Monday, May 28, 2007

A Look at Praise

Rather than totally move on to a new passage. I thought I'd begin by looking at the next one in the context of the last few lines in the passage just studied. I quoted this from reference.bahai.org so it contains the instructions on posture that are included in the text.


Thine is the command at all times, O Thou Who art the Lord of all names; and mine is resignation and willing submission to Thy will, O Creator of the heavens!

Let him then raise his hands thrice, and say:

Greater is God than every great one!

Let him then kneel and, bowing his forehead to the ground, say:

Too high art Thou for the praise of those who are nigh unto Thee to ascend unto the heaven of Thy nearness, or for the birds of the hearts of them who are devoted to Thee to attain to the door of Thy gate. I testify that Thou hast been sanctified above all attributes and holy above all names. No God is there but Thee, the Most Exalted, the All-Glorious.


This should look like familiar ground. First the performer testifies to an unconditional commitment to God. This is then followed by a prostration as if before a king in which the performer testifies to God's transcendence beyond the created world. This passage is thus, very similar in content to the third passage and what comes immediately before it.

One new theme that comes in with this passage is the implications of divine transcendence on engagement in acts of praise. It comes from the recognition that praise is a creation, and thus isn't exactly going to "move" God. Furthermore, the primary way that a person would praise God is to invoke his names and attributes. But these too are creations. They pertain to God and the way he engages with His creation, but they are distinct from God inasmuch as they are bounded and conditioned by being-as-we-know-it. In this way, the radical difference between Creator and creation is felt when a person tries to engage in prayer. I could explain this in greater depth if I really wanted to, but this following selection from a prayer of Baha'u'llah does a far better job of that in His own words then I could do in mine.

Praised be Thou, O Lord my God! Every time I attempt to make mention of Thee, I am hindered by the sublimity of Thy station and the overpowering greatness of Thy might. For were I to praise Thee throughout the length of Thy dominion and the duration of Thy sovereignty, I would find that my praise of Thee can befit only such as are like unto me, who are themselves Thy creatures, and who have been generated through the power of Thy decree and been fashioned through the potency of Thy will. And at whatever time my pen ascribeth glory to any one of Thy names, methinks I can hear the voice of its lamentation in its remoteness from Thee, and can recognize its cry because of its separation from Thy Self. I testify that everything other than Thee is but Thy creation and is held in the hollow of Thy hand. To have accepted any act or praise from Thy creatures is but an evidence of the wonders of Thy grace and bountiful favors, and a manifestation of Thy generosity and providence.

__________________

That's all I have to say for this particular passage. But before I finish this post I want to begin to think about the distinction between Creator and creation. I've been realizing how pivotal it is for understanding the Long Obligatory Prayer. But as of yet, I haven't presented any systematic understanding of how I am using these terms. I didn't want to introduce philosophy jargon. But I'm afraid it might be easier than constantly opting for words used outside of the philosophy community.

For two things to be homogeneous is for them to be of more or less the same nature. This means that they would be constituted in a similar way. The opposite of this is for two things to be heterogeneous. This would mean that they are of more or less different natures. This means that they would be constituted in different ways.

Creation is homogeneous to creation. Creator and creation are heterogeneous to each other.

The way I'm using these terms, Creator and creation refers to the way in which they do or do not have their being. Creation is for something to be present in thought. It means that it is bound as a thing by differentiation from other things. This thing is this. It is not that. Creation is synonymous with another of my expressions: being-as-we-know-it

The Creator is not a thing. He transcends all thingness, especially all He-ness. He is present in thought as a thing. But this thought is only a creation. It is a way of thinking in terms of creation about what is heterogeneous to it.

The Creator is a being beyond being-as-we-know-it, who thus has no being for us. He is the ground of being-as-we-know-it. But not in a homogeneous relationship. Rather, they are radically heterogeneous. He is not transcendence as such, but merely transcendent.

3 comments:

ayani_taliba said...

and again we have that facinating figure of Word, or Manifestation. some means to bridge that infinite difference between man and God. and the L.O.P. itself as a means of approach, contemplation, and a spring of mercy. you comment a few posts back on language and empty words was interesting as heck- i'll see if i can find more articles on this for you.

Mr. Cat said...

BTW I don't think I've told you this yet. But with the way that this project is going I'm starting to think of how to turn it into a book, which I fully intend on getting published. It will probably be about 50-60 pages or so. I'm thinking of entitling it "of Fire and Water: a Guide to the Baha'i Long Obligatory Prayer."

That entry on Who is invoked in Baha'i prayer is going to receive a priviliged position in it. It doesn't speak about any particular passage but it does shed light on the whole so I may use it as part of an introduction. And yes, I definitely need to play up the way that entry relates to the distinction between Creator and creation.

As far as more articles on that subject. I've been hoping to read Derrida's of Grammatology. I think that that contains most of what I'm trying to get at. But it's a really intimidating book. After all, it's 300 pages of Derrida. There are only so many people that are that masochistic.

ayani_taliba said...

oh, heck yes. i would love to see this become a book, man. the annalysis you could go into on self/other and Baha'i theology would be incredible.