The Case of the Animals Versus Man Before the King of the Jinn

[Ahanu]

I find the differences startling.

Animals do not make war. Either on other species, or on each other within a species. Animals do not decimate their habitat. They kill as much as is needed for survival of the group and no more. Animals have no emotions like hate, prejudice, resentment, revenge. They do not hold grudges.

Baha'is may find this interesting.

DA's words here reminds me of an epistle from an ancient Muslim group called the Brethren of Purity. Ismaili theology is somewhat similar to the Baha'i thought. The title is translated as "The Case of the Animals Versus Man Before the King of the Jinn". It's available online here. It is much like George Orwell's Animal Farm, because in both cases the animals don't want to be slaves. The animals decide to seek refuge from human oppression and make their case to the king that they are not slaves. The humans also make a case before the king that they are their masters. Both cite scripture from the Qur'an and use rational arguments to convince the king.

Here are a few examples. The animals say the humans lack mercy and compassion, because they skin them and treat them cruelly. The complaints are long. But the humans counter by saying they show compassion to the animals by providing them food, shelter, and deliverance from other wild beasts. The animals respond by saying they don't do it out of compassion--only for their investments! The animals also say the humans aren't as intelligent as they think. One reason is because the humans think they are the loveliest of forms based on their interpretation of the Qur'an (95.4), but the animals argue they misinterpret the words of God, and then they give an esoteric meaning to the verse.

After hearing both sides make their arguments, the king delivers his just judgement the next day. This story is rich in symbolism. I'm still reading the footnotes. There's so much meaning here!

 

[Ahanu]

Some modern editions of this epistle add the following extra words near the end:

"And how did the just King rule on the claims of these human strangers, and their responses to the counter-claims of the animals? His order was that all of the animals were to be subject to the commands and prohibitions of the humans and remain subject to them until a new age had dawned. But then they would have a new fate".

Abdu'l-Baha taught humanity would turn to a different diet in the future. Instead of eating animals, they would eat other things.

"Fruit and grains. The time will come when meat will no longer be eaten. Medical science is only in its infancy, yet it has shown that our natural diet is that which grows out of the ground".

A new fate for animals is emerging in this new age.

 

[arthra]

Well it is true that Abdul-Baha uses analogies that seem to favor animals...

One of the great reasons of separation is colour. Look how this prejudice has power in America, for instance. See how they hate one another! Animals do not quarrel because of their colour! Surely man who is so much higher in creation, should not be lower than the animals.

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha in London, p. 55

Then, O ye friends of God! Ye must not only have kind and merciful feelings for mankind, but ye should also exercise the utmost kindness towards every living creature. The physical sensibilities and instincts are common to animal and man. Man is, however, negligent of this reality and imagines that sensibility is peculiar to mankind, therefore he practices cruelty to the animal. In reality what difference is there in physical sensations! Sensibility is the same whether you harm man or animal: there is no difference. Nay, rather, cruelty to the animal is more painful because man has a tongue and he sighs, complains and groans when he receives an injury and complains to the government and the government protects him from cruelty; but the poor animal cannot speak, it can neither show its suffering nor is it able to appeal to the government. If it is harmed a thousand times by man it is not able to defend itself in words nor can it seek justice or retaliate. Therefore one must be very considerate towards animals and show greater kindness to them than to man. Educate the children in their infancy in such a way that they may become exceedingly kind and merciful to the animals. If an animal is sick they should endeavor to cure it; if it is hungry, they should feed it; if it is thirsty, they should satisfy its thirst; if it is tired, they should give it rest.

~ Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 373

 

[Ahanu]

Abdu'l-Baha has used animals as examples a few times.

"All the nations are thinking of how to advance their own interests while working against the best interests of other nations. They desire their own personal advantage while seeking to undermine affairs in other countries. They call this the 'struggle for survival' (tanázu'-i baqá), and assert that it is innate to human nature. But this is a grievous error; nay, there is no error greater than this. Gracious God! Even in the animal kingdom cooperation and mutual assistance for survival are observed among some species, especially in the case of danger to the whole group. One day I was beside a small stream and noticed some young grasshoppers which had not yet developed wings seeking to cross to the other side in order to obtain food. To accomplish their goal, these wingless grasshoppers rushed forward into the water and vied with each other to form a bridge across the stream while the remaining grasshoppers crossed over on top of them. The grasshoppers were able to pass from one side of the stream to the other, but those insects which had formed the bridge in the water perished. Reflect how this incident illustrates co-operation for survival, not struggle for survival. Insofar as animals display such noble sentiments, how much more should man . . ."
-Abdu'l-Baha