God. Karen Armstrong calls this an attempt to combine the
Semitic and the Greek conception of God.
We may ask: what is unknowable today, where science and
technology opened so many ways of knowing things? The only
thing that is unknowable in this world is the “personal” and the
“subjective” and even science cannot make it known
objectively. The crucial issue is human consciousness, the
fundament of human personality. We do not know what goes
on in anybody’s mind, unless they talk to us. As a matter of
fact, even neurobiological studies can only tell us that there is
something going on, but not what is going on. Even our
knowledge of our own mind is limited by our ability to reflect.
48 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

Psychology, with all its tests and clinical evaluations, has to
recognize the fact that there is always a substantial part of the
person which is unknowable. That’s why the therapeutic process
is based on honesty and honest communication with each other,
honesty with oneself and honesty of the patient, a virtue the
patient has to learn in the process of therapy. That was clearly
expressed by the psychoanalyst Loewald’s description of
therapy:
Our object, being what it is, is the other in ourselves and
ourselves in the other. To discover truth about the patient
is always discovering it with him and for him as well as for
ourselves and about ourselves. And it is discovering truth
between each other, as the truth of human beings is
revealed in their interrelatedness.
This is the psychoanalytic description of what the dialogical-
personal thinkers called personal versus substantial knowledge.
Ferdinand Ebner has formulated this truth in the following way:
What exists as personality, can never and in no way be
conceived as existing in the way of a substance. If we
make the concept of substance the basis of the
understanding of reality, then we lock out forever any way
to recognize that, which exists in the way of personality.
To a being of a personality we can only have a ‘personal’
relation, in the final analysis no other relation as the
relation of the ‘I’ to the ‘Thou.’ To a substance we can in
no way have a personal relation – therefore in our relation
to it the ‘I’ disappears in a sense.
Concluding, it can be stated that God is unknowable in any
substantial, scientific and objective way. What we know about
God is what He has revealed to us through His Manifestations,
so it is an eminently personal knowledge that is expressed in
praise and prayer, not in any knowing of what God is.
Therefore, the sameness between God and His Manifestation is
not an essential one of “ousia” or substance, as the Council of
Nicaea understood it, but a personal one. It is based on the
Revelation of God’s Will or Word in His Commands, as
Bahá’u’lláh so clearly describes this oneness as related to the
acts of the Manifestations with the Will of God:
By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all
His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth,
should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all
circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 49

with the Will of God Himself. (GWB 165)
The mistake, and at that time any other solution might have
been even more wrong than the Nicaean Creed, was not in the
identification of sameness between God and His Manifestation,
but in placing the sameness into the substance, the hypostasis,
or the “ousia”, or essence of God.
This is still true about Catholic Theology today. Karl Rahner,
making a statement in his Theological Dictionary about the
Hypostatic Union (as the explanation for the concept of the
Trinity is traditionally called), said:
This formulation is the fruit of the great Christological
controversies of the first four centuries. These arose of
intellectual speculations which unsuccessfully attempted
to elucidate the fact, evident in Scripture, that Jesus
Christ is true man and true God. … (p. 218-219)
It is remarkable that even Rahner calls it no less than an
intellectual speculation and an unsuccessful attempt. From the
point of view of the Bahá’í Revelation it has become clear that
this speculation probably was unavoidable, but it could not be
successful, because it attempted to understand intellectually
what is unknowable and inaccessible, i.e., the essence or
substance (‘ousia’) or nature of God.
That this intellectual speculation has to be unsuccessful, that
the nature of God cannot be conceived or described, was stated
by Bahá’u’lláh when He revealed in a prayer:
Every praise which any tongue or pen can recount, every
imagination which any heart can devise, is debarred from
the station which Thy most exalted Pen hath ordained, how
much more must it fall short of the heights which Thou
hast Thyself immensely exalted above the conception and
the description of any creature. (PM 194)
Islam has totally rejected the concept of Trinity and accused
Christians of believing in more than one God, accusing them of
Tritheism, a heresy in Christian theology which never reached
importance in theology, even though some practices of
Christians today are not far away from this way of thinking. For
example, there are medieval pictures, which depict God with
three heads on one body. This way of depicting the Trinity was
condemned by the church as clearly wrong,
What is rather interesting is the fact that in Islam the person
50 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

of Muhammad, the Prophet, does not reach the same veneration
than Christians give to Jesus. This means that in the Muslim
faith it is the Book that attracts the special attention; it is the
Qur’an, which has come from heaven through the Prophet. In
Christianity, the Book, the Bible, is secondary to Jesus; it tells
us about Him, and that is its importance. The emphasis on the
human station of Mohammad, the Prophet, can be understood
as a reaction to the understanding of Christ’s Divinity, as it is
expressed in the concept of the Trinity.
In the Bahá’í Faith these two aspects are combined and
corrected. Jesus and Muhammad are placed in the same position
as all the other Manifestations of God, and the holy Books are
equally seen as testimonies of the Revelation of God. It is the
person of the Manifestation, as well as His Revelation and His
Writings that are the testimony to the truth.
In the Most Holy Book, the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, (p. 134),
Bahá’u’lláh has combined these two traditions in calling the
Manifestation the “Living Book,” contrasted it with the written
Book of His Revelation (the Báb, in His Writings, has used this
concept of living book before):
Take heed lest ye be prevented by aught that hath been
recorded in the Book from hearkening unto this, the
Living Book. (KA 66)
Another verse of Bahá’u’lláh specifically explains how the
testimony of the truth of this Revelation is established in the
Person of the Manifestation, in His Revelation, and in the
resulting Book of His Writings, and how this can be recognized
by every soul:
Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His
truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His
Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one
or the other He hath established the words He hath
revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily,
an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath
endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the
signs of God. (GWB 105-106)
The solution to this age old problem of the Oneness of God,
that has caused discord and strife, war and hate between the
followers of these two Revelations of God, is the fact explained
in the above quoted verse of Bahá’u’lláh, that the essence, the
substance, the nature or ‘ousia’ of God is unknowable and
inaccessible. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá has formulated this truth revealed by
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 51

Bahá’u’lláh, when He said:
But, that Essence of Essences, that Invisible of Invisibles,
is sanctified above all human speculation, and never to be
overtaken by the mind of man. Never shall that
immemorial Reality lodge within the compass of a
contingent being. His is another realm, and of that realm
no understanding can be won. No access can be gained
thereto; all entry is forbidden there. The utmost one can
say is that Its existence can be proved, but the conditions
of Its existence are unknown. (SWAB 54)
Bahá’u’lláh describes this complicated issue by affirming that
the Manifestation can say “I am God,” just like the Christian
believes that Jesus is God. Because all of what we know about
God derives from the life and Revelation of His Manifestation,
Christians and Muslims can say about their Prophet that He is a
“Messenger of God,” and Bahá'u'lláh emphasizes that this is only
possible when the human aspect of the Prophet is seen in its
“uttermost state of servitude”:
Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to
declare: ‘I am God!’ He verily speaketh the truth, and no
doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly
demonstrated that through their Revelation, their
attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name
and His attributes, are made manifest in the world. …
And were any of them to voice the utterance: ‘I am the
Messenger of God,’ He also speaketh the truth, the
indubitable truth. …
And were they to say: ‘We are the servants of God,’ this also
is a manifest and indisputable fact. For they have been
made manifest in the uttermost state of servitude, a ser-
vitude the like of which no man can possibly attain. (KI 178)
This is nothing more than an explication of the statement of
Christ in the Gospel of John (10:30) “I and my Father are one.”
And later (John 10:37-38) “If I do not the works of my Father,
believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe
the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in
me, and I in him.”
To close this excurse into Christian dogma, it appears that at
the time of early Christianity the concept of an unknowable
God was unconceivable, since everyone was believed to know
God. It was a time when the statues of many different gods
52 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

covered the sanctuaries of the land, and the whole world was
conceived as functioning in dependency to these gods. The
Jewish belief in one God only, was tolerated by the Romans as
peculiar and as a historical tribal idiosyncrasy. On the other
hand, the same belief was conceived so aberrant in non-Jews
that Christians who shared that belief were called atheists by the
Romans. To them, belief in only one God was nothing other
than un-belief, a-theism. Christians were persecuted on the
Emperor’s mandate for such beliefs and put to death for it.
How could people raised in this environment conceive of an
unknowable God, Who is only known through His
Manifestation? So, they had to describe the relationship
between Christ and God in their own way, inventing the
concept of the Trinity and attributing the same essence,
substance, or ‘ousia’, to both Christ and God the Father. This
was a logical and possible unavoidable conclusion taken at the
Council of Nicaea and then carried forth into 2,000 years of
Christian Theology.
Today, after the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, we can
understand that the mistake of their solution was the fact that it
is totally incorrect and impossible to talk about essence,
substance, nature or ‘ousia’ of God; God is absolutely
unknowable in any such way.
Even today, even among the followers of Bahá’u’lláh, who
came from a Christian background, it is quite likely that this
issue is not clear, and our understanding of God is not yet what
it should be in keeping with the Writings of the Bahá’í Faith.
We have not consequently followed through with the idea that
we do not know and cannot know God in any substantial and
objective way, that we cannot even talk about God in this way,
or talk about the essence, the substance or ‘ousia’ of God.
On the other hand, we are exhorted, invited and even
obligated to know God and love Him, not in a scientific and
objective way, but in a personal approach. God has spoken
through the Word of the Manifestations to us, and has allowed
us to speak back and praise Him through prayer and service
The following Verse from a prayer of Bahá'u'lláh can best be
understood in the same way
Here am I with my body between Thy hands, and my spirit
before Thy face. (PM 243)
As in Genesis 2:7
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 53

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;
and man became a living soul.
God formed the body of Adam, so Bahá'u'lláh talks about the
material body between God’s forming hands. The living soul
was given to Adam through the breath of God, which breath
comes from the face in the picturesque language of the first
book of the bible, hence the many allusions to the face or
countenance of God as a indication of the spiritual aspect of
man. Here clearly the difference between the material and the
spiritual of man is described. Without exaggeration we can say
that the consequences of this understanding will certainly change the
whole structure and meaning of religion in the future.
Concluding the previous two chapters the following can be
stated: The difference in the concept of unity between the
Creator and the creation is important and has to be understood
in the way this unity is manifested in the Prophets of God. It is
not their nature or essence; it is their Word, their Revelation,
and their Message which manifests the unity of God. That
means that the unity of God can only be seen in the unity of the
Manifestations with each other and in the unity of their
individual Revelations, which is the Word of God and originates
in the Will of God. Any other understanding of the unity of
God is vain imagination, as Bahá’u’lláh stated in the prayer
mentioned before.
Consequently, the unknowability of God could be described
in this way: The essence of God is unknowable, so all that can be
known about God is what He makes known of Himself. What
God makes known to humankind is called Revelation, and it is
known to humanity through God’s Messengers, through His
Manifestations, or biblically through His Word, which was
incarnated in Christ.
In other words, nothing can be known about God except
what was revealed through His Manifestations. Secondarily,
God reveals Himself in His creation, which is the place where
God makes Himself known through His Manifestations in
another form, as all that was created was created through His
Manifestation, through His word, as it is said in John 1:1-3 “In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All
things were made by him; and without him was not any thing
made that was made.”
54 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

There are three ways of knowing God: through the life of the
Manifestation, through the Revelation of the Manifestation,
and through the world as being created by the Manifestation. It
needs to be remembered that humanity is part of creation, and
therefore the knowledge of God is innate to humans as well.
These three ways of knowing God are described by
Bahá’u’lláh:
All knowledge of God comes
1. through the Manifestation, through His life,
described as the “Living Book”
Say: God, the True One, is My witness that neither the
Scriptures of the world, nor all the books and writings in
existence, shall, in this Day, avail you aught without this,
the Living Book, Who proclaimeth in the midmost heart
of creation: ‘Verily, there is none other God but Me, the
All-Knowing, the All-Wise.’ (KA 81)
2. and through their Revelation, their written Book:
The source of all learning is the knowledge of God, exalted
be His Glory, and this cannot be attained save through the
knowledge of His Divine Manifestation. (TB 156)
3. and all knowledge of God is evident in His creation,
because all things were made by the Manifestation:
From that which hath been said it becometh evident that
all things, in their inmost reality, testify to the revelation
of the names and attributes of God within them. Each
according to its capacity, indicateth, and is expressive of,
the knowledge of God. So potent and universal is this
revelation, that it hath encompassed all things visible and
invisible. (GWB 178)

Overview of a Philosophy of Integral Unity
In a very cursory form we will present the history of the
unity concept in philosophy by mentioning the major
philosophers and indicating their understanding. Certainly, this
topic could be the subject of an extensive monograph, but here
only a very short overview of the most important authors will
be presented, assuming that the details are known.
B. R. Kadem has described the “Origin of the Bahá’í Concept
of Unity and Causality, A Brief Survey of Greek, Neo-Platonic,
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 55

and Islamic Underpinnings” and has pointed out the distinctive
features of the Bahá’í account. One of the most important
differences is the assertion that the unity concept is attributed
to the Manifestation of God, not to God Himself as in the Neo-
Platonic and Islamic tradition. Therefore he states
The Bahá’í concept of the unity of being is laden with
implications unprecedented in the Greek, Neo-Platonic, or
Islamic forbears. The understanding of these implications
are therefore now part of the current and future labors of
thought for Bahá’í thinkers. (p. 115)
He further states that there is a need to re-think the Neo-
Platonic concept of emanation, when used in the Bahá’í context.
In this paper the concept of Revelation of Unity is carried
further into the present scientific and philosophical thinking,
and only the following very brief reference is made to the
historical aspect of this question.
Pre-Socratic Philosophers: Monism versus Pluralism
Parmenides (and in similar way much later Spinoza, and in
some ways Hegel): One Reality, Monism. His understanding
pervades all of European philosophy, from Plato to the Neo-
Platonists, and into the Christian Philosophy by Origin and
others, especially in the tractate of the Trinity by Augustine. It
further implies an emphasis on unity (spirituality) and distrust
for plurality (materiality).
Democritus (and in similar ways modern science): Atomism.
The whole is the sum of its parts, a mechanical, accidental and
material universe. Any concept derived from the whole and not
the parts is without value and can be neglected; all phenomena
can be reduced to their “atoms,” and truth can only be found in
this reductionistic way of thinking.
Classical Greek Philosophy
Plato: The reality is in the idea; any multiplicity is only a
shadow of reality. Neo-Platonism has developed this further and
was critical in influencing Christian theology towards the
depreciation of the reality of this world
Aristotle: Unity (or Form) and Plurality (Primal matter).
Reality is the unity of form and matter that explains movement
and change; Aristotle developed his meta-physic after studies in
physics (nature). This understanding was renewed by Thomas
Aquinas and became the centerpiece of scholastic philosophy. It
56 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

is taught in Catholic Universities even today, making Christian
philosophy more realistic and directed towards the reality of
this world. As a matter of fact, this more realistic understanding
was one of the causes of the development of modern sciences.
Modern Philosophy: Idealism versus Materialism
Hegel: Idealism, Unity of Ideals, of the Spiritual, Dialectical
process of these ideas verified in the social arena of the ideal
Prussian State
Marx: Materialism, Economic evolution of World Unity to
be brought about by violent revolution, and cumulating in the
dictatorship if the proletariat, even though it is predicted to
happen with iron necessity. (Before and after Marx, Feuerbach,
Darwin and Freud can be counted in the same group.)
The different ways unity and multiplicity were understood is
a theme with many variations throughout the history of
philosophy. It seems to have come to a harmonious solution
only recently, after the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, and not
without the influence of this Revelation, as was noted by
‘Abdu’l-Bahá in the above mentioned quote:
And all this newness hath its source in the fresh
outpourings of wondrous grace and favour from the Lord
of the Kingdom. (SWAB 253)
What is the newness in the philosophy of today that relates
to the one and the many, to unity and diversity? In a previous
paper of this writer, the history of this vision of the “Integral
opposition of Unity and Plurality” (“Der integrale Gegensatz
von Einheit und Vielheit”) was briefly described, and the
relevant authors were mentioned. Here the thoughts of
Augustinus Karl Wucherer-Huldenfeld, as described before, will
be more extensively presented as they are important to better
understand the concept of unity in the Bahá’í Writings.
The Integral Whole is described by Wucherer-Huldenfeld in
the following points:
• The Whole relates to the parts integrating or
complementing them in a structure of a real synthesis
• The parts, in their internal unity and diversity, are
equally original and essential, constituting equally the
respective whole, which they build with each other and
for each other
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 57

• The greatest unity of the whole is realized with the
greatest independence and freedom of its diverse parts
or elements
• In the whole the parts are “healed” and integrated;
through the parts the whole is “healed,” it is made whole
• A dialectic of different conceptions of Unity & Plur-
ality can be developed: Totalitarian dissolution of
Plurality versus Radical Plurality (Postmodern Pluralism)
• From an article on Teilhard de Chardin: Unification
differentiates; the more unity the more complexity is
possible; unity of spirit and matter: Spirit-Matter
The drastic change and the newness of this thought are not
obvious, unless we consider the social and political application
of it. That is really the topic of Shoghi Effendi’s considerations
about the New World Order of Bahá’u’lláh, even though it is
not expressed in philosophical statements in his writings. The
Guardian does clearly state that all previous social and political
forms of political unity are obsolete and that a new form will be
developed in the Bahá’í Commonwealth:
“The unity of the human race, as envisaged by Bahá’u’lláh,
implies the establishment of a world commonwealth in which all
nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently
united, and in which the autonomy of its state members and the
personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that com-pose
them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (WOB 203
In this brief formulation, which is more extensively described
in the Guardian’s communication to the American Bahá’ís, it is
remarkable that the unity of all nations, races and creeds is
combined with a complete safeguard of the autonomy of the
individual states as well as with the promotion of the personal
freedom and initiative of all individuals.
What is crucial in the Guardian’s understanding of unity in
diversity is the fact that in this understanding the parts reach
their advantage from the whole and the whole has to guarantee
the welfare of the parts.
The advantage of the part is best to be reached by the ad-
vantage of the whole, and that no abiding benefit can be
conferred upon the component parts if the general interests
of the entity itself are ignored or neglected. (WOB 198)
58 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

Seen from the side of the parts Shoghi Effendi states that any
distress to the parts affects the whole; they are mutually
dependent, that is, they constitute each other mutually. Neither
is prior, neither is more or less than the other.
The welfare of the part means the welfare of the whole, and
the distress of the part brings distress to the whole. (PDC 122)
Philosophically this conception is only possible in the above
proposed understanding of the unity of the integral whole. It is
remarkable to note that this philosophical thought was only
fully developed after the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, even though
it happened in a tradition that prepared for this development.
There are many statements in the Writings of the Bahá’í Faith
that envision a similar unity, where the parts are equally
protected, cherished and found to be essential to the unity,
especially the many comparisons of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá of the unity
of the world and mankind with a flower garden. Here some
examples how the diversity and variety of a garden adorns its
beauty and increases its perfection.
How unpleasing to the eye if all the flowers and plants, the
leaves and blossoms, the fruits, the branches and the trees
of that garden were all of the same shape and colour!
Diversity of hues, form and shape, enricheth and adorneth
the garden, and heighteneth the effect thereof. In like
manner, when divers shades of thought, temperament and
character, are brought together under the power and
influence of one central agency, the beauty and glory of
human perfection will be revealed and made manifest.
(SWA 291-292)
The importance of variety in oneness is emphasized in this
sample from ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s Writings:
When there is variety in the world of oneness, they will
appear and be displayed in the most perfect glory, beauty,
exaltation and perfection. (TH 14)
‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s beauty in the diversity of the garden expresses
the new understanding of the relationship between the one and
the many, the whole and the parts. It is described as a gift of
God and the felicity of the human world in another statement:
Therefore, the part is expressive of the whole, for this seed
was a part of the tree, but therein potentially was the
whole tree.
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Nine 59

So each one of us may become expressive or representative
of all the bounties of life to mankind.
This is the unity of the world of humanity. This is the
bestowal of God. This is the felicity of the human world,
and this is the manifestation of the divine favor. (PUP 16)
The importance of what Shoghi Effendi called the
“watchword” of the Bahá’í Faith, “unity in diversity,” can hardly
be overestimated. Is it not the basis of any future political,
sociological and philosophical development which the Bahá’í
Writings predict, and is it not the need of our age? This is
expressed by Bahá’u’lláh in these words:
Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live
in, and centre your deliberations on its exigencies and
requirements.
In the Bahá'í Faith the spiritual is not evaluated by
devaluating the material; both are valued and equal in their own
right. Neither is unity extolled at the cost of diversity and
multiplicity. That means that any devaluation of any aspect of
God’s creation is wrong and alien to this Faith.
A basic difference to previous dispensations, like
Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and others, is the value given
to the world as God’s creation. This value judgment is not
placed on the ontological structure of the world, but on the
choices humans make in dealing with the creation. Any
overestimation of one aspect over the other is wrong. When the
material, the multiple, and the diverse is overestimated, we have
materialism and a station of man that is lower than the animal.
On the other hand unity – or the spiritual – should not be over-
estimated either to the detriment of the diversity and the material.
Bahá'u'lláh made this clear in the rejection of asceticism and
monasticism and of certain forms of mysticism.
Bahá'í Unity is understood as unity and diversity, as variation
and oneness, as oneness in multiplicity, which is characteristic
for this created world, and neither can be evaluated by
devaluating the other, neither can be affirmed by negating the
other, yet both are transcended by the inner meaning of the
Word of God, as it is stated by Bahá'u'lláh
Please God, that we avoid the land of denial, and advance
into the ocean of acceptance, so that we may perceive,
with an eye purged from all conflicting elements, the
worlds of unity and diversity, of variation and oneness, of
60 Bahá’u’lláh’s Most Sublime Vision

limitation and detachment, and wing our flight unto the
highest and innermost sanctuary of the inner meaning of
the Word of God. (KI 160)
Bahá'í spirituality, therefore, needs to be conceptualized on
the idea of unity in diversity, and the consequences of this new
approach cannot be fully understood today, neither can the
practical applications in the future be seen in our present world.
Shoghi Effendi’s description of the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh
is the most that can be said today about this future
development. And yet, it can easily by understood that this new
vision will bring a revolutionary change to all religions in the
future, affecting theology, philosophy and the practical life of
all the followers of the world religions. Summarizing we can
make the following conclusions.
• God’s Unity is transcendent, beyond unity and
multiplicity, transcending numbers and comprehension,
i.e., unknowable.
• God’s Unity is revealed only through the Unity of the
Manifestations, their words and laws, expressing God’s
Primal Will and Word
• Created unity is always “unity in diversity”, “oneness in
multiplicity”
• Created unity is constituted by the integration of the
whole and the parts, which are equal and both original;
they are the “same and different” (TB 140)
• The concept of integral unity, or unity in diversity, has
implications for the future, and its practical application in
the future Bahá’í commonwealth was described by Shoghi
Effendi as far as this is possible today.

Escolha um segundo texto para ler em paralelo — uma tradução, ou qualquer outro texto.