World Order/Volume 5/Issue 7/Text

←Issue 6

World Order Volume 5 - Issue 7

Issue 8→

Return to PDF view Proofread once

[Page 239]

WORLD ORDER

OCTOBER 1939

OUT OF THIS AGONY

Editorial

THEY MET THE DAWN

Alice Simmons Cox

SCIENCE CONTRIBUTES

G. A. Shook

THE VALLEY OF UNITY

Helen Pilkington Bishop

THE TIME HAS ARRIVED

Ben Ellison

[Page 240]

CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE

OCTOBER 1939 VOLUME 5 NUMBER 7

OUT OF THIS AGONY • Editorial ........................................................ 241

THEY MET THE DAWN • ALICE SIMMONS COX .......................... 243

SCIENCE CONTRIBUTES • G. A. SHOOK ....................................... 248

ASSURANCE OF IMMORTALITY • Compilation ............................ 254

THE VALLEY OF UNITY • HELEN PILKINGTON BISHOP ......... 256

TRUTH AND SOCIETY • HORACE HOLLEY .................................. 259

THE CONCEPT OF FEDERATION • SIRDAR D. K. SEN ............ 263

THE TIME HAS ARRIVED • BEN ELLISON ...................................... 273

MAN’S ILLUSION • PEARLE U. EASTERBROOK .......................... 277

VIEWING THE WORLD AS AN ORGANISM

Change of address should be reported one month in advance.

WORLD ORDER is published monthly in New York, N. Y., by the Publishing Committee of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States and Canada. EDITORS: Stanwood Cobb, Bertha Hyde Kirkpatrick and Horace Holley. CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Alice Simmons Cox, Genevieve L. Coy, G. A. Shook, Dale S. Cole, Marcia Atwater, Annemarie Honnold, Marzieh Carpenter, Hasan M. Balyusi, Shirin Fozdar, Inez Greeven. BUSINESS MANAGER: C. R. Wood. PUBLICATION OFFICE: 135 East 50th Street, New York, N. Y. EDITORIAL OFFICE: 536 Sheridan Road, Wilmette, Ill.

SUBSCRIPTIONS: $2.00 per year, $1.75 to Public Libraries. Rate to addresses outside the United States, $2.25, foreign Library rate, $2.00, Single copies, 20 cents. Checks and money orders should be made payable to World Order Magazine, 135 East 50th Street, New York, N. Y. Entered as second class matter, May 1, 1935, at the post office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879. Contents copyrighted 1939 by BAHA’I PUBLISHING COMMITTEE. Title Registered at U. S. Patent Office.

October 1939, Volume 5, Number 7

[Page 241]

WORLD ORDER

October 1939 Volume 5 No. 7

OUT OF THIS AGONY

Editorial

MEN begin now to witness the vast spectacle of an era overtaken by destiny. It is a mode of civilization that has been brought to destruction, in addition to the myriad individuals who may perish in war, famine and disease. A cycle terminates, an age is fulfilled. The yesterday we had and were never will return.

Human feeling was not created to mourn the death of a world. The vast spectacle proceeds, whilst we fear for the fate of the few we love, or shed tears because one tree falls, one home burns, one child lies crushed beneath the wheel.

But indirectly, as through the mist of these intimate tears, we become aware of the larger portent and the vaster fate. This deepening, this widening violence that flames in East and West is not in essence war; in essence it is perturbation, a convulsion in society as a body that writhes to vomit a poison that eats the vitals away.

Indirectly, like the memory of a Doré illustration that appalled because the soul was tender and young, we can see within the artificial frame of the journalist’s world the insistent rising of a greater world, a world ancient and without end. From that world stride shadowy figures; these figures lock in death embrace; the strife is here only in part. Its energies and its aims are there, in that greater world of the soul.

Distilled from memory, too, the overwhelming realization that this world conflict and destruction is not improvised by desperate or neurotic men. They play a part in a drama conceived long, long ago. Turn to the ancient Holy Books. This agonized spectacle was written down before we were born. It was foreknown, in the clarity of that indestructible knowledge which holds the balance, weighing men, systems, worlds, whether they be good or evil.

The journalist’s world no longer has meaning. It is a fiction that must be renewed each instant or it would be forgotten. It tells what happens to human bodies, ships, forts, airplanes, roads, houses and stocks and bonds. It is life suspended in an incredible X-Ray projection, quivering under the thrust of a prodigious power whose function is to obliterate all reality except that of things. It tells us that trees are tormented and uprooted, [Page 242] but it denies the wind. It perceives that flesh is discolored and consumed; it names the germ; but the man’s destiny and why he suffers it has ignored.

Man is eternally a conscious being, supernatural to wood, stone, grass and flesh. His life is the laying of bricks of fact in a wall of meaning. This is the wall against which men stand in their ultimate heroism, to defend the meaning of existence from those who would pervert and destroy.

Society in convulsion will not destroy the spirit of man, but when the spirit has betrayed itself by substituting things for meanings it comes under the necessity to undo all it has painfully built on the basis of error. Hence the devastating tempests that from age to age unloose destruction upon ancient institutions and empires and peoples. It is the fury of return to the beginning, before the betrayal, to seek to build on truth.

All virtue, quality, capacity and energy of men derive from the meaning of their society-building actions. Men have become wise, heroic, saint-like in yielding themselves to the process of creating community. So was the family created, the first society and culture and civilization. So was the clan evolved, then the city and last the national state.

But in our time the bricks of fact lie broken upon the ground, for there is no wall of meaning in a society limited by and to the national state. Men, institutions, cultures, faiths—all acquire vitality as they form means to the ends of life. When they become ends, they are in defiance of life. They are marked by the angel of destruction. After a time, they destroy themselves, and life builds anew.

“By Myself,” Bahá’u’lláh declared, “the day is approaching when We will have rolled up the world and all that is therein, and spread out a new Order in its stead. He, verily, is powerful over all things.”

Religion in its purity is the spiritual meaning that gives life to men above the beast. Religion ever moves forward, urging men to build for the great community. Out of the agony of this fury of destruction, out of the flame of this worldwide devastation, men will be severed from the tribe and from the nation. They will be reborn, as human beings, sacredly upholding the dignity of Man.

H. H.

[Page 243]

THEY MET THE DAWN

ALICE SIMMONS COX

“. . . with an eye made quiet by the power

Of harmony, and the deep power of joy,

We see into the life of things.”

—William Wordsworth.

AN old Muhammadan tradition states that “treasures lie hidden beneath the throne of God; the key to those treasures is the tongue of poets.”

Our topic is what poets of the modern era have said of this time in which we live, what they have learned from communication with the realms of thought and spirit that may have significance for the world; but our theme song is of an older era, a century when not yet had the light of the Christ illumined the hearts and minds of men. It is this:

Preserved at Rome is a legend which all the world might well know because of its spiritual imagery and gem-like beauty. The historian who is loyal to the authority of facts must leave the legend where it rests, in the Church of Santa Maria on Capitoline Hill, the Hill where Edward Gibbon, diametrically, first conceived the idea of writing his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. We, however, for purposes of creative analogy, may trespass the bounds of exactness, step to the citadel of this ancient city, and hold our thoughts to the flame that still flickers in a story not all pagan and very much divine.

It is said that Augustus Caesar in a year of census taking for the empire (the year when Joseph took Mary down to Bethlehem that they might be enrolled as citizens of the Roman world, according to the custom of descendants of David) peered into the future in meditation upon his vast domain. Happy withal over the prospects of continued Roman invincibility, peace and progress, he went to the citadel to consult the Tiburtine Sibyl. “Who after me,” he asked, “shall rule the world?”

The reply came from. Apollo: “A little child, a God himself, and stronger than all the gods, bids me leave the heavens to give Him place. Him shall ye now adore, but me invoke no more.”

The emperor returned to his home, his mind afire with thoughts new and strange and—joyful. Rome would be safe—safe, for another generation of more to come. “Ave Roma Immortalis!” was perhaps no dream of his imaginative soul. Peace for the world through time yet unborn was after all no mere figment of his human desire. And he, “the august one,” declared by the Senate inviolate before gods and men, could add to his exaltation that peace which would come with the laying of the sublimest title ever bestowed on man at the feet of One Whom he could revere!

Thereupon Augustus set up an altar [Page 244] to the Divine Child, an altar which he called Aracoeli, the Altar of Heaven.

Here in symbol we find more than the supplanting of paganism by Christianity in the Roman world. We find also the suggestion of the part which Augustus played in preparing a wide dominion for the rapid infusion of the spiritual teachings of the Prophet of Judea. As builder of roads and bridges, as protector and developer of natural resources, as controller of just distribution of the goods of the realm, as political organizer, as establisher of schools for the teaching of one language and the inculcation of a knowledge of Roman law, and as patron of arts and letters, Augustus laid the material foundations upon which Christianity established peace and unity for three hundred years. Unconscious as he may have been of this greatest import of his work for mankind and for God, he nevertheless made this offering to heaven, the heaven that he knew. He did not find the Christ on earth, but he met the dawn of His Day with an intuitive eagerness, subconsciously impelled to a distinct service by that Divine Guidance which once again God had released to the world through the advent of a Prophet.

VERGIL THE SEER

Standing by the side of Augustus, influencing his course to a remarkable degree and by his pen inflaming the people of the empire with zeal for Roman unity and prosperity, which were the emperor’s objectives, was Vergil, shy, talented, tireless craftsman in rhythm and words, whose soul was more keenly attuned to things of the spirit than was common in that decadent century preceding, though touching, the Day of Christ. To some few of the treasures at the foot of the throne of God he held a key.

“We must pass over his idealization of the Empire in the AEneid, although “this poem drew its greatness from some of the noblest springs of human emotion, and constituted an unconscious prophecy of a greater kingdom than Rome, and a greater King than any of the Caesars,” for consideration, however brief, of Vergil’s genius as a prophet of Christianity. A half century before Christ he wrote his fourth “Ecologue.” Famed as one of a group of pastorals of great beauty, it becomes intensely interesting to us now as a vision of a glorious age for the Empire under the leadership of a child who should found a new race, take on himself a divine nature, and give to the people under his rule the finer virtues of their ancestors. This later proved to have notable fulfillment. Constantine used this “Ecologue” in recitation at Nice in reference to Christ, and Vergil came to be enrolled among the prophets. Dr. A. H. Strong points out that this conception of a deliverer, whether it came to Vergil as inspiration or not, did not come from the pagan thought of the day. It may have come to him from the Jews. “But Vergil had the piety and the faith that could welcome truth so far above men’s common thought, and could welcome it even though coming from a Jewish source.”

“Vergil’s prophecy (which settled on the new-born child of Augustus) did not come precisely true,” Strong [Page 245] continues. “Yet his religious teaching had wonderful effect. . . . Vergil, more than any other single influence, brought about this revival of old religion; showed how much literature could do to change the course of human thought and feeling. It showed how much literature could do, but it showed how little literature could do. It could quicken conscience; it could inspire hope; it could not give certainty; it could not impart life. Neither Vergil’s legal nor his prophetic utterances could do the work of the gospel, but they could and they did do something in preparing the world to accept the Christian faith. It is not wonderful that the Middle Ages came to regard Vergil both as a saint and as a wizard.”

Many of the rarest treasures remained sealed. His eyes had seen through a glass darkly; but his heart had caught the fragrance of a new and better day. Through his tongue and pen he rendered a needed service. Thus did one of the greatest poets of all time meet the Dawn of a Spiritual Day of God.

OUT OF THE EAST

As we turn to the dawn era of this new Dispensation, proclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh as the latest Day of God, the consummation of all previous dispensations, their fulfillment and ultimate purpose, we will find among the poets harbingers of a new age. To no one of them was given full insight, but to many of them there was revealed some sign of the coming era of peace and order and righteousness.

From the Word of God, spoken by a Prophet, issues a divine knowledge, from His Word radiates love, through It is released power that can animate the world of arts and sciences, leaven that leaveneth the world of being. Through the Prophets of God the earth bringeth forth its destined fruits. “All things,” declares Bahá’u’lláh, “must needs have a cause, a motive power, an animating principle. These Souls and Symbols of Detachment have provided, and will continue to provide, the supreme moving impulse in the world of being.”

Oftimes the influence of the Word of God reaches receptive souls before the Prophet actually announces His mission. When It touches the mind of a poet he produces new and beautiful and illumined art, either in form or content or both. But “it is the influence of the Holy Spirit (the Word) that causes such words to stream from the tongues of poets, the significance of which they themselves are oftentimes unable to comprehend,” the Báb Himself once remarked to a disciple. He had been standing in the company of Mullá Ḥusayn on a spot in the mountains of Khurdistán, looking out over the landscape from the castle of Máh-Khú where He was a religious prisoner. “He gazed towards the west and, as He saw the Araxes winding its course far away below Him, turned to Mullá Ḥusayn and said: ‘That is the river, and this is the bank thereof which the poet Háfiz has thus written: “O zephyr, shouldst thou pass by the banks of the Araxes, implant a kiss on the earth of that valley and make fragrant thy breath. Hail, a thousand times hail, to thee, O abode of Salmá! How dear is the voice of thy camel-drivers, how sweet the [Page 246] jingling of thy bells!’”’

At that moment was the region of the Araxes fragrant with the Presence of the Báb, the Prophet of the Dawn, and a little later the prophecy concerning the “abode of Salmá” came true with His transference by the government to the castle of Chihríq, in the neighborhood of Salmás.

Háfiz, in Irán, had met the Dawn in the realm of inspiration.

Was this Dawn felt on the other side of the world?

Yes,—in the growing conviction of inspired writers concerning characteristics of the coming age of universal peace, world organization, human brotherhood, a new spiritualized race of men, and in rare instances of the coming of the Christ spirit to rule the earth.

INTO THE WEST

During the time that Shíih heralds of the new Dispensation were preparing for the divine Advent in Irán, teaching all who would hear, a voice from Scotland spoke and many heard:

“Then let us pray that come it may

(As come it will for a’that) ,

That sense and worth, o’er a’ the

earth,

May bear a gree and a’that.

For a’ that, and a’that,

It’s comin yet for a’that,

That man to man, the warld o’er,

Shall brithers be for a’that.”

(Robert Burns, 1795).

And nearly a century later:

“For there is neither East nor West,

Border, nor breed, nor birth,

When two strong men stand face

to face,

Though they come from the ends

of the earth,”

(Rudyard Kipling, 1889).

Three decades before the impetus of moral reform changed English letters (about 1850), Shelley’s vibrant spirit, struggling to be free, broke the bounds of the prevailing “art for art’s sake” and lifted wings over England and the world. Always foreseeing a Golden Age not far distant in the progress of mankind, he soared in joyous and triumphant vision with Prometheus Unbound, writing it in 1818-1819, the latter year a miraculous one for his pen, and significantly, although unknown to him, the year of the birth of the Báb. Details of scientific discovery and application, of art, of world relationships, and of character attainment unrolled before his eye as the gift of the Spirit of the Hour: “. . . the impalpable thin air

And the all-encircling sunlight

were transformed,

As if the sense of love dissolved in

them

Had folded itself round the sphered

world,

My vision then grew clear, and I

could see

Into the mysteries of the universe.”

“Beyond the glassy gulfs we flee

Of shadow-peopled Infancy,

Through Death and Birth, to a

diviner day.”

“To sing those wise and lovely

songs

Of fate, and Chance, and God, and

Chaos old,

And Love, and the chained Titan’s

(man) woeful doom,

And how he shall be loosed, and

make the earth

One brotherhood.”

[Page 247] It was later, just one year before the Báb proclaimed Himself to be the Promised One and the Forerunner of the Great Prophet of the Day of God, that Alfred Tennyson wrote in Locklesley Hall of catastrophic strife and final peace:

“For I dipped into the future,

Far as human eye could see,

Saw a vision of the world,

And all the wonder that would

be. . . .

Far along the world-wide whisper

Of the south wind rushing warm

With the standards of the peoples

Plunging through the thunder

storm.

Till the war-drums throbbed no

longer,

And the battle flags were furled

In the Parliament of man,

The federation of the world.”

(1843).

In 1850, six years after the Báb’s declaration, and two years before Bahá’u’lláh’s, the Rev. Edmund Sears wrote the beautiful last lines of the Christmas Hymn, “It Came Upon the Midnight Clear”:

“For, lo the days are hastening on,

By prophet bards foretold,

When with the ever-circling years

Comes round the age of gold;

When peace shall over all the earth

Its ancient splendors fling,

And the whole world give back the song

Which now the angels sing."

(To be continued)

---

Lauded be Thy name, O Lord my God! Darkness hath fallen upon every land, and the forces of mischief have encompassed all the nations. Through them, however, I perceive the splendors of Thy wisdom, and discern the brightness of the light of Thy providence.

They that are shut out as by a veil from Thee have imagined that they have the power to put out Thy light, and to quench Thy fire, and to still the winds of Thy grace. Nay, and to this Thy might beareth me witness! Had not every tribulation been made the bearer of Thy wisdom, and every ordeal the vehicle of Thy providence, no one would have dared oppose us, though the powers of earth and heaven were to be leagued against us. Were I to unravel the wondrous mysteries of Thy wisdom which are laid bare before me, the reins of Thine enemies would be cleft asunder.

Glorified be Thou, then, O my God! I beseech Thee by Thy Most Great Name to assemble them that love Thee around the Law that streameth from the good-pleasure of Thy will, and to send down upon them what will assure their hearts.

Potent art Thou to do what pleaseth Thee. Thou art, verily, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.—BAHÁ’U’LLÁH.

[Page 248]

SCIENCE CONTRIBUTES

G. A. SHOOK

ALL human failures are due to a lack of social interests, so Adler informs us, and then he proceeds to show that every individual is an integral part of a social organism and that he succeeds when, and only when, he contributes something to society.

The genius who devotes his entire life to his creative work is not unsocial merely because he does not know how to play or take frivolity seriously. Rather, Adler believes, he is an example of supreme usefulness. Where, we may ask, are the people of yesterday, the people who wanted to get something out of life, those who wanted above all to be happy at any cost? Not a trace is left except their contributions to society. Art, music, science or the simple domestic duties well-performed—these remain, and in time their authors will be honored.

Every individual strives for a “meaning of life;” life must have significance. But real meaning, Adler tells us, implies contribution to others; it cannot be private. All true meanings are common meanings, others can share them, they are valid for others. In a community a solution of any individual’s life problems has value for all. Here is a test that can be applied. Private meanings cannot be tested, indeed it appears that the individual who cannot, or will not, cooperate interprets life in such a way that defies any kind of a test. The neurotic, fanatic, and pervert are never wrong. These types reject the fundamental principles upon which a peaceful society rests—they admit no standard. The moment they recognize a standard, their own defects appear but these can be naively suppressed, and they generally are, by adopting a private interpretation of life. They often command sympathy because they pose as wronged individuals who are never understood. They do not realize that the happiest people are those who make the greatest contributions and these are they who do not ask the world to try to understand and appreciate them.

All great movements in life are to increase social interest and human welfare. It is one of the functions of religion.

To understand others and to regulate our own lives, we must realize the significance of the meaning we give to life and the results of a mistaken view. How do we form a meaning of life? Is it independent of heredity? Is it a matter of training? Can we change our style of life? Why do we take a false view of life? Adler believes that the style of life is fixed before the fifth year of the child. This puts a tremendous responsibility upon the mother, [Page 249] who is the first educator of the child. The early years of the child must be carefully guarded, and this cannot be done unless the parents, in particular the mother, have the right interpretation on life. The implications of this meaning of life therefore warrant a little consideration.

THE MEANING OF LIFE

To begin with, our actions interpret the meaning we give to life. They agree with our style of life which, ordinarily, remains stable. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá reminds us that, “A thankful person is thankful under all circumstances. A complaining soul complains even if he lives in Paradise”. . . Our actions will not change, Adler maintains, unless our style of life changes, and to change the latter, some powerful external influence is needed.

While science, in this instance individual psychology, has made great strides, it must be supplemented by something more comprehensive. In the realm of morals and ideals, science can rise no higher than the level of its protagonists. Not only must we have absolute standards of value but a dynamic urge to apply these standards. But history has known only one force that meets these requirements, namely religion. Religion is the most potent factor in changing the style of life.

Today, however, it is not sufficient to teach a child to cooperate with its family or with the members of its own race or religion. We have excellent examples of high-minded citizens who can contribute within a limited sphere, but who manifest the proclivities of the lower animals when the elimination of the boundaries of race or nation are suggested. In every community one may find benevolent souls who are kindly disposed to all within the community but such love and tolerance is often turned into hate when the limitations of the community are expanded. The diffusion of a great religion, however, has been able to expand the provincial love to include other communities, races and nations, but nothing less than a universal religion, one common faith, can ever accomplish this for the entire world.

Science alone cannot solve the problem of the false meaning of life, but let us not pass over too lightly the positive results of science in this field. Whatever we may think of the efforts of science to control behavior, at least science has stressed some fundamentals that cannot be overlooked. It has emphasized the fact that man is a social being, that he must stay on the useful side of life and that he must contribute to society. Adler shows that success or failure in life is not due to some early experience, as we often imagine, but to our interpretation of the experience. The experience may be offered as an excuse for failure but it is not the real cause. Three individuals may experience the same tragedy in life and yet react differently. Take the case of ill health; one individual has a break in health, loses courage and never accomplishes anything. Another, having the same fate, rises above it but is ever conscious of his limitations. A third forgets all about health, remembering only that his activities must be along the lines that do not demand normal vigor and endurance. [Page 250] The first would probably give up in the face of any calamity while the third would meet every situation with courage. People with handicaps are not necessarily failures, but the attitude toward the handicap determines success or failure. A child often gets a false meaning because it has imperfect organs or because it is pampered or neglected. Experience shows, however, that great as these handicaps are, they do not necessarily prevent the child from getting on the useful side of life. These are facts we should remember for our own personal development, but with reference to our fellows and to the generality of mankind, we are forced to take a more comprehensive view. We must part company with those well-meaning psychologists who believe there is room for all goals. The glaring facts negate such an optimistic outlook.

ANTI-SOCIAL QUALITIES

In any group, the peculiar type that cannot cooperate must be studied and assisted. Ordinarily inharmony calls to mind such crass offenses as aggressiveness, jealousy, envy and insubordination, but there are other less harmful imperfections which are just as difficult to overcome because they are more subtle and more insidious. We will consider only three.

1. Survival of the unfit.

2. Lack of respect for the qualities we do not possess and for those that are foreign to us.

3. The inferiority complex.

1. As we develop mentally and spiritually we become more susceptible to those uncalled-for distractions which are fatal to both the creative worker and to his work. Shall we overcome these “minor, trivial things” or shall we try to eliminate them? Have we any right to resist the things that dissipate our energies: the things that can and should be avoided? Those who are not bothered by needless noises or unnecessary interruptions may say “no, let the mental worker and those who are spiritually sensitive learn to rise above such things—they should be impervious to all disturbances.” In the past the burden has been put upon those who resent and not where it belongs, namely, upon those who produce or permit distractions. The latter often feel that people who cannot think or contemplate with a radio broadcasting, a doorbell ringing, and a phone calling, are neurotics, while those who permit such things are perfectly normal.

But we may ask seriously, is the person who inadvertently disturbs others or permits disturbances, perfectly normal, unselfish and free from egotism? Is the highly strung creator or mental worker, whose sole concern is to produce something of worth, a neurotic or problem child? Should those who are making the greatest contributions to life adjust their daily habits to the whims of the introvert? This tendency to make life easy for the undeveloped at the expense of the creative genius, we have termed the “survival of the unfit.”

And let us not confuse the mental worker, or the creative genius who cannot live like a savage, with the neurotic who wishes to feel important and who refuses to face the facts of life. The person who wants quiet for [Page 251] thinking is not trying to feel important; indeed he may be very humble. Such people are generally looking beyond themselves and this in itself is an indication of real humility. The individual who makes this condition impossible is really nearer the neurotic. He calls attention to himself when he says, “You should be able to overcome. . .” He is really trying to convey the fact that he is not bothered. In reality he is the one that wants to feel important. Those who brag that they can work under any conditions, never distinguish themselves in creative work.

After all, we have a very practical criterion that should be applied in such cases. If the individual who demands favorable working conditions makes a contribution to society, he is entitled to some consideration even though his demands may not be comprehended fully by those who are not engaged in a like occupation. Bahá’u’lláh reminds us that, “Fruitless trees have been and will be only fit for fire.”

2. The second disturber of the peace is the person who does not understand nor respect talent and genius and who is prone to discredit their importance in any community. After all, the world cannot advance very far without those who are mentally and spiritually sensitive. We may not comprehend them but, to the extent that they enhance our lives, they should be respected.

Also the capacity for leadership and the ability to organize must be appreciated. The rights of the majority can never be protected without a high-minded capable minority. The acquisition of wealth is praiseworthy if it leads to refinement and culture, rather than to indolence and extravagance, for the former are necessary for real spiritual development. Every prophetic religion has been accompanied by a rise in culture.

Now that the world is more mature the Divine Revelation with which Bahá’u’lláh has been entrusted, is able to clarify man’s relation to the material world. In the “Gleanings,” Bahá’u’lláh says, “Should a man wish to adorn himself with the ornaments of the earth, to wear its apparels, or partake of the benefits it can bestow, no harm can befall him, if he alloweth nothing whatever to intervene between him and God, for God hath ordained every good thing, whether created in the heavens or in the earth, for such of His servants as truly believe in Him.”

There must be a superior class from whom we may learn. Art, music, literature, and travel are of little consequence to those who do not recognize a superior class. To deny that we may learn from others does not demonstrate our independence so much as our inflated self-esteem. Moreover, the unwillingness to recognize a superior class is usually accompanied with logical contradictions and inconsistencies —we often reject the leadership of one class, only to be led by an inferior class.

3. Finally, to some degree, neurosis is responsible for much inharmony. Harmony depends upon cooperation, and cooperation, upon understanding of ourselves and others.

Every neurotic has an inferiority complex. At times all of us feel inferior, [Page 252] we all wish to improve. All culture owes something to feelings of inferiority, they are not abnormal in themselves. The important thing to remember is that we cannot feel inferior for long. When we do, tensions are produced and these can be relieved only by removing the feeling of inferiority. If we have courage, we will act and improve our condition. If we lack courage, we may hypnotize ourselves to feel superior, but this does not, in reality, make us superior —so the tensions persist because the situation remains. The neurotic never faces the facts of life; every move he makes is toward self-deception—on the useless side of life. He avoids the real struggle that would make superior and strives by subtle tricks to appear superior but in reality remains inferior. The feelings of inferiority become a complex.

THE INDIVIDUAL GOAL

Every individual has a “goal of superiority,” personal and unique, but it is determined by his style of life. This goal, Adler believes, is not expressed concretely once for all but below the surface there is a unity of personality, an underlying coherence, something that seems to remain fixed, although our outer activities may change.

Is it not this underlying reality in man that has been affected most profoundly by religion? Is it not possible that this change of goal, for which science is striving, may be accomplished more effectively through spiritual knowledge?

The nearer to normality and health, the more flexible the striving becomes. The normal individual always sees more than one solution to a baffling problem; he advances to meet difficulties. The uncertainties of the future merely add zest to his life and consequently he is never a liability to society. He never asks for concessions. The goal of the neurotic, on the other hand, is always too concrete. His natural tendency is to restrict his field of action. He is obsessed by one desire at a time, he must be granted this wish or he believes he is ruined. Since his interpretation of life is private, he naturally concludes that he is always right. As we said at the beginning, the neurotic, fanatic, and pervert are never wrong. It is useless to try and convince the neurotic; he must be made over.

If one has little courage, his feeling of inferiority may be due to the fact that his goal is too high. Sometimes it helps to try something that is within our ability. Our courage is often restored by doing something well.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá assures us that man must enlarge the circle of his ideals and that he must be tireless in his efforts. Effort in itself, he reminds us, is one of the noblest traits of human character.

Finally, we should realize that every individual has some social feeling; a few have lost courage and cannot get back upon the useful side of life. At times all of us lack courage, now and then some of us may even exhibit neurotic tendencies.

All this investigation of man shows that the world is beginning to realize that the most satisfactory life is the one that is characterized by usefulness and well-guided activity. To be sure, [Page 253] some classes have taken a very long time to realize that the end of life is not self-assertion, self-expression or leisure. This investigation also indicates that one cannot develop as an individual irrespective of his fellows. To quote Adler, “If we think that we must develop personality in vacuo, without a goal of contribution, we shall merely make ourselves domineering and unpleasant.”

Those who believe that they can separate being from doing and that they can exist by just being, are simply living upon and usurping the contributions of others and experience shows that today, such persons are not very valuable to the community. Just being, without doing, is no longer respectable; in fact it is almost parasitical. “Affairs depend upon means, and the blessing of God will appear therein and will enrich you.”

Seventy-five years ago Bahá’u’lláh anticipated this work on “human relations” when He raised work from the low level of things disagreeable— something to be avoided—to a very high level, not merely that of respectable occupation but to the level of worship. Useful work performed in the spirit of service, He declares, is an act of worship.

We must not imagine, however, that the joy of doing creative work is confined to the arts. The organizer who undertakes colossal enterprises and the capitalist who manages large industries, are creative workers and find the same joy in their work as the artist does in his. The popular notion that the capitalist is concerned solely with accumulating money is erroneous. It is a betrayal of that kind of ignorance that always blocks the way to an understanding of people that are not like ourselves. Even routine, or so-called monotonous, work brings some degree of satisfaction to those who are devoid of imagination and initiative, those who are not fitted for specialized skills.

Bahá’u’lláh’s message to humanity is a message of unity; neither society nor man can be a house divided against itself. In this age there is no distinction between secular and spiritual. Science has eliminated and will continue to eliminate drudgery, but it has exonerated useful work. “Waste not your time in idleness and indolence, and occupy yourselves with that which will profit yourselves and others besides yourselves. Thus hath the matter been decreed in this Tablet, from the Horizon of which the Sun of Wisdom and Divine Utterance is gleaming! The most despised of men before God is he who sits and begs. Cling unto the rope of means, relying upon God, the Causer of the Causes.”

[Page 254]

ASSURANCE OF IMMORTALITY

I have made death a messenger of joy to thee. Wherefore dost thou grieve?

“Hidden Words.”

A LOVE that one may have entertained for anyone will not be forgotten in the world of the Kingdom, nor wilt thou forget there the life that thou hadst in the material world.

“Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.” Vol. I, p. 206.

A friend asked: “How should one look forward to death?”

‘Abdu’l-Bahá answered: “How does one look forward to the goal of any journey? With hope and with expectation. It is even so with the end of this earthly journey. In the next world man will find himself freed from many of the disabilities under which he now suffers. Those who have passed on through death, have a sphere of their own. It is not removed from ours: their work of the Kingdom, is ours; but it is sanctified from what we call “time and place.” Time with us is measured by the sun. When there is no more sunrise, and no more sunset, that kind of time does not exist for man. Those who have ascended have different attributes from those who are still on earth, yet there is no real separation.

In prayer there is a mingling of stations, a mingling of condition. Pray for them as they pray for you.

“‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London.” p. 97.

Sincere prayer always has its effect and it has a greater influence in the other world. We are never cut off from those who are there. The real and genuine influence is not in this world but in that other.

“Life Eternal.” p. 102.

As to the question whether souls will recognize each other in the spiritual world: this fact is certain; for the Kingdom is the World of Vision, where all the concealed realities will be disclosed. How much more the intimate souls will become manifest. . . . How much more will he recognize persons with whom he has associated.

“Life Eternal.” p. 124.

Know thou of a truth that the soul, after its separation from the body, will continue to progress until it attaineth the presence of God, in a state and condition which neither the revolution of ages and centuries nor the changes and chances of this world, can alter. It will endure as long as the Kingdom of God, His sovereignty, His dominion and power will endure. It will manifest the signs of God and His attributes, and will reveal His loving kindness and bounty.

“Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh.” p. 155.

With them (the Prophets and His chosen one) that soul will freely converse. . . . If any man be told that which hath been ordained for such a soul in the worlds of God, the Lord [Page 255] of the throne on high and of the earth below, his whole being will instantly blaze out in his great longing to attain that most exalted, that sanctified and resplendent station.

“Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh.” p. 156.

The world of matter is a facsimile of the world of spirit. “Promulgation of Universal Peace.” Vol. II, p. 264.

The Celestial Universe is so formed that the under world reflects the upper world. That is to say, whatever exists in heaven is reflected in this phenomenal world.

“‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London.” p. 37.

To consider that after the death of the body, the spirit perishes, is like imagining that a bird in a cage will be destroyed if the cage is broken, though the bird has nothing to fear from the destruction of the cage. Our body is like the cage and the spirit is like the bird. . . . If the cage becomes broken, the bird will continue and exist: its feelings will be even more powerful, its perception greater and its happiness increased.

“Some Answered Questions.” p. 265.

It is evident that the spirit is different from the body, and that the bird is different from the cage, and that the power and penetration of the spirit is stronger without the intermediary of the body. Now if the instrument is abandoned, the possessor of the instrument continues to act. For example, if the pen is abandoned or broken, the writer remains living and present; if a house is ruined, the owner is alive and existing. This is one of the logical evidences of the immortality of the soul.

“Some Answered Questions.” p. 265.

When you break a glass on which the sun shines, the glass is broken but the sun still shines! If a lamp is broken, the flame can still burn bright!

The same thing applies to the Spirit of man. Though death destroys his body, it has no power over his Spirit— this is eternal, everlasting, both birthless and deathless.

“Wisdom of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.” p. 58-59.

As to the soul of man after death, it remains in the degree of purity to which it has evolved during life in the physical body, and after it is freed from the body it remains plunged in the ocean of God’s Mercy.

“Wisdom of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.”

Every composition is necessarily subject to destruction or disintegration; . . . this is what we call death. . .

But the inner and essential reality of man is not composed of elements and therefore cannot be decomposed. It is not an elemental composition subject to disintegration or death. A true and fundamental scientific principle is that an element itself never dies and cannot be destroyed, for the reason that it is single and not composed. Therefore it is not subject to decomposition.

“Promulgation of Universal Peace.” Vol. II, p. 410.

Death, therefore, is applicable to a change or transference from one degree to another. . . . There never is for man annihilation. Man is everlasting, ever living. And if we think of death it is only an imaginary term implying change. . . . Man only through ignorance is afraid of death.

“Promulgation of Universal Peace.” Vol. I, p. 84-85.

[Page 256]

THE VALLEY OF UNITY

HELEN PILKINGTON BISHOP

THE Wayfaring knight of the allegory is one archetype. Beside him stands the lady of romance. The valid types of literature live, as do their types in life. The mother, the artist, the teacher are met universally, as are figures of authority, the executive, the priest, the patriarch, the king. If these high types are also spiritually-conscious individualities, then the world concedes they have reached maturity. The discriminating recognizes any of them with a murmured, “Ah, a great soul.”

Admiration notwithstanding, should that “great soul” cherish the self which has been integrated through personal experience, he gives up the quest. It led through the valleys of search, love, and knowledge and met tests toward “the winning of spurs.” As prizes gained are the will to face reality, the desire for union with the ideal, and the impersonal, truth-accepting mind. Adventuring on the mystic journey heightened the sense of individuality. What purpose is individuality content to serve? Therein comes the ordeal.

Whoever is patterned after a differentiated type has saved his life from the crowd. However, spiritual attainment whispers of “losing the life.” Progress through the three valleys was made in order to bring the individual before the pass into the fourth valley, where the self-cultivating life merges into the unitive life as the seed becomes rooted in the soil.

Resistance to this mode of going stops the journey upon “the last plane of limitation,” where the soul remains at the level of self-conscious individuality, instead of pressing hard toward inner destiny, beyond in the world of the wondrous.

Arrestation is the danger because individuality is the unit, whether primitive or cultivated. Individuality as expression is freedom to act. If uncurbed, individual action will impose bondage upon others, for lawlessness is the stage of those who take more freedom than direction. The quandary over the right use of freedom persuades individuality to turn the mind upon the mind itself, there to confront the dread awareness of separation.

Only by guidance, the soul sees the way out, and makes just use of freedom by submitting to law of its own free will. The change is from a restricting, and yet inescapable attachment to others, into enjoyment of fraternity. Even the latter does not suffice the soul following the quest. He longs to bring individuality into [Page 257] union with all others. When he begins to suspect that the unit is but a part of the unity, and, therefore, cannot find fulfillment apart, he is embarking upon the discovery of the oneness of mankind. To live in the experience of individuality as one reflection of the shining attributes of mankind is to travel, with wonder and delight, into the world of the paradoxes —the valley of unity.

In this valley, “He sees in himself no name, virtue or rank.” The individuality, which knew separation, once sought to be known; now this ego has been effaced by the will to know. It was the ego that stood in the way of pure knowing. Between the ego and the rational soul there was no compatibility, and all attempted compromise turned out to be soul-defeating. Now, the ascendancy of the rational soul is causing the ego to disappear, inasmuch as the ego is but the illusion of separateness, the dust which lies on the surface of the mirror and thwarts its capacity to reflect the lights. Therefore, it was promised, “A pure heart is like unto a mirror: Purify it with the polish of love and severance from all save God, so that the true sun may shine therein and the eternal morn may dawn. Then will the meaning of ‘Neither doth My earth nor heaven contain Me, but the heart of My faithful servants contains Me’ become clear unto thee.”

This reflection of light within casts its radiation without, where all that was darkness now becomes brightness, in which all that is in earth and heaven exists as a sign of God. No war waged for equalities mars the harmony of this plane, where each created thing accepts, by virtue of its capacity, its measure of life’s energy, and fulfills, with humility and gladness, its play in the scheme of unity. The one sun gives its rays to all creation, remaining unchanged itself, while it undergoes changes in its reflection, if the recipient of its rays is opaque, and the glass through which it shines is colored red or yellow. Only the unsullied mirror holds the encircled splendor of the sun’s rays.

The perfect Mirrors are the Prophets or Manifestations of God; and from Them is transmitted the Light that has not been changed. The Spirit acts as the universal power by making its focal center in the Manifestation of God. Through that intermediary world, God transmits energy to the world of creation.

Spiritual ranks among men make for differences of opinion on these Founders of religion, but many points of view cannot mislead the soul to turn from the unity back into the conflict of words. Reason is admitted with its limitations, although it proves no case against faith. Intuition perceives the logic of the universe set forth in correspondences. These analogies use the part to give glimpses of the whole.

By this pattern, in the Day of the Manifestation, all time reveals its mystery. The starting-point in time is the appearance of the Prophet. His cycle is the working-out of the renewed law of God. Written history tells the violations of that revealed law, but does not trace the process of divine justice. Its time is measured, not in man’s grant of years, but over [Page 258] generations, periods, epochs, ages— from cycle to cycle. It follows that past times were in order that this Time might be. In this awareness of time, the faithful soul seizes the road to eternity.

As time is an earthly world, so, too, is space. It illustrates the same law of relations. Just as the parts of nature are prisoners to nature, so the whole of nature is imprisoned in space. The forms of nature show forth some of God’s attributes—that of will, for example, and instinct, love, beauty, harmony—and are wanting in others. When the soul can behold the emanations of light in the order of their effulgence, he will not be confused by the kingdoms of earth in their relation to the kingdom of God. His kingdom of creation is the reflection of light, whereas His kingdom of Revelation is the Light.

Throughout many Revelations there is the unity of Faith. In the Revelators is the unity of Manifestation. Under many Names their identity is One. The soul in the valley of unity sees through the many to the One. Through the One lies the kingdom of life everlasting.

The oneness of God’s Manifestations is the Oneness of God. His Unity cannot be divided; hence, through His Manifestation is known all that is to be known.

The valley of unity is the consent to face the supreme paradox: to be alone with consciousness of God. Aloneness without loneliness. Individuality without separateness. God is One. God is all.

This quiet harmony of inner consciousness and outer happenings gives peace, and leads into the valley of contentment.

The fourth in a series on the Seven Valleys of Bahá’u’lláh.

---

Know ye that God has Created in man the power of reason whereby man is enabled to investigate reality. God has not intended man to blindly imitate his fathers and ancestors. He has endowed him with mind or the faculty of reasoning by the exercise of which he is to investigate and discover the truth; and that which he finds real and true, he must accept. He must not be an imitator or blind follower of any soul. He must not rely implicitly upon the opinion of any man without investigation; nay, each soul must seek intelligently and independently, arriving at a real conclusion and bound only by that reality. The greatest cause of bereavement and disheartening in the world of humanity is ignorance based upon blind imitation. It is due to this that wars and battles prevail; from this cause hatred and animosity arise continually among mankind.—‘ABDU’L-BAHÁ.

[Page 259]

TRUTH AND SOCIETY

HORACE HOLLEY

WHEN, in this modern time, human civilization shifted from agriculture to industry, and from manual work to the power-driven, automatic machine, the very foundations of our social life were destroyed. The international upheavals, and the internal troubles afflicting every nation today, are nothing more than the inevitable results of so profound a change. Indeed, as we really come to understand the immensity of this historic event, we realize that the difficulties must continue, and possibly increase, until a new foundation has been laid adequate to support the structure of an entirely new and larger civilization.

What scientific industry has done is to have introduced two new and vital elements into human affairs. On the one hand, it has broken down for ever the walls of isolation and self-sufficiency which characterized society throughout the long era of an agricultural economy. On the other hand, it has brought a truly titanic extension and reinforcement to the human personality. Let us examine these two elements separately, and then attempt to grasp their combined result upon the basis of our social existence.

Throughout the agricultural era, human affairs were inherently restricted to relatively small areas and relatively small numbers of people.

The sustenance of the community, and the raw materials needed for shelter and other necessities, came directly or indirectly from the locality. Such international trade as existed dealt only in articles of luxury, the interruption of which for any reason affected only a few and could not threaten the life of the community as a whole. But our present-day industrial economy requires the largest possible area in which to operate. It cannot, in the first place, function on raw materials restricted to the locality. Nor can it, in the second place, function with a merely local market. The existence, to say nothing of the progress, of this machine industry depends upon a worldwide economic area transcending the established political divisions. This simple fact cannot be altered by any argument arising from partisan emotion. It must be accepted as a social law as beyond our control as the law of gravitation itself. There is simply no such thing as an industrial economy artificially restricted to any one country or land. But since the successful operation of industry has become the source of sustenance and life to all persons on earth today, except those still living under primitive conditions, it has become a matter of supreme importance to achieve and maintain a world economy protected [Page 260] from artificial interference. Scientific industry has given us the power to produce whatever and as much as we require for the material well being of all mankind. Mankind, however, has not yet learned how to employ such a new and unprecedented power.

The other contribution made by science is equally important and far-reaching. As long as man’s intelligence had no instrument to work through more effective than the skill and physical capacity of human beings, the range of thought and will was sharply confined. The era of manual labor was one during which human intelligence walked and could not fly. Every undertaking was necessarily limited in its scope, and during that era mankind was well nigh exhausted by the sheer struggle to obtain sufficient food. Beneath this burden, the chief expression of intelligence was to overcome the difficulties and hazards of the physical environment. Humanity lived deeply immersed in the conditions of nature. Nature, in fact, was man’s environment up to the dawn of this new day.

Now, in the processes of science, we have become masters over nature. The conquest of the natural environment has been achieved. Our intelligence today has thrown off its ancient burden. Whatever we deeply and truly will, the human intelligence can accomplish by science throughout the entire realm of physical work. In this freedom of the intelligence to employ the forces of nature for human aims and needs, a revolution has taken place infinitely more significant than is yet generally realized. The will of man has been transformed from a state of servitude to nature into an assured dominance over all its mysterious elements, its forces and its laws.

Hence the humblest modern family, in using the radio, in turning for healing to the public hospital, in reading the daily press, and in a thousand other ways, has ready access to advantages which the mightiest of kings and conquerors could not have commanded a few hundred years ago.

What, then, is the missing link in this golden chain of progress and achievement? Our failure to understand that man’s environment today is no longer nature but his fellow men.

Our lives are immersed in the movements of society as the lives of our forefathers were immersed in the conditions of nature. It is no longer from nature but from society, our fellow men, that we must somehow derive our livelihood and the means of continued existence. With every betterment in human civilization, we advance. With every breakdown in civilization, whether by war, revolution or industrial conflict, we are thrown back to poverty and helplessness. Our utmost hope and our deepest dread alike depend upon the direction and movement of society which has come to include all mankind.

This means that the highest intelligence on this planet must seek out and formulate the laws of human association with the same intensity that, in previous ages, the highest intelligence was employed in the investigation of the laws of nature. Just as ignorance of nature produced the calamities of famine and pestilence in former days which destroyed entire [Page 261] tribes and communities, so continued ignorance of social laws and principles can and will today inevitably produce the larger famine of revolution, the more universal pestilence of international war. Events today seem to be drawing to a climax. The time in which to find and act upon the principles of human association may well be less than we know.

It is at this very point of world crisis, this turning point in the destiny of mankind, that the Bahá’í teachings have come to shed the clear and penetrating light of truth.

What is essential today, they explain, is an inner vision and outlook purified from the limitations of the past. To be alive in this new age, and attain its blessings, we must learn how to think with an unprejudiced mind, and to feel with a heart that is open to the claims of an all-embracing brotherhood. We must realize that as airplane, radio and other instruments have transcended the frontiers drawn upon a map, so our sympathy and spirit of oneness should rise above historic grievances that separated race from race, class from class, nation from nation, and creed from creed. One inclusive destiny now controls all human affairs. The claims of world unity stand paramount over every lesser interest or consideration.

Entering into the oneness of truth, we can look backward and perceive how the factor of struggle and strife became so organized a part of human relations that it perverted even our conception of the power of truth. The task of spiritual education in the early ages was to produce cooperation between the members of the individual tribe or race. The conception of loyalty, honesty, fellowship, mutual effort and kindliness was necessarily limited to the single race. As between tribes or races, the conception of a solemn obligation to be just or humane to one’s fellows was replaced by the opposite conception of struggle, violence and war. Two ethical causes, two moralities, even two religions, have been practiced by all the races from the dawn of time. One code was followed in relation to one’s own race, the other, just as conscientiously, was applied to all other races and peoples. One code was accepted as a spiritual teaching identified with a great seer or prophet who spoke as having a divine authority, the other code developed from the conditions of race experience. It was as though two totally different and mutually exclusive sources of social principle existed in the world—the principle of unity and fellowship, and the principle of struggle and hate.

The Bahá’í teaching abolishes this ultimate source of struggle and conflict in the soul of modern man. It removes the cause of this profound division in human nature. To the spiritually minded, it declares that the essence and aim of all revealed truth has been to promote the spread of love and fellowship among men. Beneath the differences of form, name and organization, it points to the singleness of spirit animating revealed truth in all ages and all parts of the world. To the social minded, the Bahá’í writings demonstrate that the principle of organized struggle, whatever fruits it may have secured to the victor in the past, has today become inimical to [Page 262] every human society. The same heroism which went into the building of tribes, races and nations in the past is urgently needed now for the building of an ordered world civilization. These two levels of truth—devotion to God and devotion to the welfare of the community—have at last been brought together and reconciled. No longer is the man of intelligence and good will divided within himself. With the whole power of his spirit, and the whole power of his mind, he can strive to establish a basis of cooperation among all the peoples of mankind.

Has not every people received its blessing of spiritual truth? Have not all nations and races possessed a path to the one God of humanity? Let us at last realize that all the paths led to one same abode, that but one light gleamed, though the lamps were many.

The one light of truth illumines these words of Bahá’u’lláh: “The measure of the revelation of the prophets of God in this world . . . must differ. Each and every one of them hath been the bearer of a distinct message, and hath been commissioned to reveal Himself through specific acts. It is for this reason that they appear to vary in their greatness. Their revelation may be likened to the light of the moon that sheddeth its radiance upon the earth. Though every time it appeareth, it revealeth a fresh measure of its brightness, yet its inherent splendor can never diminish, nor can its light suffer extinction.

“It is clear and evident, therefore, that any apparent variation in the intensity of their light is not inherent in the light itself, but should rather be attributed to the varying receptivity of an ever-changing world. Every prophet whom the Almighty and Fearless Creator hath purposed to send to the peoples of the earth hath been entrusted with a Message, and charged to act in a manner that would best meet the requirements of the age in which He appeared. God’s purpose in sending His prophets unto man is twofold. The first is to liberate the children of men from the darkness of ignorance, and guide them to the light of true understanding. The second is to insure the peace and tranquillity of mankind, and provide all the means by which they can be established.”

The summons to unity has not been sounded in words alone, no matter how true and inspiring these may be. That summons has been written indelibly upon the movements of the world for more than seventy years. A new age has indeed come into being —a new age which requires a renewal of the spirit of men. Can there be any nobler task than to make effort to remove the sources of prejudice and hostility, removing those masks of fear and hatred which conceal from us the true human-ness of our fellows across the frontier and beyond the sea. They, too, are from God and to Him will return. Those who perceive this constitute the seeds of a new humanity.

[Page 263]

THE CONCEPT OF FEDERATION

SIRDAR D. K. SEN

THE distinction between unitary States and composite States constitutes the basis of a well-recognized classification in the domain of jurisprudence and politics. In a unitary State the totality of sovereign power over the entire territory and population is vested in a central authority. A composite State, on the other hand, necessarily implies the association, more or less complete and more or less durable, of several States under a common government or a common Ruler. Laband classifies the associations of States into two different and distinct categories:

1. Association of States founded exclusively on agreement or treaty (d’indole contrattuale).

2. Association of States of a corporate character. Confederation falls under the first category, while Federation furnishes an interesting example of the second.

The existing Federations are:

1. The United States of America
2. The United States of Mexico
3. The United States of Venezuela
4. The United States of Brazil
5. The Republic of Argentine
6. The German Reich
7. The “Swiss Confederation”
8. The Republic of Austria
9. The Union of Soviet Republics

It has been argued that the Soviet Union is not a Federation. Durand, for instance, says:

“Their constitutional rules are founded upon a political situation of a revolutionary character, not only in their origin but also in their permanent nature. Such a situation is incompatible with the notion of juristic powers subject to positive rules in regard to their scope and mode of exercise.”

It is no doubt true that the Russian jurists of today have discarded the orthodox theories of State, and hold that the State is not a rule of law but the expression of a dictatorship of a non-juristic character.

Says Gourvitch,

“The economic interests of the dominant class are the active force and the fundamental law of the State.”

This new conception finds expression in the Constitution of the Republic of the Ukraine. Article I of this Constitution declares:

“The Socialist Republic of the Soviets of the Ukraine is an organization of the dictatorship of the exploited, labouring masses of the proletariat, and of the poor peasantry against their ancient oppressors and exploiters, the capitalists and large land-owners.”

This novel doctrine of State has necessarily produced a striking feature [Page 264] in the constitution of the Soviet Union. It is the authority which has been conferred on a particular class or section of society to the exclusion of the entire body of other classes. The Soviet organization insures the predominance of the proletariat and deprives the bourgeois of franchise and eligibility. The consequence of this principle is that the electorates exercise unrestricted control over their representatives. In the first place, the deputy elected by the proletariat is under an obligation to render account to his electors of his activities in the Soviet within three days after the close of each session. He is also bound to discuss with his electors all questions on the agenda of the Soviet before the opening of each session. Further, the electorate has the right to revoke the election of a deputy if it be proved that he has not carried out its directions.

The other outstanding feature which differentiates the Soviet organization from orthodox parliamentary institutions is the fact that the Soviet Constitution has totally abandoned the theory of separation of powers, and has consecrated a new conception which has been described as the theory of “dimension of power.” According to this theory, each institution in the hierarchy of the Soviet organization exercises within the compass allotted to it all the powers of governance, whether legislative, executive, or judicial. Apart from these two distinctive features, the Constitution of the Soviet Union is not opposed to the structural organization of a Federation. It is, therefore, clear that the contention advanced by Durand can not rightly be accepted. If a Constitution possesses the essential elements of a Federation, it cannot justly be excluded from the federal category merely because it is founded on political doctrines of a revolutionary character.

There is another class of existing Federations which may be designated as subordinate Federations. These must be distinguished from the first group inasmuch as they do not enjoy full and complete sovereignty but are subordinate to another superior authority. This class comprises:

1. The Commonwealth of Australia
2. The Dominion of Canada
3. The Federation of India, as proposed in the Government of India Act, 1935.

Durand contends that the Dominion of Canada is not a Federation since the power to amend the constitution is vested in the Imperial Parliament. He says:

“Au Canada, au contraire, la constitution du Dominion ne peut etre modifiee que par une loi du Parlement Anglais; l’assentiment du Parlement canadien est en fait necessaire et c’est meme de lui que vient l’initative, mais sa decision ne suffit pas. La situation ne se presente donc pas pour le Canada comme pour les Etats federaux.” This contention cannot, however, be accepted. One might just as well argue that the Commonwealth of Australia is not a federal union because certain powers of legislative sovereignty are vested in the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

It has been asserted by a recent writer that there does not exist any distinctive mark of Federation. It has [Page 265] been urged that “once a general name is given to a number of particular things in order to distinguish them from others, these things acquire a reputation for a distinction they do not in fact possess.” Prailaune puts forward the view that “between the Confederation of States, the Federal State, and the unitary State which corresponds to a precise but arbitrary, academic classification, there exists a whole series of intermediate combinations. It would, however, appear that these criticisms cannot fully be substantiated. It is no doubt true that there are certain features which are to be found both in Federations and Confederations of States; nevertheless a close and critical study of Federal Constitutions and an analysis of the theory of Federation conclusively prove that a federal union of States possesses certain characteristic marks which differentiate it from other forms of State organizations. As Borel has rightly pointed out,

“L’historien et le juriste ont deux domaines distincts et poursuivent deux buts absolument differents. Le premier cherche avant tout a etablir cette continuite irristible des faits que revele un development de plusieurs siecles; le second par contre, doit dans cette evolution quelquefois imperceptible, distinguer le moment precis ou les deux notions, essentiellement distinctes, de la confederation d’etats et de l’etat federatif, se touchant et ou elles se separent.”

Further, the theory of “floating frontiers” (flissende Grenzen) cannot be sustained in law. Every legal classification must be clear and precise. We shall therefore proceed to analyze the constituent elements of a Federation which distinguish it from other forms of association of States.

A Confederation of States is an association of sovereign States in which there exists a central power possessing organizations of a permanent character. It is founded essentially on a treaty concluded amongst States which are and continue to be sovereign. It is in reality “una somma di attribuzione e di poteri fondati sul libero accordo degli stati particolari e reuniti per essere esercitati in commune.” A Confederation does not, therefore, possess either sovereignty or the character of State, the confederating States preserving their sovereign and independent existence subject to agreed restrictions. It, therefore, follows that a Confederation is not a State, but merely a vinculum juris, ein Rechtsverhaltniss, founded exclusively on agreement or treaty. For instance, in the Swiss Confederation of 1815 the Federal Act was invariably construed as a vertrag or treaty and not as a Statute or Constitution. The German Confederation (Deutsche Bund) created by the Wiener Schlusseaete of 1820 was also a union of sovereign States founded upon a series of treaties. Similarly, the American Confederation of 1781 was only a “firm league of friendship” between States which retained their sovereignty, freedom and independence. (Articles 2 and 3 of the Articles of Confederation, 1781-88).

A Federation, on the other hand, is not only an association of States but also a State. As Brie rightly points out,

[Page 266] “Der Bundesstaat ist zugleich Bund und Staat; er ist also, . . . einerseits ein aus Staaten zusammengesetztes, foderativ organisiertes, Gemeinwesen, und andererseits ein aus Menscben zusammengesetztes Gemeininwesen mit einer principiell alle Zwecke des menschlichen Lebens umfassenden Aufgabe und Zustandigkeit.”

It follows, therefore, that a Federation is, on the one hand, a unity, and possesses all the features of an organic union par excellence, whereas a Confederation is always to be distinguished by “la mancanza di coesione psicologica interne.” This is then the fundamentum divisionis between a Federation and a Confederation. On the other hand, a Federation is also an association of States, and differs from unitary States which cannot at the same time be a union of constituent States.

There are several results of the constitutional unity of the federal association of States. In the first place, it is inevitable that the central government in a Federation should enjoy and exercise all rights and powers of external sovereignty. It is the Federation alone which possesses international personality and is consequently the sole representative of the federating units in International Law. For instance, under the constitution of the United States of America it is the Federal Government which exercises all powers of sovereignty in regard to international matters, and the federating States have no personality or authority from the point of view of International Law. Article 1 of the Soviet Constitution similarly states that the representation of the Union in all international affairs, the conduct of diplomatic relations, and the conclusion of treaties with foreign powers belong exclusively to the competence of the Union. This view, however, has been severely criticized by Le Fur who holds that it is not correct to say that under a Federation it is the Federal Government alone which possesses international personality. He cites the instance of the German Federation of 1871 in which the States constituting the Federation did enjoy certain powers in regard to International affairs, as, for instance, the right of direct diplomatic intercourse with foreign States. This however, does not mean that the constituent States of the German Federation were considered as persons in International Law. Le Fur is therefore, clearly wrong when he says that the constituent elements of a Federation also possess international character. It is no doubt true that in a Federal Constitution the units may be entitled to exercise such rights as rights of legation but this does not confer on them any international character, nor does it transform them into sovereigns from the point of view of International Law. Further, it cannot for a moment be disputed that in cases of conflict with foreign powers it is the Federation, and the Federation alone, which is responsible in the eyes of International Law even where the units enjoy and exercise certain powers of external sovereignty.

The second consequence of the organic unity of a Federation is that in all Federal constitutions Federal laws over-ride the laws of the constituent units in cases of conflict. As Jellinek remarks, Bundesrecht bricht Landesrecht. [Page 267] Provisions to this effect are sometimes expressly incorporated in the Constitutions. For instance, Article 13 of the German Constitution of 1919 provides: “The law of the Reich prevails over the law of the Landes.” Article 2 of the transitory provisions of the Swiss Constitution is to the same effect. Similar provisions have also been incorporated in Article 31 of the Argentine Constitution, and Article 126 of the Constitution of Mexico. The corresponding clause of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia runs thus:

“When the law of a State is in conflict with the Law of the Commonwealth the latter shall prevail, and the former shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be invalid.”

Section 107 of the Government of India Act is as follows:

“If any provision of a Provincial Law is repugnant to any provision of a Federal Law which the Federal Legislature is competent to enact or to any provision of an existing Indian Law with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent Legislative List, then, subject to the provisions of this section, the Federal Law, whether passed before or after the Provincial law, or, as the case may be, the existing Indian Law, shall prevail and the Provincial law shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void.”

It would, however, appear that this may not necessarily be a distinctive feature of a Federal Constitution. It is possible to conceive a Confederation of States in which it might be expressly provided that the regulations or decrees of the common government of the Confederation shall, within the limited scope of the legislative authority allotted to the central organ, abrogate the laws and regulations of the constituent States. Whether in a particular case the laws of a Confederation possess such exclusive and authoritative character will depend entirely on the terms and provisions of the convention creating the Confederation. The mere fact that the Constitution of a Confederation expressly provides that all central decrees or resolutions shall over-ride the laws and regulations of the States in regard to certain specified matters, does not necessarily transform the Confederation into a Federal State.

Another consequence of the constitutional unity of a Federation is that in cases of conflict between the constituent units or between a constituent unit and the Federation, the Federal Constitution invariably provides for the settlement of disputes by a Federal authority. For instance, Article 110 of the Swiss Constitution states:

“Le tribunal federal connait des differents de droit civil: 1. Entre la confederation et les cantons; 2. Entre la confederation, d’une part, et les corporations . . ., 3. Entre cantons.”

Similar provisions are to be found in Article 76 of the German Constitution of 1871, Article 105 of the Mexican Constitution, Article 100 of the Argentine Constitution, Article 59 of the Constitution of Brazil, Article 120 of the Constitution of Venezuela of 1931, and Article 43 of the Treaty of Union of the Socialist Soviet Republics. On the other hand, we find that in all Confederations the pact of association [Page 268] has always provided for arbitration in cases of dispute. This again cannot be regarded as a fundamental characteristic of a Federation since express provision for the settlement of disputes by a central authority and not by arbitration does not necessarily abrogate the essential feature of a Confederation that it is an association and not a State.

Several other points of difference between a Confederation and a Federation have been urged by eminent jurists of different countries. It is therefore necessary for us to examine how far their arguments can be sustained. In the first place, it has been urged that a distinctive characteristic of a Confederation is that the powers of the central organ are specifically and definitely enumerated, whereas in a Federal Constitution the rights of the component States are expressly declared, leaving the remainder of sovereign authority in the hands of the Federal Government. A cursory study of Federal Constitutions will, however, show that this argument is not sound either in theory or in practice. From the theoretical point of view it may be urged that the mere enumeration of the rights of the Federal Government does not necessarily conflict with the fundamental character of a Federation. The view is also clearly opposed to facts. For instance, under the American Constitution the residuary powers of sovereignty are vested in the constituent States. Indeed, this is true of all Federal Constitutions except that of Canada. Further, as Le Fur points out, the difference is purely quantitative and not of the least significance in practice.

According to Bluntshli, “the real difference between a Confederation of States and a Federal State lies in the different organizations of the two forms of union.” He argues that in a Confederation there is only one organ, a Diet, a sort of Congress of diplomats (Gesandtencongress); whereas in a Federal Constitution the organization of government is complete from the triple point of view of the legislature, the judiciary and the executive. This view, however, will not bear scrutiny. In the first place, it does not take actual facts into consideration. For instance, the legislative and the executive organizations were highly developed in the Confederation of the United Provinces of the Netherlands. There was, however, no organization of the judiciary under this Constitution. On the other hand, even under the German Federation of 1871 there was no central organization of judiciary until the Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz (Judicature Act) of January, 1877. It is clear from these instances that differences in organization do not necessarily differentiate a Federation from a Confederation of States.

It has been argued that the real and fundamental difference between a Federation and a Confederation lies in the fact that under a Confederation the constituent units stand on an absolutely equal footing, whereas under a Federation equality of the States is neither absolute nor indispensable. This theory was propounded by Von Holst on the basis of the Confederal Constitution of the United States of America and is not in accord with other Federal and Confederal Constitutions. [Page 269] For instance, under the German Confederation prior to the Act of 1871 all the constituent units were not equal in point of law. Bavaria, Wurtemberg and Saxony had special rights and powers which were not enjoyed by other States.

Laband, on the contrary, holds that equality of the constituent units is an essential characteristic of Federal Constitutions. He says:

“A Federal State is a Republic of which the States themselves are citizens and in which the sovereign power is exercised by the collectivity of the States considered as a unity. Thus the German Empire, for example, is neither an Empire of forty million subjects nor a democracy of forty million citizens; it is a Republic of twenty-five members which collectively exercise the supreme power.”

There is no doubt a certain element of truth in this contention. The Venezuelan Constitution, for instance, expressly provides that “the States which comprise the United States of Venezuela are autonomous and equal amongst themselves as political entities.” In other Federal Constitutions equality of the constituent units is to be found in the matter of representation in the Federal Legislature. For instance, equality of representation in the Upper House of the Federal Legislature is a cardinal feature of the Federal Constitutions of Switzerland, the United States of America, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentine and Brazil. In all these cases each federating State is entitled to two seats in the Upper House except in Brazil and Venezuela where three seats have been allotted to each constituent unit. It is clear that in all these cases neither size nor population has been considered to be a material factor in determining the quantum of representation. The presence of this feature in the majority of the existing Federal Constitutions does not however mean that equality of the federating States is an essential characteristic of Federation. On the contrary, in Federal Constitutions representation in the Federal Legislatures may be determined according to the size, population, and political importance of the constituent units, as in the case of Germany and Canada. Under the Indian Federation, representation in the Upper House has been based on several factors such as population, size, salute of guns, etc. For instance, the State of Hyderabad has five seats in the Upper House, whereas the States of Udaipur, Jaipur, and Jodhpur have each been allotted two seats.

Bryce has argued that the superimposition of a central government over the authorities of the individual States is a fundamental characteristic of a Federation, which distinguishes it from a Confederation of States.

He says:

“The acceptance of the Constitution of 1789, made the American people a nation. It turned what had been a league of States into a Federal State by giving it a National Government with a direct authority over all citizens.”

There is an element of truth in this contention, but the point of difference is not of a significant character as it is merely a difference of degree and not of quality. It is no doubt true that the central government in a Confederation [Page 270] is not always of a highly organized character. It is equally true that the central government in a Federal Constitution embraces every sphere of governmental activity. It does not, however, follow that if the central government of a Confederation is fully organized from every point of view, it necessarily comes under the category of Federations. Take, for instance, the case of the Confederation of the Southern States of America which possessed a complete organization of legislature, executive and judiciary. This, however, did not bring the Confederation under the category of Federal States. Further, as Westerkamp remarks, this argument merely points out the grave and frequent defect of a Confederation that its central power is incompletely organized, but does not affect its juristic character.

Closely associated with this view is the argument that a distinctive feature of a Federation lies in the fact that its central government is invested with the authority to enforce its decrees and orders directly against individuals without the intervention of the authorities of the federating units. On the other hand, the principle of mediatization obtains in all Confederations; in other words, under a Confederation there is no direct connection between the individual and the central power. Calvo, for instance, argues that “that the essential characteristic which distinguishes a Confederation from a Federation of States resides in this that in the former there does not exist a common executive authority which has the right to impose its decrees in direct relationship with the subjects of the States.” It is true that a provision of this character is to be found in certain Federal Constitutions. In the American Federation, as Bryce points out, “the authority of the National Government over the citizens of every State is direct and immediate, not exerted through State organization, and not requiring the cooperation of the State Government.” Article 7, sub-clause 3, of the Constitution of Brazil provides:

“Le: lois de L’Union, les actes et sentences de ses authorite seront executes dans tout le pays par les fonctionnaires federaux.”

It is, however, submitted that this feature does not constitute a distinctive characteristic of a Federation. Under a Federal Constitution the administration of Federal laws may be left, within a restricted sphere, in the hands of the federating States; in such cases the Federal authorities will not come into direct relationship with the individual subjects of the States. Thus, Article 11 of the Austrian Constitution of 1929 expressly provides that whereas legislation in regard to certain specified subjects shall be federal, the administration of such subjects shall vest exclusively in the Government of the units. Further, the central government in a Confederation may be invested with limited powers to act directly upon the subjects of the States, without the intervention of the State authorities. Such provisions will not, however, in any way affect the essential nature of a Confederation.

This leads us to the examination of a theory of Federation which has been enunciated in the judgment of the Privy Council in The Attorney General [Page 271] for the Commonwealth of Australia v. Colonial Sugar Refining Co., Ltd. (1914 A.C. 237) where Lord Haldane dealing with the question of Canada said:

“With deference to a great many people who talk on platforms just now of the ‘federal system,’ in Canada there is no federal system. What happened was this: an Act was passed in 1867 which made a new start and divided certain powers of government, some being given to the Parliament of Canada, and some to the Parliament of the provinces. The provinces were created de novo. The provinces did not come together and make a federal arrangement under which they retained their existing powers and parted with certain of them and an Imperial Statute had got to ratify the bargain; on the contrary the whole vitality and ambit of the Canadian Constitution was a surrender, if you like, first, and then devolution. . . . The meaning of a federal government is that a number of States come together and put certain of their powers into common custody, and that is the federal constitution in Australia, but in Canada not at all. . . . The British North America Act of 1867 commences with a preamble that the then provinces have expressed their desire to be federally united into one dominion with a constitution similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. In a loose sense the word ‘federal’ may be used, as it is there used, to describe any arrangement under which self-contained States agree to delegate their powers to a common government with a view to entirely new constitutions even of the States themselves. But the natural and literal interpretation of the word confines its application to cases in which these States, while agreeing on a measure of delegation, yet in the main continue to preserve their original constitutions.”

This pronouncement involves several fallacies. In the first place, it ignores the very important fact that a Federation may come into existence in two different ways. Sovereign and independent States may come together and make a federal arrangement in which they retain certain powers of sovereignty and surrender the rest of them to the newly constituted Federal Government, or, as in the case of the United States of America, they part with specified powers and retain the remainder. There is however another method whereby a unitary State may by virtue of a statute be transformed into a Federal State, as was the case in regard to the federal constitution of Mexico. Lord Haldane is therefore entirely inaccurate when he states that “the meaning of a Federal Government is that a number of States come together and put certain of their powers into common custody.” He is clearly wrong when he propounds the view that the character of Federation depends on the manner and method of distribution of power. His argument is that since under the Canadian Constitution the powers of the constituent units are expressly enumerated, it does not therefore fall under the category of Federation. But as we have already seen, this argument is totally unsound both in theory and practice. Such a method of distribution does not vitiate the essential character [Page 272] of a Federation that it is an association of States which, by the surrender of certain portion of their sovereignty, constitute a new State. It has been already pointed out that Federation is a State as well as an association of States. As long as these characteristics remain unaffected, the method of distribution of power between the Federation and the federating units is of the least significance.

Federations must also be distinguished from decentralized unitary States. The component parts of a unitary State in which a system of decentralization has been adopted, enjoy and exercise certain specific and definite powers of governance but always subject to the control and supervision of the central government. Under a Federal Constitution, on the other hand, the constituent units exercise the powers of sovereignty allotted to them, unrestricted and uncontrolled by the central government, so long as they do not transgress the limitations placed on their competence by the Constitution. As Brunialti rightly remarks, “nello Stato Federale molti uffici sono lasciati al gli Stati o Cantoni senza controllo, sino a che non escono dai limiti posti d’all constituzione.” This distinction between decentralized unitary States and Federal States is clearly brought out in the judgment of the Privy Council in Liquidators of the Maritime Bank of Canada v. The Receiver General of New Brunswick (1892 A.C. at pp. 441-3). In dealing with the question of the Provinces of Canada their Lordships say:

“The object of the British North-America Act was neither to weld the Provinces into one, nor to subordinate Provincial Governments to a central authority, but to create a Federal Government in which they should all be represented, entrusted with the exclusive administration of affairs in which they had a common interest, each Province retaining its independence and autonomy. . . . In so far as regards those matters which, by Section 92, are specially reserved for provincial legislation, the legislation of each province continues to be free from the control of the Dominion, and as supreme as it was before the passing of the Act.”

It is on this ground that the Union of South Africa must be classed as a unitary State and not as a federation; for, under the Union of South Africa Act, the central legislature is supreme, and can always over-ride provincial ordinances. (Middleberg Municipality v. Gertzen, 1914 A.D. at p. 559).

The foregoing examination of the principles of Federation leads us to the following conclusions: Federation is a State as well as an association of States, its distinctive features being—

(a) that the Federation itself is a constitutional and international unit; and

(b) that its component parts retain the character of State, and exercise powers of sovereignty conferred on them by the Constitution, independent of the Federal Government.

These features distinguish Federations from Confederations of States on the one hand, and from unitary States on the other.

Reprinted from The Modern Review, Calcutta.

[Page 273]

THE TIME HAS ARRIVED

BEN ELLISON

BAHÁ’U’LLÁH, the Founder of the Bahá’í Faith (Bahá’u’lláh meaning the “Glory of God”) has said: “The Tabernacle of Unity has been raised, regard you not one another as strangers . . . of one tree are all ye the fruit and of one bough the leaves . . . the world is but one country and mankind its citizens—let not a man glory in this that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this that he loves his kind.”

In the prelude of life there must be the entire keyboard of mankind to make for the minor and major harmonies through which God brings forth His universal melodies. What matters if the keys be white or black—it is the melody that counts. God is not a respector of persons. Man innately is one. Though there be a variance in colors and creeds the life spirit from God in man is potentially the same.

“The time has arrived for the world of humanity to hoist the standard of the oneness of the human world, so that solidarity and unity may bind together all the nations of the world, so that dogmatic formulas and superstitions may end, so that the essential reality underlying all the religions founded by the Prophets may be revealed. That reality is one. It is the love of God, the progress of the world, the oneness of humanity. This is physical fellowship which insures material happiness in the human world. The stronger it becomes, the more will mankind advance and the circle of materialism be enlarged.”

Is it not interesting that over seventy-five years ago out of the East from whence all Prophets arise, Bahá’u’lláh proclaimed to a wayward world certain fundamentals upon which the future safety of civilization itself depended. Some of these principles are: The oneness of mankind; Independent investigations of truth; The foundations of all religions is one; Religion must be the cause of unity; Religion must be in accord with science and reason; Equality between men and women; Prejudice of all kinds must be forgotten; Universal peace; Universal education; Spiritual solution of the economic problem; A universal auxiliary language; An international tribunal.

These are the principles He proclaimed to a yet unawakened but maturing world. To know the full value of these truths it is imperative that we face these expressions of reality with a broad perspective and deep spiritual understanding.

It matters not how rigid man’s demand and standards be in exacting judgment one upon the other. In the [Page 274] final analysis, we are all interdependent . . . God pours out His Spirit upon the universe, and all may partake of it with the cup of faith and the dipper of humility.

Just as man must have perfect coordination of his spiritual, mental and physical life for a full, balanced living; so must society, the communities of men have a coherent pattern of cooperation for true progress.

In our beloved America coordination is becoming the password in many fields of endeavor. There must be the closely coordinated effort of all classes, religious and racial minority and majority groups to bring about this most worthy ultimate aim for Peace on earth—Good will toward men. Nations that build on the rock of Divine planning for human welfare, providing security and progressive opportunity for those at the lowest rung of the ladder, are establishing a solidarity of strength, a secure holy foundation which cannot be shaken by adversities.

The Bahá’ís endeavor to keep before the eyes of this generation the message of the Unity of Mankind, the promulgation of Universal Peace, the establishment of a New World Order. To some this may seem a momentous task and Utopian ideal; but the perpetuity and ever increasing velocity of small efforts make for great achievements.

In these troubled times with nations of the world facing the most trying test to maintain their traditional structures, there is still great hope. Where there is imminent danger there is also phenomenal opportunity; opportunity to demonstrate the efficacy of God’s Holy Spirit, opportunity to turn a crisis into a stroke of genius which can raise humanity another cycle closer toward the horizon where brotherhood, human values, the oneness of mankind, shall be rated above materialism and selfishness, and man may have his God-given right to live a life more abundant.

Bahá’u’lláh has proclaimed the oneness of the world of humanity. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, His son, tells us “There is need of a superior power to overcome human prejudices; a power which nothing in the world of mankind can withstand and which will overshadow the effect of all other forces at work in human conditions. That irresistible power is the love of God.”

Thus the Holy Ones out of the East bring us the philosophy of the New Day, give us the key of truth which can open the gateway to the New Horizon of a higher more profitable existence. This key is the Unity of Mankind—the united effort of the classes, the masses, the individual community with the greater community of the world, in striving toward a more abundant spiritual and material civilization.

Only the power of God, only the whole-hearted spiritual good-will of each one of us toward our neighbors, our friends, our enemies, can ultimately clear our vision sufficiently that we might face the radiant reality of this New Day. The Bahá’í knows that whether it be the Moslem kneeling in prayerful worship in the name of Muhammad, the Hindu adoring Krishna, the Jew turning to the wisdom of Moses, or the Christian, radiant [Page 275] in his gratitude for the teachings of Jesus the Christ, one and all of these great prophets take man back to the Creator, the One God.

The Bahá’í Faith is not a new religion. It is the recognition of all Prophets of the One God; its teachings bring the practical message of Unity and the Oneness of Mankind. It is the prophesy of the fulfillment of God’s Kingdom on Earth, the New Order of Divine Existence among men. It matters not your creed, race, color or individuality—all may enter into this consciousness of oneness.

It is in the hearts and souls of men —their aims,—their ambitions, their motives that the great danger lies. If, through God’s Almighty Love, the hearts and minds of men can be reached, civilization can progress without wholesale annihilation. Yet if there must be great wars and rumors of wars, still there remains the task of building a new world order over the embers of quickly disintegrated old orders which had to crumble because they would not yield to Divine progress for the common good of God’s people.

How much all of us could benefit by reflecting upon ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s words: “The splendors of Divinity shall be visible through translucent mirrors of pure hearts and spirits.” Does this not mean it is imperative that all mankind guard against the vain subtleties of prejudice and bigotry which undermine the very foundations of confidence and human rights? There is a crying need for the unified working of religious leaders, educators, and social engineers in a God inspired spirit of sincerity; working together for the establishment of this Divine Plan in which intolerance, poverty and oppression shall be wiped from the face of the earth, and peace established, making Heaven on Earth an accomplished fact.

These words are not vain imaginings. The wonderful age in which we are now living, with its wealth of natural resources and scientific achievement, is a proof that there is a new era just ahead. The depression and break-down in economic structures in the last few years have been because there has been a need of rebuilding these same structures into a broader, more effective service to individuals and classes as a whole. Business and religion should be for the uplift and service of mankind, not his master to enslave him.

The adult of yesterday and today must yield to the rapid inflow of the coming higher social order which commands new standards of living, and will effect the very lives of posterity. Our youth must be permitted to know the truth of the oneness of mankind, free from the complexes of narrowed visions of the past. Our children can no more be expected to think according to the racial hatreds and limiting views of yesterday, than we could expect them to revert to modes of travel of the ox cart era.

The essence of this new world consciousness which we must acquire is powerfully expressed by Bahá’u’lláh in these words; “Oh Children of Men! Know ye not why We created you all from the same dust? That no one should exalt himself over the other. Ponder at all times in your hearts how ye were created. Since We [Page 276] have created you all from one same substance it is incumbent on you to be even as one soul, to walk with the same feet, eat with the same mouth and dwell in the same land, that from your inmost being, by your deeds and actions, the signs of oneness and the essence of detachment may be made manifest. Such is My counsel to you, O concourse of Light! Heed ye this counsel that ye may obtain the fruit of holiness from the tree of wondrous glory.”

Youth and Adult must sit together at the round-table of understanding, in full recognition of these Truths. Youth with their dreams and aspirations, adults with their experience and wisdom must together turn prayfully to the Holy Spirit for guidance; for God has today given His Divine Blueprint for the future. In the Bahá’í Faith will be found the path of progress, the starting point, the practical daily life. As all mankind must inevitably face the dawn of each new day, so shall our task be made known to us when we desire sincerely to serve.

In Bahá’u’lláh’s own words, we are given this: “O ye discerning ones of the people: Verily the Words which have descended from the heaven of the will of God are the source of unity and harmony for the world. Close your eyes to racial differences and welcome all with the light of oneness. Be the cause of comfort and the promotion of humanity. This handful of dust, the world, is one home—let it be in unity. Forsake pride, it is a cause of discord. Follow that which tends to harmony. Consort with all people in love and fragrance. Fellowship is the cause of unity, and unity is the source of order in the world. Blessed are they who are kind and serve with love.”

One of a radio series delivered at Los Angeles in February, 1939.

---

This is the Day whereon the unseen world crieth out, “Great is thy blessedness, O earth, for thou has been made the footstool of thy God, and been chosen as the seat of His mighty throne.” The world of being shineth, in this Day, with the resplendency of this Divine Revelation. All created things extol its saving grace, and sing its praises. The universe is wrapt in an ecstasy of joy and gladness. The Scriptures of past Dispensations celebrate the great Jubilee that must needs greet this most great Day of God. Well is it with him that hath lived to see this Day, and hath recognized its station. This Day a different Sun hath arisen, and a different Heaven hath been adorned with its stars and its planets. The world is another world, and the Cause another Cause.—BAHÁ’U'LLÁH.

[Page 277]

MAN’S ILLUSION

PEARLE U. EASTERBROOK

“MAN, Know Thyself” has been the admonition of Prophet, sage and teacher since man first felt the need to be taught. To know one’s self—what an elusive, age-defying realization! Deep in the recesses of man’s being has ever been a great hunger. Back of all man’s striving lies a profound yearning. As we read the history of his earthly achievements, we find evidence of this eternal quest.

“He hath known God who hath known himself,” says Bahá’u’lláh; and “also in your own selves will ye not, then, behold the signs of God.” In this way Bahá’u’lláh points the way into a satisfying search that is sure to finally lead the seeker unto his eternal goal—the path unto God. Life seems to offer many illusions as the seeker hurries toward this mirage or that. From youth to old age, from birth to death, we hasten from one illusion to the next until, finally, experience becomes knowledge and knowledge becomes wisdom—a wisdom that cries out to us of life which is all darkness save where there is love that knows and effort that guides us back to our Source from which all life, work, love, and knowledge spring. When this wisdom is born, the seeker becomes conscious of what it is he seeks, but he in no wise knows where nor how to carry on his search.

Mary, a dancing, bright-eyed child of ten, dreams of the joy of high school days, those days when all shall be freedom, sunshine, unallowed joy. Mary, the high school girl, laughs and talks of the college days when her dreams shall come true, days that shall bring the thrilling time that has eluded her thus far. College days come but that great Thing is not there. It seems to be just ahead. And so she hurries through those four years, realizing at last that it is a mate for which her heart yearns. Now that she knows, she will find him. College days are over. He has come and, joy supreme, they are to marry and create a home.

Anxious, busy days go flying by. Mary’s heart sings, for now the Great Adventure is just ahead. How stupid of her to have thought she could find it anywhere else but in this companionship of man and wife! The wedding day comes and goes. With the passing months comes the quiet, gentle realization, “this is not it.” She dreams and plans with the sudden knowledge that her unborn babe is, after all, her great adventure, and with renewed ardor and anxious anticipation she works and plans. The day comes when to her warm inert body she holds the little bundle of pink flesh for which she has searched and waited so long. But in the act of [Page 278] holding this most precious of gifts against her throbbing heart she stops and with a great and deepened longing whispers, “This is not it.”

No. Human love, marriage, home, success in business, honor, fame, position among men—none of these, absolutely none, will bring to man that thing for which he seeks and for which he has yearned ever since the first man became individualized upon this plane of existence.

Just as all the Marys search amidst human mirages, so do all the Johns. John moves from experience to experience, knowing full well the next step will bring the one great Something for which he has searched. But, so long as this search is confined to the human, his search will only lead him into dark alleys and up closed lanes. His success and fame will turn to ashes, and he will conclude that all is empty and life indeed is futile.

Were man created without a will, he would assuredly turn back to his Source, as the tide turns back to the sea. But God created man with a will by which he may choose his path and determine his goals. We choose daily, and by our choice we rejoice or suffer.

God has not left His children afloat upon this great sea of life without chart or compass. As the centuries come and go, the World of Light opens and there descends to us a Teacher and Guide, who leaves with us explicit instructions how to travel over this rough and stormy sea. And He even teaches us how to ride the waves to save us from shipwreck and heart-breaking suffering.

Before man attains spiritual knowledge his search is an unconscious, restless quest for happiness. Apparently the road leading unto this knowledge is a definite urge to know God, a great desire to understand life and its reasons for being. Where are we going? Why are we here? From whence did we come? Why is life an effort, a constant urge, a seemingly unsatisfying time of trial and error? Who is God? What is the relation of God to man and of man to God?

These questions clamor and press at the heart of awakening man until his feet enter the path of Reality. Then, whether he will or not, the steed upon which he journeys must be patience. Acquiring and developing patience is an arduous task for western civilization. But there is a reassuring promise: “We will assuredly direct them into our ways.” Bahá’u’lláh encourages the seeker by promising: “At every step the assistance of the Invisible surrounds him.”

The first requisite for this great search is purity of heart. In our western world “purity of heart” connotes a negative goodness toward which the average thinker does not happily react. Purity of heart as described by Bahá’u’lláh is freedom from doubt and the dross of blind imitation, as well as the elimination of self-seeking. At every step we find human hearts striving, yearning, breaking, doubting, aching for some sort of surcease. Well it is that we seek in all places, calling no man friend and no man enemy but recognizing all men as we ourselves hope to be recognized—as children of the living God, striving in all ways possible to reflect Him.

“A seeker cannot obtain this search except by the sacrifice of all that [Page 279] exists; that is, he must annihilate all that he has seen, heard or understood with the negation ‘No’ so that he may search the city of the Spirit which is the city of ‘but.’” The amplification of “but” may be expressed by the formula of faith in Divine Unity, which is “There is no God but God.” In other words there is nothing in all the wide, wide universe but God and His expression.

The seeker must annihilate “all that he has seen, heard or understood.” Then must he forget all that his senses have taught him and prepare, with God’s assistance, to follow His instructions as given by Bahá’u’lláh in Hidden Words: “Blind thine eyes that thou mayest behold My beauty; stop thine ears, that thou mayest hearken unto the sweet accents of My voice; empty thyself from all learning, that thou mayest partake of My knowledge,” etc.

Thus the search for God, the one great eternal Source of all, brings man into his two-fold heritage; the conscious realization of his own shining reality awaiting eternal illumination, through its union with Divinity; and the finding of the Great Ones Who eternally are watching and waiting to draw men back into a glorious reunion with God.

“With the hands of power I made thee and with the fingers of might I created thee, and in thee have I placed the Essence of My light.” In these words Bahá’u’lláh brings to struggling man his potential selfhood.

Asleep in his senses man has neglected his true inheritance, but that neglect does not alter his shining reality awaiting the magic Touch of God. With this Touch vanishes discontent, fear, darkness, frailty; and there dawns the consciousness that becoming is a daily adventure requiring the molding influence of suffering and disappointment, these last being life’s two tutors sent by a loving Omnipotence. When weary feet have entered the valley of search, disappointment becomes His appointment, and suffering becomes the gentle urge of a loving Father to “Turn thy sight unto thyself, that thou mayest find Me biding in thee, mighty, powerful and self-subsisting.”

May all seekers learn to look long and deep, that they may find Him “abiding” in them, mighty, powerful and self-subsisting, to the end that we may all begin our journey back to our One Supreme Source.

“Peace be upon those who follow guidance!”

---

The journey of the soul is necessary. The pathway of life is the road which leads to divine knowledge and attainment. Without training and guidance the soul could never progress beyond the conditions of its lower nature which is ignorant and defective.—‘ABDU’L-BAHÁ.

[Page 280]

SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM

The twelve successive issues of World Order, from April, 1938 to March, 1939, constituting Volume Four, can be obtained in attractive and enduring green fabrikoid binding stamped in gold.

The cost to subscribers who supply the twelve issues is $1.25, postage additional. The price for the bound volume complete is $2.50, postage additional.

Before mailing any copies for binding, communicate with the Business Manager to learn proper address for shipping the copies.

Volume Four contains 480 pages of reading matter with Index and Title page. It will be invaluable as a permanent source of reference. It makes an excellent gift for presentation to Public and University Libraries.

Volumes One, Two and Three containing the issues from April, 1935 to March, 1938, may also be obtained at the same cost as Volume Four. Those who prefer to make their own arrangements for binding, can obtain a copy of Title Page free on request.

---

WORLD ORDER

135 EAST 50TH STREET,

NEW YORK, N. Y.

I enclose $ for which please fill my order as checked.

[ ] Copy of current issue, .20c

[ ] Introductory subscription, seven months, $1.00.

[ ] Annual subscription, $2.00 (Public or University Library rate, $1.75.)

[ ] Gift subscriptions, five or more annual subscriptions on one order, $1.50 each.

[ ] Extra copies—seven copies of any issue sent to one or more addresses, $1.00.

(Add 25c for additional postage on foreign subscriptions).

Name___________________________________

Address__________________________________

_________________________________________

[Page 281]

[Page 282]