A new version of the Bahá’í Reference Library is now available. This ‘old version’ of the Bahá’í Reference Library will be replaced at a later date.
The new version of the Bahá’i Reference Library can be accessed here »
THE DIVINE STANDARD OF KNOWLEDGE |
During my visit to London and Paris last year I had many talks
with the materialistic philosophers of Europe. The basis of all
their conclusions is that the acquisition of knowledge of phenomena
is according to a fixed, invariable law,—a law mathematically exact
in its operation through the senses. For instance, the eye sees a
chair; therefore there is no doubt of the chair’s existence. The eye
looks up into the heavens and beholds the sun; I see flowers upon
this table; I smell their fragrance; I hear sounds outside, etc, etc.
This, they say, is a fixed mathematical law of perception and deduction,
the operation of which admits of no doubt whatever; for
inasmuch as the universe is subject to our sensing, the proof is
self-evident that our knowledge of it must be gained through the
avenues of the senses. That is to say, the materialists announce,
that the criterion and standard of human knowledge is sense perception.
Among the Greeks and Romans the criterion of knowledge
252
was reason; that whatever is provable and acceptable by
reason must necessarily be admitted as true. A third standard or
criterion is the opinion held by theologians that traditions or prophetic
statement and interpretations constitute the basis of human
knowing. There is still another, a fourth criterion, upheld by
religionists and metaphysicians who say that the source and
channel of all human penetration into the unknown is through
inspiration. Briefly then, these four criterions according to the
declarations of men are: First—Sense Perception; Second—Reason;
Third—Traditions; Fourth—Inspiration.
|
In Europe I told the philosophers and scientists of materialism
that the criterion of the senses is not reliable. For instance, consider
a mirror and the images reflected in it. These images have
no actual corporeal existence. Yet if you had never seen a mirror
you would firmly insist and believe that they were real. The eye
sees a mirage upon the desert as a lake of water but there is no
reality in it. As we stand upon the deck of a steamer the shore
appears to be moving, yet we know the land is stationary and we
are moving. The earth was believed to be fixed and the sun revolving
about it but although this appears to be so, the reverse is
now known to be true. A whirling torch makes a circle of fire
appear before the eye, yet we realize there is but one point of light.
We behold a shadow moving upon the ground but it has no material
existence, no substance. In deserts the atmospheric effects
are particularly productive of illusions which deceive the eye.
Once I saw a mirage in which a whole caravan appeared traveling
upward into the sky. In the far north other deceptive phenomena
appear and baffle human vision. Sometimes three or four suns
called by scientists “mock suns” will be shining at the same time
whereas we know the great solar orb is one and that it remains
fixed and single. In brief, the senses are continually deceived and
we are unable to separate that which is reality from that which
is not.
|
As to the second criterion, reason, this likewise is unreliable and
not to be depended upon. This human world is an ocean of varying
opinions. If reason is the perfect standard and criterion of
knowledge, why are opinions at variance and why do philosophers
253
disagree so completely with each other? This is a clear proof that
human reason is not to be relied upon as an infallible criterion.
For instance, great discoveries and announcements of former centuries
are continually upset and discarded by the wise men of
today. Mathematicians, astronomers, chemical scientists continually
disprove and reject the conclusions of the ancients; nothing is
fixed, nothing final; everything continually changing because
human reason is progressing along new roads of investigation and
arriving at new conclusions every day. In the future much that
is announced and accepted as true now will be rejected and disproved.
And so it will continue ad infinitum.
|
When we consider the third criterion, traditions, upheld by
theologians as the avenue and standard of knowledge, we find this
source equally unreliable and unworthy of dependence. For religious
traditions are the report and record of understanding and
interpretation of the Book. By what means has this understanding,
this interpretation been reached? By the analysis of human reason.
When we read the Book of God the faculty of comprehension by
which we form conclusions is reason. Reason is mind. If we are
not endowed with perfect reason, how can we comprehend the
meanings of the Word of God? Therefore human reason, as already
pointed out, is by its very nature finite and faulty in conclusions.
It cannot surround the Reality Itself, the Infinite Word.
Inasmuch as the source of traditions and interpretations is human
reason, and human reason is faulty, how can we depend upon its
findings for real knowledge?
|
The fourth criterion I have named is inspiration through which
it is claimed the reality of knowledge is attainable. What is inspiration?
It is the influx of the human heart. But what are satanic
promptings which afflict mankind? They are the influx of the
heart also. How shall we differentiate between them? The question
arises, How shall we know whether we are following inspiration
from God or satanic promptings of the human soul? Briefly,
the point is that in the human material world of phenomena these
four are the only existing criterions or avenues of knowledge, and
all of them are faulty and unreliable. What then remains? How
shall we attain the reality of knowledge? By the breaths and
254
promptings of the Holy Spirit which is light and knowledge Itself.
Through it the human mind is quickened and fortified into true
conclusions and perfect knowledge. This is conclusive argument
showing that all available human criterions are erroneous and defective,
but the divine standard of knowledge is infallible. Therefore
man is not justified in saying: “I know because I perceive
through my senses”; or: “I know because it is proved through my
faculty of reason”; or: “I know because it is according to tradition
and interpretation of the holy book”; or: “I know because
I am inspired.” All human standard of judgment is faulty, finite.
|