a Theory on the Indiscernability between Divine and Human Action

One key aim of the Kitab-i-Iqan is to diminish to an extent the uniqueness of the end-times by positioning it as the coming of a divine Revelation resembling those of the past. Because the physical creation is not destroyed, any prophecies of divine justice in those days must then be projected across the surface of human history yet to come. The long-awaited millenium, the period of divine justice following the end-times would then arrive without the cosmic annhilation expected by most. But by projecting divine justice across an earthly future, Baha'u'llah's framework raises questions as to who is to be enacting this salvation. At no time did Baha'u'llah ever perform a sort of world-miracle by which all society is instantly transformed into a world of justice. This appears to leave humanity the task of accomplishing such justice. That Baha'u'llah's writings give such voluminous instruction on the establishment of a global civilization backs this up. But all along He continues to ascibe its arrival to divine action.

Curiosity demands that a way be found to understand the relationship between human and divine action in the plan for salvation. Mutual exclusion is unsatisfactory. It's not enough to say it's one or the other. What follows is a theory of salvific action, the will towards salvation, that charts out one way that spiritual and material prosperity is accomplished in this world.

Salvation in this world by the Baha'i understanding cannot be attributed exclusively to either divine or human action. Neither should it be regarded as the sum of these two components. Rather, one form of its manifestation is as the product of an ineffable power that both embraces and exceeds the designations "divine" and "human." It embraces inasmuch as neither God or humanity take on an entirely passive instrumental role, subsuming one into the other. Both retain their distinctive agency. And it exceeds inasmuch as neither designation can provide by itself an exhaustative account of the action in question. If this form of salvation is always both divine and human, but never one or the other, then one is led to speak of some sort of unified reality, however ineffable, distinct from the two-ness of the previous formulation, however real that two-ness might be. An insistance on the unconditional applicability of numbers to this ineffable power is an impediment to its understanding. This has enormous consequences for how to think the spiritual dimensions of social action in a Baha'i context.