Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: John Walbridge, Miscellaneous philosophy topics, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Miscellaneous philosophy topics

John Walbridge
published in Essays and Notes on Babi and Bahá'í History

2002

Philosophy

Philosophy (Ar. and Pers. falsafah, from Gr. philosophia, "love of wisdom"; hikmat,

lit. "wisdom.") is the investigation of the underlying principles of reality
and knowledge by rational means. Philosophy is distinguished from religion by its reliance on rational
investigation rather than revelation. Traditionally, the natural sciences were considered part of philosophy,
but modern thought now confines philosophy to those subjects that cannot be
investigated by empirical experiment.

The history of philosophy
is complex, and it is not possible to explain here even the various conceptions
of the meaning and content of philosophy. Moreover, little research has been done into the philosophical aspects
and antecedants of Bahá'í thought, and almost nothing has been done to integrate
the ideas of the Bahá'í writings with modern philosophy. Therefore, this article will mainly discuss
philosophy as part of the historical background of Bahá'í thought and the
references to philosophy in the Bahá'í writings.

Islamic philosophy as background to Bahá'í thought

History
of Islamic philosophy. Philosophy
reached the Islamic world in the eighth century through the translation of a
large number of Greek philosophic, scientific, and medical works. The Greek philosophical corpus in Arabic
eventually included most of the works of Aristotle, extracts or summaries of
the works of Plato, and various treatises and commentaries of later Hellenistic
philosophers, physicians, and scientists. By the ninth century there was an indigenous school of Islamic
philosophy, the most important representatives of which were al-Kindi (9th
cent.), al-Farabi (d. 950), and Ibn-Sina (980–1037), known in the West as
Avicenna. These early Islamic
philosophers expounded a system in which Aristotle's logic, physics,
psychology, and ontology were combined with a neoplatonic metaphysics of
emanation. Though later philosophers
made many modifications, this system remains the basis of the Islamic tradition
of philosophy up to the present. Thus,
the reader should be aware that `philosophy' in Islam refers primarily to the
Greek tradition of philosophy, although some strains of Islamic mystical
theology came to be included in the philosophical curriculum. Other kinds of Islamic thought, notably
dogmatic theology, might also be included as `Islamic philosophy', but
following tradition they are not discussed here.

Philosophy, however, never completely
overcame opposition from Islamic theologians and jurists who held that certain
doctrines of philosophical metaphysics were contrary to Islam. As a result, many of the distinctive
features of Islamic philosophy resulted from the philosophers' attempts to
reconcile Greek philosophy with revealed religion and specifically Islam. Al-Farabi, the first great Islamic
philosopher, taught that the doctrines of prophetic religion—particularly
concepts such as heaven and hell that were most disputed between philosophers
and theologians—were expressions of philosophical truths in language suitable
for the masses of people incapable of grasping literal philosophic truth. Since both philosophers of the Platonic
tradition and Muslim scholars considered religions to be primarily legal
systems, religion thus became a branch of political philosophy. Philosophy and religion expressed the same
truths on different levels. Al-Farabi's
approach was carried on by Spanish Arab philosophers such as Ibn-Rushd (the
Latin Averroes, 1126–1198) and greatly influenced both Jewish and Christian
philosophy in the Middle Ages. In
Islam, however, this approach to reconciling religion and philosophy died out
after Ibn-Rushd.

In the eastern lands of Islam Ibn-Sina was
more influential. In contrast to
al-Farabi, who like Plato made political philosophy central to his system,
Ibn-Sina mainly confined himself to abstract issues and began to explore the
philosophical implications of mysticism. As-Suhrawardi (1154–91) systematically integrated mysticism and
philosophy, producing a system reinterpreting Ibn-Sina's system on the basis of
the concept of divine light.

The great mystical theologian Ibn-`Arabi
(1165–1240) produced a wonderfully complex system of mystical theology that
came to be called "the Unity of Being" (wahdat
al-wujud). In his system all the
creatures of the universe are the self-manifestations of God. His works encompassed all the lore of
Islamic thought and mysticism and burst on the Islamic world like a
bombshell. Even among thinkers bitterly
opposed to him, his system was immensely influential.

Islamic philosophy reached its greatest
heights in seventeenth century Iran in the so-called "School of Isfahan," whose
greatest representative was Mulla Sadra. In Sadra's system the rationalism of Ibn-Sina and the mysticism of
as-Suhrawardi and Ibn-`Arabi were combined. Although philosophy was still a matter of suspicion to most Islamic clerics,
a continuous tradition of philosophy has survived carried on by Shi`i clergy
from Mulla Sadra and the School of Isfahan down to the present.

The Shaykhis were the most recent
distinctive school to arise in Islamic philosophy. Shaykh Ahmad al-Ahsa'i, a Shi`i Arab from eastern Arabia,
propounded an elaborate system in which an extreme reverence for the imams was
combined with a philosophical system owing much to Mulla Sadra. His most distinctive contribution was the
elaboration of an older idea in which a world of immaterial images intermediate
between the physical world and the world of pure spirit served as the locale
for heaven, hell, and the miraculous events of the last judgment. Like many Islamic philosophers before him,
Shaykh Ahmad was bitterly attacked by orthodox clergy. After the death of his successor, Sayyid
Kazim Rashti, a large number of his followers became Babis. The remaining Shaykhis broke into several
factions and emphasized the Shi`i orthodoxy of their views, modifying or concealing
their most distinctive doctrines.

The philosophical tradition deriving from
Ibn-Sina and Mulla Sadra has continued in the theological seminaries of Iran up
to the present. Although it has never
ceased to be viewed with suspicion by some of the clergy, in recent decades it
has attracted considerable interest and respect in the West. A number of prominent figures in the 1979
Islamic revolution in Iran were philosophers of this tradition, including
Khomeini himself.

Doctrines
of Islamic philosophy. Though
naturally there is immense variation in the views and approaches of Islamic
philosophers over the last twelve centuries, some useful generalizations can be
made. Islamic philosophy is based for
the most part on the works of Aristotle, which Islamic philosophers understood
as a systematic treatmentment of philosophy and science. Where appropriate works of Aristotle were
not available, other classical works filled the gap, notably the substitution
of Platonic works of political philosophy for the untranslated Politics of Aristotle and the addition
of a late textbook of Neoplatonic metaphysics, misattributed in translation
under the title of The Theology of
Aristotle. After al-Farabi's
abortive attempt to organize philosophy on the basis of Platonic political
philosophy, almost every Islamic philosoper organized his works on the basis of
some variation of a systematic division of the sciences worked out by Ibn-Sina:

Theoretical

Logic

Mathematics

Physics (natural science)

Metaphysics

First philosophy
(ontology)

Theology

Practical

Ethics

Economics (household management)

Politics

While logic, the sciences, and even ethics
eventually were accepted as useful tools even in Islamic jurisprudence,
metaphysical doctrines came into direct conflict with Islamic dogmatic
theology. While there are innumerable
variations, Islamic philosophers generally shared a view of the universe
something like the following:

God is that one being whose existence is
necessary in itself. God in His essence
is absolutely one and simple. Since an
absolutely simple cause cannot be the direct cause of the complexity of the
world, God in His simplicity cannot be the direct cause of all the particulars
of the world, so that the traditional Judeo-Christian-Islamic account of God
creating the world by simple fiat cannot be accepted. Instead, God creates directly one other being—an immaterial
intellect or mind variously known as the primal intellect, the primal will, the
first angel, and the proximate light. This
immaterial intellect creates another, which in turn creates another of still
lower rank. The Islamic philosophers
accepted the Ptolemaic astronomy, in which the earth was at the center of a set
of concentric spheres, each associated with a planet and each moved by an
immaterial intellect. It is the very
complex interrelationships among the planets and their motions that account for
the complexities of the sublunar world in which we live. The world itself is eternal, without
beginning or end in time.

This metaphysical system came into conflict
with Islamic theology and its representatives on several grounds. First was the question of authority. The philosophers claimed to derive doctrines
about God, the universe, and the soul from pure reason. Islamic philosophers worked prophecy into
their systems and were for the most part sincere Muslims, but it was clear that
prophecy was subordinate to philosophy. Second, there were several fundamental philosophical doctrines that
directly conflicted with the usual interpretation of Islam: God did not create the universe from nothing
at a particular moment of time. It was
difficult to explain how God could know particulars or how His providence could
care for the individual person. The
night-journey of Muhammad, heaven and hell, and the last judgment could not be
taken literally. Philosophers were
accused of denying the immortality of the individual soul.

Earlier Islamic philosophers had attempted
to defuse these criticisms, explaining prophecy and its symbolic elements by
subsuming prophecy under political philosophy and explaining the contradictions
between philosophy and religion in terms of the rhetorical difficulties of
conveying philosophical truths to ordinary people. Later Islamic philosophy drew on mysticism and theories about the
imagination to solve such difficulties. As it had in later Greek philosophy, philosophy became an ethical and
mystical pursuit for the individual, not simply a subject of intellectual
investigation. Thus, philosophical investigation
was to some extent protected by the prestige of mysticism.

In
addition, new attempts were made explain religion in terms of philosophy. The most interesting was the doctrine of the
World of Image. In the material world
an image is normally a form subsisting in matter. The divine world of the intellects had no images, only pure
intellect. The later philosophers,
following Ibn-`Arabi—posited a world in which images could exist without
matter. This explained a whole range of
phenomena ranging from the images in mirrors, imagination, and dreams to the
visions of mystics, heaven and hell, and the last judgment. The Shaykhis developed this idea to its highest degree, arguing that men lived
both in this world and several levels of the world of image. The material body, for example, dies in this
world but the image body in the world of image is resurrected as promised in
the Qur'an.

The Bab and philosophy

The Bab in the Bayan
prohibited the study of philosophy (qawa'id-i hikmiya), along with the study of
logic, religious law and legal theory, philology, and grammar, except insofar
as these disciplines might be necessary for reading his works. He did allow the study of dogmatic theology ('ilm-i
kalam). The volume of his writings
and the fact that he Himself was devoid of these sciences made their study
unnecessary (Persian Bayan 4:10). Though the Bab condemned the study of abstract sciences, many of his
most influential followers were drawn from the Shaykhis and may be presumed to
have had philosophical training and interests. However, in the few disturbed years before the suppression of the Babis,
it is not likely that any of them had much time for philosophical reflection. The Bab's writings show some trace of
Shaykhi philosophy and certainly presuppose issues dealt with in Shaykhi and
Islamic philosophy, but they do not deal directly with philosophical
issues. The relationship of the thought
of the Bab and his followers to Islamic philosophy needs much more study.

Bahaullah and philosophy

Though Bahaullah
condemned "such sciences as begin in mere words and end in mere words," he did
not renew the Bab's explicit condemnation of philosophy. He is not known to have made any particular
study of philosophy, but his writings show an easy familiarity with the
concepts and main issues of Islamic philosophy. Though none of his writings can be said to be philosophical in a
technical sense, he often uses philosophical terminology and sometimes treats
specifically philosophical questions. An example is the Tablet of Wisdom (or "of philosophy":`Lawh-i Hikmat'),
written in reply to questions about the eternity of the universe submitted by
the prominent Bahá'í philosopher Aqa Muhammad Qa'ini, Nabil-i Akbar. In this tablet Bahaullah answers this classical
philosophical question, though in a way that indicates that much of the dispute
about it derives from the limitations of men's minds. He goes on to summarize the history of the ancient philosophers,
citing the common Islamic belief that the Greek philosophers were in contact
with the prophets of Israel as evidence that the deistic philosophers drew
their fundamental inspiration from prophetic religion. `Abd al-Baha's Secret of Divine Civilization, written about the same time, also
gives this account of the history of philosophy.

It should be noted that philosophers were
one of the groups addressed in the Suriy-i Muluk.

`Abd al-Baha and philosophy

`Abd al-Baha's writings
also show familiarity with Islamic philosophy, in addition to those ideas of
European philosophy and science that were becoming known in the Middle
East. His earliest major work, the
commentary on the famous Islamic tradition "I was a hidden treasure," is a
philosophical and mystical refutation of Ibn-`Arabi's doctrine of the unity of
being. The Secret of Divine Civilization touches many of the themes
relating to philosophy that characterize `Abd al-Baha's later references to the
subject: philosophy as a sign of civilization, that the fundamentals of
philosophy derive from the prophets, the praise of the great ancient
philosophers, and the comparison of the early believers in each religion to
philosophers. These themes are expanded
in `Abd al-Baha's talks in Europe and America, where he also criticizes modern
materialistic philosophy, by which he means a naive faith in the universal
applicability of the methods of physical science. This he distinguishes from the deistic philosophy of the ancients
and of more reflective moderns.

In such works as Some Answered Questions, `Abd al-Baha frequently uses the concepts
and arguments of Islamic philosophy when he discusses scientific,
methaphysical, and theological topics. Often he cites the views of the ancient philosophers in confirmation of
his own views. Among the philosophical
subjects specifically addressed by `Abd al-Baha in his writings and talks are
proofs for the existence of God, personal eschatology, epistemology, free will,
the nature of religion and evil, and substantial motion. Insofar as they assume a philosophy, the
writings of Bahaullah and `Abd al-Baha employ the late Avicennan philosophy of
illumination current in nineteenth century Iran. Whether this philosophy is integrally connected with the Bahá'í
teachings or whether it is a rhetorical device sometimes useful for conveying
them is a matter of current Bahá'í theological debate.

Shoghi Effendi and philosophy

Shoghi Effendi, who was
educated in Western schools and had studied political economy and philosophy in
college, showed little direct interest in philosophy in his writings. Though he permitted the study of philosophy,
he generally encouraged Bahá'ís to pursue more practical interests during his
time. He makes little reference to contemporary
philosophical schools other than to reiterate `Abd al-Baha's criticism of
"materialistic philosophers" and to comment that this sort of philosophy was an
intellectual fad that would one day pass. His most specific comment on philosophy is his sharp criticism of the
contemporary schools of Hegelian political philosophy, particularly Communism,
nationalism, and fascism.

Current Bahá'í law allowing the study of
philosophy is based on several interpretations of Shoghi Effendi in which he
distinguished between "fruitless excursions into metaphysical hairsplitting"
and "a sound branch of learning like philosophy" (Shoghi Effendi, Unfolding 445).

Philosophical writings by Bahá'ís

Among the numerous clerics
who became Bahá'ís during the lifetimes of the Bab and Bahaullah were a number
of men trained in philosophy. In
addition to the many former Shaykhis who may be presumed to have a greater or
lesser training in philosophy, we may include Wahid, Sayyid Yahya Darabi, the
Babi leader of Yazd and Nayriz, whose father was a well-known philosopher. A number of prominent Bahá'ís of the time of
Bahaullah were also trained as philosophers, the most notable being Aqa Muhammad
Qa'ini, known as Nabil-i Akbar, and Mirza Abu al-Fadl Gulpaygani. Though both these men wrote on Bahá'í
subjects, not surprisingly they dealt mostly with theological subjects and the
defense of their new religion.

It is interesting that the two greatest
modern Iranian Bahá'í scholars, Fadil Mazandarani and `Abd al-Hamid
Ishraq-Khavari, were both former `ulama trained in philosophy. Though both wrote mainly on historical and
theological topics, Mazandarani's great compilation of Bahá'í writings, Amr va-Khalq, shows his knowledge of
philosophical issues.

Three other recent Bahá'í authors have
written specifically on philosophy. `Azizu'llah Sulaymani, better known for his Bahá'í biographical
dictionary, prepared a textbook of traditional Islamic philosophy for the use
of Bahá'í students. This work, Rashahat-i Hikmat, is intended to
familiarize the students with traditional philosophy for use in understanding
Bahá'í scripture and for teaching their faith to those trained in this
philosophy. It makes no attempt to
integrate modern Western philosophy or science. Dr. `Ali-Murad Davudi was chairman of the philosophy department
at Tehran University until his disappearance shortly after the Islamic
Revolution. He wrote a number of works
on the history of Greek and Islamic philosophy, in addition to articles on
Bahá'í philosophical and theological themes. Ruhi Afnan, a cousin of Shoghi Effendi expelled as a covenant-breaker,
wrote several works on the history of philosophy and its interrelationship with
religion. These include an ambitious
attempt to correlate Babi and Bahá'í thought with the rationalist philosophies
of Descartes and Spinoza.

Only recently have Western Bahá'ís begun to
write on philosophical themes. Some
examples are listed among the sources mentioned below.

The Greek philosophers and the Jews

Bahaullah and `Abd al-Baha praise the
"deistic" (ilahi, muta'allih) philosophers of the Greeks. In a famous tablet to the Swiss scientist A.
H. Forel, `Abd al-Baha writes:

As to deistic
philosophers, such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, they are indeed worthy of
esteem and of the highest praise, for they have rendered distinguished services
to mankind. (Bahá'í World 15:37.)

Aristotle (384-322
B.C.E.), for example, is mentioned a number of times, usually favorably. Aristotle's works had been the primary
influence on Islamic philosophy. Islamic philosophers defended Aristotle and the other pagan philosophers
as sages of antiquity who through reason and mystical insight or through
contact with the Hebrew prophets had attained knowledge of the unity of
God. Various wise sayings were
attributed to him. Bahaullah's
reference to him in the Tablet of Wisdom (para. 47/Bahaullah, Tablets, 147) and many of `Abd al-Baha's
references to him reflect this view of Aristotle. `Abd al-Baha thus contrasts him with the modern materialist
philosophers and scientists (`Abd al-Baha, Promulgation

327, 356-57/`Abd al-Baha, Khitabat 2:299,
Bahá'í World 15:37) and compares the
continued fame of his learning with the oblivion of the empires of his day
(`Abd al-Baha, Promulgation 348/`Abd
al-Baha, Khitabat 2:268). On the other hand, his learning was limited
compared to that of the Prophets and of God (`Abd al-Baha, Paris 19, `Abd al-Baha, Some

5:para. 6/p. 15). `Abd al-Baha
attributes a type of pantheism to him (`Abd al-Baha, Some 82: para. 2/p. 290).

There has been considerable confusion about
Bahaullah's account of the Greek philosophers, as elaborated by `Abd
al-Baha. In his Tablet of Wisdom,
Bahaullah had praised Hippocrates, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Apollonius of
Tyana, and Hermes Trismegistus. Empedocles, he said, had been a contemporary of David and Pythagoras a
contemporary of Solomon. Thus, "the
essence and fundamentals of philosophy have emanated from the Prophets"
(Bahaullah, Tablets, 9, para. 26, pp.
145). Socrates is praised for having
taught monotheism, an offence for which the ignorant put him to death.

With the circulation of Bahá'í writings in
the West further questions arose. Western Bahá'ís questioned why the chronology implicit in the Tablet of
Wisdom differed from the Western histories. Forel had evidently written to question `Abd al-Baha's criticism of
"materialist" philosophers. Other
questions might have been asked had the Western Bahá'ís of `Abd al-Baha's time
known more of classical history: why was Empedocles placed before
Pythagoras? Why did Bahaullah seemingly
accept the historicity of Hermes Trismegistus, given that Western scholars had
known for three hundred years that the works attributed to him were
spurious? Explaining that Bahaullah's
"Tablet of Wisdom was written in accordance with certain histories of the
East," `Abd al-Baha states that histories from the period before Alexander the
Great had many discrepancies and that such discrepancies were to be found even
in the various versions of the Bible (Research Department, p. 2). To Forel he explained that there had been
two schools of ancient philosophers, one deistic and one materialistic. His condemnation of philosophers had applied
only to the materialists (Bahá'í World

15:40). The explanation for Socrates'
monotheism is that he studied in the Holy Land, for the Greeks were polytheists
and so Socrates' monotheism must have had another source. Hippocrates had also lived in Syria, in the
city of Tyre (`Abd al-Baha, Some
14–15, 25.55; `Abd al-Baha, Secret
77; `Abd al-Baha, Promulgation
362–63, 406).

The difficulty with `Abd al-Baha's account
is that it is not in accordance with what is known about the lives of Greek
philosophers. Empedocles and Pythagoras
were not contemporaries of David and Solomon. There is no evidence that Socrates went to Syria. Socrates did not teach monotheism. So why did `Abd al-Baha say and write these
things? There are two kinds of answers:
theological and historical.

The theological answer is simpler. In the time of `Abd al-Baha, Western
science, and increasingly Western philosophy, were thoroughly positivistic,
sometimes in a very simplistic way. `Abd al-Baha, as had many religious thinkers before him, cited the
religiously-oriented Greek philosophers as evidence that reason did not
necessarily imply irreligion. Pythagoras and Plato are thus old allies of monotheistic religion. Such statements are additional examples of
Bahaullah's and `Abd al-Baha's habit of using their thorough command of high
Islamic culture to explicate Bahá'í teachings. But what were the materials that they drew on?

The key to understanding the historical
origins of `Abd al-Baha's account is found in his statement that "the Tablet of
Wisdom was written in accordance with certain histories of the East." The pre-modern Islamic world had a very
imperfect knowledge of the history of Greece in general and of Greek philosophy
in particular. `Abd al-Baha's account
can be explained by his reliance on the Islamic accounts of the Greek
philosophers. The details of his
account can be explained in three stages:

1.
The two schools of Greek philosophy. On this point `Abd al-Baha is on solid ground. The later Greek historians of philosophy were fond of arranging
philosophers in "schools" or "successions." Diogenes Leartius, the author of the most comprehensive surviving
classical history of Greek philosophy, divides the philosophers into the
Ionians and the Italians. The Ionians
were the pre-Socratic physicists, or as it might be translated,
"materialists." This succession
included the atomists and those pre-Socratics who attempted to find a physical
first principle of being. The Italians
were the Pythagoreans and Empedocleans, whose interests were more theological and
religious (Diogenes Laertius 1.13–14). The same notion is found in pseudo-Plutarch (Aetius), De placita philosophorum (1.3). Here we find Pythagoras, Empedocles,
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle listed among the Italians. This work was translated into Arabic, and
this chapter was incorporated into various well known Arabic histories of
philosophy (e.g., Shahrazuri [13th cent.], Nuzhat
al-Arwah, ed. Ahmed [Haidarabad: Da'iratu'l-Ma'arifi'l-Osmania, 1396/1976],
1:20). The Italian school acquired
added importance when it was identified by the Illuminationist school of
Islamic philosophers with the "divine sages" of the Greeks. The Ionians physicists were mostly forgotten
by the Muslims. Thus to later Iranian
intellectuals familiar with philosophy, the Greek philosophers of importance
were the "divine" or "deistic" philosophers of the Italian school: Pythagoras,
Empedocles, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. This was a tradition that both Bahaullah and `Abd al-Baha know and cite.

2.
"Those properly called wise." Medieval Muslim scholars attempting to
understand the history of Greek thought were confronted by a variety of
fragmentary accounts, none of which was sufficiently detailed to serve as the
basis of a coherent and comprehensive history. As a result a variety of independent short accounts were transmitted,
most of which eventually dropped out of circulation. The most persistent such tradition, found in works written from
the tenth century on, was a list of "those properly called wise": Luqman, Empedocles,
Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Accounts influenced by it can be recognized by the error of placing
Empedocles before Pythagoras. According
to this account, Luqman, a sage mentioned in the Qur'an and not otherwise
known, lived in Syria at the time of David and was the first to be called
"wise" (or "a sage" or philosopher, hakim). Empedocles came to Syria and studied
with Luqman. Pythagoras went to
Egypt,where he studied with the disciples of Solomon. Socrates was a follower of Pythagoras, who was put to death for
refuting polytheism with rational arguments. Finally, there was Plato, who was Socrates' student. This tradition would have been known to any
well-educated nineteenth century Iranian.

This account can be traced back as far as
the tenth century philosopher al-'Amiri and probably derives in whole or part
from some Christian source. It was
common for early Christian theologians to trace the origins of Greek philosophy
to Jewish sources. They found it a
useful strategy for undermining their most formidable pagan opponents, the
Neoplatonic philosophers. Needless to
say, there is no evidence of intellectual contact between the Greeks and Jews
before the conquests of Alexander and little evidence of significant
intellectual contact until even later. The identification of the Jews as the original source of philosophy was
useful for medieval Muslims as well, since the Islamic version of the theory of
progressive revelation did not provide an obvious explanation for pagan
philosophy. That this particular
account is the origin of Bahaullah's and `Abd al-Baha's versions of the history
of Greek philosophy is obvious from a variety of large and small features.

3.
Oral simplification and quoting from memory. There is one major remaining incongruity: `Abd al-Baha's
statement that Socrates studied in Syria. No such statement is known either in Greek or Islamic sources—or for
that matter, in Bahaullah's writings. `Abd al-Baha writes the following:

It is recorded in
eastern histories that Socrates journeyed to Palestine and Syria and there,
from men learned in the things of God, acquired certain spiritual truths; that
when he returned to Greece, he promulgated two beliefs: one, the unity of God, and the other, the
immortality of the soul after its separation from the body; that these
concepts, so foreign to their thought, raised a great commotion among the
Greeks, until in the end they gave him poison and killed him. . . .Eastern
histories also state that Hippocrates sojourned for a long time in the town of
Tyre, and this is a city in Syria. (`Abd al-Baha, Selections 25, p. 55)

This passage
attributes two innovations to Socrates: the unity of God and the immortality of
the soul. In the Islamic versions of
the tradition we have been discussing, these doctrinal innovations are
attributed to Empedocles, not Socrates. Hippocrates is not said to have lived in Tyre; Pythagoras was. In each of these cases a less familiar name
in the Islamic tradition—Empedocles and Pythagoras—has been replaced by a more
familiar name—Socrates and Hippocrates. In the absence of a textual source embodying the confusion, the probable
explanation is simply that `Abd al-Baha read the story in some history and
later retold it several times, and that either he or his secretary confused
Socrates with Empedocles.

As for the larger question of whether the
early Greek philosophers could have been influenced by Judaism, the answer is
no. There is no surviving reference in
Greek to the Jews dating earlier than the conquests of Alexander, which took
place in Aristotle's lifetime. It is
also quite certain that no such references were known in the first century
C.E., since had they existed Jewish apologists such as Philo and Josephus would
certainly have eagerly cited them, as would slightly later Christian
writers. The reason why there was no
such contact is simple enough; the Greeks and Jews had no common language. The Jews of that time used Aramaic as a
lingua franca; the Greeks used Greek. There would have been nowhere they would have met with a common
language. Plausible arguments can be
made for a Zoroastrian influence, or even an Egyptian influence, on early Greek
philosophy, but not for a Jewish influence.

Sources:
The principle Bahá'í scriptures dealing with philosophical subjects are the
Tablet of Wisdom (Bahaullah, Tablets,
9:137–52), `Abd al-Baha, Some
(especially parts 4 and 5), `Abd al-Baha, Promulgation

(20–22, 87–91, 253–55, 326–27, 355–61), and Tablet to Dr. Forel (Bahá'í World Faith 336–48). Bahá'í writers on philosophy have include
`A. M. Davudi, Insan dar A'yin-i Bahá'í and Uluhiyat va Mazhariyat;
William Hatcher, Logic and Logos; Julio
Savi, The Eternal Quest for God; John
Hatcher, The Purpose of Physical Reality;

B. Hoff Conow, The Bahá'í Teachings; Udo Schaefer, The Imperishable Dominion; M. Momen,
"Relativism: a Basis for Bahá'í Metaphysics," in SBBR 5:185–217; Robert Parry,
"Philosophical Theology in Bahá'í Scholarship," BSB Oct. 1992, 6/4–7/2:
66–91. Ruhi Afnan, the
Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh and the Bab: Book 1: Descartes' Theory of Knowledge (New York:
Philosophical Library, 1970); idem, Bahá'u'lláh
and the Bab Confront Modern Thinkers: Book 2: Spinoza: Concerning God (New
York: Philosophical Library, 1977). The
text of the tradition of "the five properly called wise" is found, with
thorough commentary, in Everett K. Rowson, A
Muslim Philosopher on the Soul and its Fate (American Oriental Series 70;
New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1988), 70–89, 203–63. I have discussed various aspects of this
tradition and related material in two books: The Leaven of the Ancients: Suhrawardi and the Heritage of the Greeks,
esp. ch. 4–8, and The Wisdom of the
Mystic East: Suhrawardi and Platonic Orientalism, esp. ch. 2. On
Socrates in Islamic sources, see Ilai Alon, Socrates
in Mediaeval Arabic Literature (Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and Science,
Texts and Studies X; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991). On texts relating to Socrates in the Bahá'í writings, see Research
Department, Bahá'í World Center, Memorandum to Universal House of Justice, 22
October 1995, which was kindly shared with me by Robert Johnston. On the history of Greek philosophy in the
Tablet of Wisdom, see Juan R. I. Cole, "Problems of chronology." Introductions to Islamic philosophy include
Majid Fakhry, A History of Islamic
Philosophy, Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, eds., History of Islamic Philosophy, and M. M. Sharif, A History of Muslim Philosophy, though none are totally
satisfactory.

METADATA

Views5996 views since posted 2011-06-03; last edit 2025-03-09 14:46 UTC;

previous at archive.org.../walbridge_philosophy
Language
English
Permission
author
Share

Shortlink: bahai-library.com/4988
Citation: ris/4988

select Collection:
Archives
Articles
Articles-unpublished
Audio
Bibliographies
BIC
Biographies
Books
Chronologies
Compilations
Compilations-NSA
Compilations-personal
Documents
East-asia
Encyclopedia
Essays
Etc
Excerpts
Fiction
Glossaries
Guardian
Histories
Introductory
Letters
Maps
Music
Newspapers
NSA-documents
NSA-letters
Personal
Pilgrims
Poetry
Presentations
Resources
Reviews
Scripts
Software
Statistics
Study
Talks
Theses
Transcripts
Translations
UHJ-documents
UHJ-letters
Video
Visual
Writings

home

sitemap

series

chronology

search:
author

title

date

tags

adv. search
languages

inventory

bibliography

abbreviations

links

about

contact

RSS

new

Kies een tweede tekst om parallel te lezen — een vertaling, of een willekeurige andere tekst.