Page Title

PAGE CONTENTS:

Zoroaster: The First Universalist
by Ken R. Vincent

OMAR KHAYYAM: Sufi Universalist
by Ken R. Vincent

One Universal Principle Which Still Makes Sense
By John C. Morgan

UNIVERSALISM: MAKING THE SOUL SMILE
by Patrick Murfin

Magic, Deeds, and Universalism
by Ken R. Vincent

_______________________________________________________________
Zoroaster: The First Universalist
by Ken R. Vincent

Once upon a time, before wisdom was confined to books, Shamans of the
“Great Spirit’ anticipated an afterlife for their peoples. But the earliest existing
expression of the Universalist idea of an afterlife where God saves ALL people
can be found in the revelation of Zoroaster, Prophet of the Magi. Truly, it is one
of many profound influences that Zoroaster’s new religion had on the
subsequent development of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Known as
Zoroaster by the Greeks and Zardust by the Arabs, he is properly called
Zarathushtra by the followers of the religion he founded. (Since he is best
known in the West by the Greek name Zoroaster, that name will be used in this
paper; interestingly, the Greek name “Jesus” also became favored over the
Hebrew “Yeshua.”)

According to the Holy Book of the Magi, Zoroaster was born in eastern Iran and
lived from about 660 BCE to 583 BCE. Like Moses (who is thought to have lived
between 1600 and 1200 BCE), there is virtually no corroborative historical
evidence for his life outside the religious writings. Most scholars place Zoroaster’
s life earlier in history (as long ago as l200 - 1800 BCE), mainly due to the
ancient Eastern Persian language he used to compose his Hymns (Gathas).

Zoroaster’s parents were middle-class, and his father was probably a horse or
camel trader as well as a priest. He was married and had children. His major
revelations occurred at age 30 after he, like Jesus, went into the wilderness to
seek God. After this experience, he was inspired to say that, “God declared to
me that silent meditation is the best for attaining spiritual enlightenment” (Y43.
15). The Holy Book of the Magi relates how Satan tempted him in the wilderness
with a promise of a 1,000-year rule. He preached for ten years without success,
after which he converted his cousin, the rest of his family, and King Vishtaspa.
Once Zoroastrianism was adopted by the kings of Persia, the religion spread
throughout the Persian Empire. The Magi, who at that time were priests of the
old pagan religion in western Iran, accepted and taught the new religion of
Zoroaster; some believe that Zoroaster himself was a Magus of the old religion
prior to his divine revelations. His Hymns to God (Gathas), about the length of
the Gospel of Matthew, were first recited orally and eventually written into the
Holy Book of the Magi (Avesta). We know that he was assassinated by a rival
priest at the age of 77 years. While Zoroaster claimed no divinity for himself,
later traditions created miraculous stories that were characteristically attached to
persons held in high esteem in the ancient world. A fond tradition claims that
Zoroaster laughed (instead of crying) at birth!

In the religion of the Magi, humanity has free will to choose between good and
evil, and we are required to be active participants with God in the eventual
defeat of evil. The core beliefs are often summarized succinctly in the phrase:
“Good thoughts, good words, and good deeds.”

Zoroaster’s name for God is “Ahura Mazda” which means, “Lord of Life and
Wisdom” or simply “Wise Lord.” This can be compared to the literal translations
of the names for God in Hebrew Scriptures: “Yahweh” which means “I AM” and
“Elohim” which means “God”. For Zoroaster, God is wholly good; God
unconditionally and totally loves all his Creation and all humanity – always. God
is not angry, jealous, or vengeful; God would never tempt humans into doing
evil. We are made of the essence of God and are cherished by God. Fasting,
celibacy, and the austere life have no place in the religion of the Magi; one is
simply directed to BE LIKE GOD – Do Good and Oppose Evil. (Christians may
recall that in Matthew 5:48, Jesus also commands us to be like our heavenly
Father.)   Because all creation is sacred, it is also humanity’s duty to protect
creation and not defile it or pollute it. (In a very real way, Zoroaster was the first
environmentalist!)

God is opposed by an evil force called “The Demon of the Lie” which Zoroaster
described as “that which is not and never was”— almost as if he saw the devil
as a vacuum. Satan is responsible for all death, destruction, decay, and
darkness. Satan has no physical presence on Earth but does have the ability to
corrupt God’s creation. However, Satan is dim-witted and disorganized and can
be defeated by the Good!

Like Christianity, the religion of the Magi has a concept of the Holy Spirit as
being the part of God that is present with us on the Earth. God is both
immanent (present) and transcendent (other). It is the Holy Spirit or Mentality of
God (Spenta Mainyu) that counters the Evil Spirit or Mentality (Angra Mainyu).
In the words of Zoroaster:

Through his Holy Spirit
And his Sovereign mind,
Ahura Mazda will grant
Self-realization and immortality
To him whose words and deeds
Are inspired by righteousness,
Moral courage and Divine Wisdom (Y47.1)

Both the ancient Magi and the modern followers of Zoroaster see God as Light,
the oldest non-anthropomorphic conception of God. God is the light above us,
around us, and within us. For Zoroaster, the contrast between light and
darkness is always a metaphor for the conflict between Good and Evil. In
speaking of the God of the Magi, the 3rd-century Greek philosopher Porphyry
said, “God’s body is Light, and His Spirit Truth.” In more modern times, Einstein
saw all matter as frozen light, and physicist Stephen Hawking stated, “When you
break subatomic particles down to their most elemental level, you are left with
nothing but pure light.” Sometimes observers of this religion from ancient to
modern times have mistaken the Magi for fire worshippers because of the
“eternal flame” present in all of their temples. However, the fire has never been
worshiped; the flame of the fire represents LIGHT, their symbol for God.

Concepts of the afterlife in the religion of the Magi are almost identical to those
of Christianity. Joseph Campbell suspects direct borrowing of the ideas of the
Magi by Dante in his vivid descriptions of a multi-layered Heaven and Hell.
According to Zoroaster’s vision, each human soul is required to face judgment
on the “ Bridge of Judgment .” If there is a preponderance of good deeds, the
soul is allowed to pass over a wide bridge to Heaven on which the good deeds
meet him or her in the form of a beautiful l5-year-old girl. The soul of the saved
asks, “Who are thou, for I have never seen a young girl on Earth more beautiful
or fair than thee?” In answer, the young girl replies, “I am no girl, but thy own
good deeds.” If the human soul contains a preponderance of evil deeds, a
young girl “who has no semblance of a young girl” comes to meet it, and the
soul of the damned says, “Who are thou? I have never seen a wench on Earth
more ill-favored and hideous than thee.” In reply, the ill-favored wench says, “I
am no wench, but I am thy deeds – hideous deeds – evil thoughts, evil words,
evil deeds, and evil religion.” The Bridge then becomes razor narrow and the
soul falls into Hell. This same razor sharp bride imagery lives on in Shiite Islam.

Unlike Dante whose Limbo is for the righteous who are not Christians, Limbo in
the religion of the Magi is for those whose good deeds and bad deeds are in
equal balance. The Hell of the Magi is not eternal but only a temporary detour
while you “shape up” and the evil in you is purified. Zoroastrians, like other
Universalists, believe God is too good to sentence humans to Eternal Hell.
Some modern minimalist scholars dispute the fact that Zoroaster was a
Universalist and say that Universal Salvation came into Zoroastrianism later;
however, as Mary Boyce points out in Textual Sources for the Study of
Zoroastrianism, the religion was definitely Universalist many years before
Christianity when the 4th century B.C. Greek, Theopompus stated that
“Zoroaster prophesies that some day there will be a resurrection of all the dead.
In the end Hades shall perish and men (people) shall be happy…”

In the religion of the Magi, the Archangels – called the “Bounteous Immortals” –
are very powerful, as you can tell from their names: “The Good Mind”,
“Righteousness”, “Divine Power”, “Universal Love”, “Perfection”, and
“Immortality.” Interestingly, half are male and half are female. They were
created by God and with the Angels serve as a link of communication between
humanity and God. Additionally, they are manifestations of the characteristics
present in men and women of good will – those that each of us needs to
integrate into our lives in order to serve God. For instance, good men and
women manifest the characteristics of the Archangel of the Good Mind, while evil
people are beset with the Evil Mind. The Archangels have been called deities
erroneously by some scholars. Some scholars maintain that Zoroaster’s original
conception was that of highly abstract Archangels which represent mere aspects
of God.   Tradition and, more importantly, followers of the modern Zoroastrian
religion interpret them literally as Archangels. The Magi also believed that there
were Earth Angels of which the prophet Zoroaster was one. Dr. J. J. Modi sees
parallels between the Christian angel Michael and the Zoroastrian angel Mithra,
as well as between the Christian angel Gabriel and the Zoroastrian angel
Sraosha.

The name of Mithra may sound familiar to Westerners because of a heretical
cult during Roman times that extended as far west as England . This “mystery
religion” (which allowed only men) worshipped Mithra as a god, and its
popularity is said to have rivaled the early Christian movement. Curiously,
Mithra’s birthday is December 25, a date adopted later by the Christian Church
for Christmas in its effort to discourage participation in this pagan celebration.
Mithra is still worshipped as a god in India . However, in the orthodox religion of
the Magi, Zoroastrians consider Mithra “only” an Angel and not even an
Archangel ! Sophy Burnham, author of A Book of Angels, credits Zoroaster with
the development of the concept of angels. Before their contact with the Magi,
the Hebrews often refer to the messengers of God as simply men (as in Genesis
18 when three men, one of whom is God, appear to Abraham). After their
contact with the Magi, Judaism and later Christianity and Islam have a well-
developed system of Archangels and Angels.

Both a spiritual afterlife of the soul and a physical resurrection at the end of time
are concepts of Zoroaster. Humanity can fall prey to evil, but after “purification”
in Hell, ALL are saved at the end of time. When the victory over evil is complete,
the end of time will come where nothing ever dies or decays, and there is no
darkness – only LIGHT.

In the spirit of Universalism, Zoroaster tells of future Saviors possibly coming
from different nations:

Indeed such shall be the Saviors
Of the countries who follow
The call of Duty by good thoughts
Because of their deeds
Inspired by righteousness
In accord with your command
O Mazda, they certainly have been marked out
As smiters of wrath (Y48.12)

One ongoing issue in Zoroastrianism present since antiquity is the debate
between those who interpret Zoroaster’s understanding of God as “ethical
dualism” (monotheism) and those who maintain the concept of “cosmic dualism”
(God and Satan co-exist). Although Zoroaster was very sure that God is wholly
good and that man is free to choose good or evil, his teachings were unclear
about the source of evil in the world. That is, if God the Creator is all good,
where does evil come from? Those supporting ethical dualism (monotheism)
would answer that evil originates in the mind of humanity and is the byproduct of
creation; because the Universe is incomplete and unfinished, there is a capacity
to alter the status quo. That is why humanity must be active in helping God to
overcome evil.   The Zoroastrian scholar and modern-day believer, Prof.
Farhang Mehr, sees Zoroaster as a pure monotheist who taught ethical dualism
rather than cosmic dualism.

Throughout the long history of this religion, the concept of cosmic dualism has
been more widely accepted; that is, a belief that good comes from God and that
evil comes from Satan, although God is Eternal and Satan is not. Interestingly,
this same concept of cosmic dualism is used throughout the New Testament by
both Jesus and St. Paul , although the monotheism of Christianity is never
doubted. Satan is a very real and powerful being to Jesus; he is tempted by
Satan in the three Synoptic Gospels (Mt 4:1-11, Mk 1:12 -13, Lk 4:1-l3). He
asks, “How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that
kingdom cannot stand” (Mt.12:25-26, Mk 3:23-24, Lk 11:17-18). In Ephesians 6:
11 , Paul writes, “Put on the whole armor of God so that you may be able to
stand against the wiles of the Devil.” The proponents of cosmic dualism feel
comfortable with modern-day “Process Theology” which expresses the idea that
God cannot bestow free will and remain all powerful. A concept in modern
physics that may reinforce the reality of cosmic dualism is that “a little chaos” is
present in every atom of the Universe.

The God of the Magi is Universal, and Zoroaster was the first to proclaim this
truth. In the words of the Persian (and Zoroastrian) King Darius, “I am King of all
the Nations by the will of God.”   In the words of Zoroaster, God is supreme:

When I held you in my very eyes
Then I realized you in my mind, O Mazda,
As the first and also the last for all Eternity,
As the Father of Good Thoughts,
As the Creator of Righteousness
And Lord over the actions of life (Y31.8)

Although the Persian Empire fell to Alexander the Great (331BCE), the Magi
continued to be very influential throughout the Middle East and the Western
World, and the religion of the Magi continued as the primary religion in the
middle east until the Moslem conquest (642 CE). The Magi were prized as
teachers of great wisdom and power, and Zoroaster remained a highly
respected figure.

Of course, Zoroastrian ideas have been enormously important to subsequent
religious thought. Many scholars contend that it was Zoroaster’s cursing of the
Hindu gods that initiated the break between the religious approaches of the East
(Hindu, Buddhism) and those of the West (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). In the
Dead Sea Scrolls of the Essenes, the imagery of the “Sons of Light” and “Sons
of Darkness” is a direct borrowing from the Religion of the Magi. Six hundred
years after the Moslem conquest, the Sufi Mystic, Attar of Nishopur, wrote, “we
are the Eternal Magi, we are not Muslims”. The Cypress slender Minister of
Wine in the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is a Magi. Omar Khayyam once said he
wore the belt of a Magi because he was ashamed of his Islam.

Zoroaster taught that God loves us all and that, after evil is finally defeated, ALL
humanity will be saved at the end of time, although those whose bad deeds
outweigh their good deeds will need to be “purified” in Hell before joining God in
Heaven.

The following example illustrates the views of Zoroaster concerning Universal
Salvation:

If you understand these laws of happiness and pain
Which Mazda has ordained, O mortals,
(There is) a long period of punishment for the wicked
And reward for the pious
But thereafter eternal joy shall reign forever (Y30.11, emphasis added)

The above article is based on Ken R. Vincent’s book: THE MAGI: From
Zoroaster to the “Three Wise Men.”

OMAR KHAYYAM: Sufi Universalist
by Ken R. Vincent

Omar Khayyam is one of my heroes. I have read translations of his poem, the
Rubaiyat, hundreds of times over the past 50 years. Amazingly, each repetition
still brings some fresh insight! Rubai means “quatrain,” a four-line stanza in
which there are two sets of rhyming lines. The Rubaiyat is a collection of
quatrains written over a period of many years by Omar Khayyam, a Sufi mystic
living in the late 11th and early 12th Centuries.

Within Omar’s poetry, I recognize a person much like myself: someone unable
to be an orthodox believer but too optimistic to be agnostic! His verses reflect
the impossibility of certainty in religion, philosophy, or science; he questions the
theological tenants of all religions. Ultimately, he was simply a lover of God. He
believed his own mystical experiences which became the basis of his faith.

#287 Although the creeds number some seventy-three,
I hold with none but that of loving Thee;
What matter faith, unfaith, obedience, sin?
Thou’rt all we need, the rest is vanity.

One of Omar’s most important theological truths is that God is ONE. His
mystical experiences convinced him that there is ONE TRUTH behind all the
world’s religions:

#63 Hearts with the light of love illumined well,
Whether in mosque or synagogue they dwell,
Have their names written in the book of love,
Unvexed by hopes of heaven or fears of Hell.

Omar had the good fortune to live in Nishapur, a prosperous city on the Silk
Road, at a time when the Moslems had ruled Iran for 500 years. Significantly, a
large minority of followers of the Zoroastrian religion whom Omar called
“Magians” still resided in this area. He was also acquainted with the beliefs of
smaller religious minorities in the region – Jews and Christians, as well as
Buddhist travelers. In his poem, he shows respect for all of these religions. He
recognizes that ALL yearn for God – that all are seeking the ONE.

#34 Pagodas, just as mosques, are homes of prayer,
‘Tis prayer that church-bells chime unto the air,
Yea, Church and Ka’ba, Rosary and Cross
Are all but divers tongues of world-wide prayer.

While any monotheist may become a Sufi, they are most often associated with
Islam. Ultra-orthodox Sufis may choose to obey Islamic law but add some
mystical component. Other Sufis (like Omar) view Islamic law much the way
Jesus viewed the ritualistic Jewish Law – that it is more important to obey the
spirit than the letter of the law. Consequently, Omar was admired by some Sufis
who used his poem as a teaching tool but, like Jesus, he was cursed by those
who were victims of his barbed criticisms of religious hypocrisy. In another
behavior reminiscent of Jesus, Omar openly associated with sinners. Both
believed that God wants us to speak, act, and live from our hearts.

#368 Hear now Khayyam’s advice, and bear in mind,
Consort with revelers, though they be maligned,
Cast down the gates of abstinence and prayer,
Yea, drink, and even rob, but oh! Be kind!

Omar was a scientist, astronomer, and mathematician. Everyone who has ever
taken algebra has been taught his binomial theorem! As an astronomer, he
revised the Persian calendar to be as accurate as our present Georgian
calendar, but he did so 500 years earlier and without the use of telescopes!

Many people have attempted to translate the Rubaiyat; some translations are
academic, literal, and “dry as a bone,” while others are simply paraphrases. At
one time or another, I have owned 21 different translations. Probably the best-
known one is that of Edmund Fitzgerald who first published in 1859 but
subsequently made 4 other translations over the next 30 years. It is Fitzgerald’s
version of this familiar verse that falls so easily on our ears:
“A loaf of bread, a jug of wine, and thou,
A book of poems beneath the bough.”

However, my favorite translator is E. H. Whinfield because of his effort to
balance the meaning of the poems with a pleasing rhythm. While keeping the
words as literally accurate as possible, he takes enough “poetic license” to
insure that the poems remain beautiful when read aloud. Whinfield made 3
translations of the Rubaiyat. His second translation was selected by Joseph
Campbell for the epic series, The Masks of God, so I assume that Campbell
favored this translation too.

Contrary to what you may have assumed when you were exposed to the
Rubaiyat as an adolescent, the poem is NOT about living for the moment without
regard for tomorrow! Omar does not advocate irresponsibility, but he does want
to persuade people to BE ALIVE IN THE MOMENT – to enjoy what we have
today –NOW! He is addressing those who live “in the past” or those who
imagine that happiness is not possible until some imagined goal is achieved or
current problem resolved!

#30 To-day is thine to spend, but not tomorrow,
Counting on morrows breedeth naught but sorrow;
Oh! Squander not this breath that heaven hath lent thee
Nor make too sure another breath to borrow!

Omar’s respect for the insight of other religions includes the “middle way” of
Buddha and Lao Tzu which asserts that it is best to live modestly – shunning
poverty or wealth.

#168 Let him rejoice who has a loaf of bread,
A little nest wherein to lay his head;
Is slave to none and no man slaves for him;
In truth, his lot is wondrous well bested.”

Like Jesus who told us that “the Kingdom of God is within you,” Omar claims that
one can attain mystic union with God in the “here and now.” This is the
universal insight repeated by all mystics throughout the ages. When our
primary goal is to truly seek and love God, we are joined by persons from a
diversity of religious affiliations, and academic arguments on textual minutia
become irrelevant.

#49 In Synagogue and cloister, mosque and school,
Hell’s terrors and heaven’s lures men’s bosoms rule,
But they who master Allah’s mysteries,
Sow not this empty chaff their heart to fool.

Omar explains that some time may be needed to achieve mystic unity with God –
it can’t be bought or obtained through reason alone:

#302 The “Truth” will not be shown to lofty thought,
Nor yet with lavished gold may it be bought;
But, if you yield your life for fifty years,
From words to “states” you may perchance be brought.

One of the many points argued by scholars is Omar’s meaning of the word,
“wine.” Obviously, wine is forbidden in Islam. Is the meaning of “wine” literal,
symbolic, or both? Personally, I think Omar often uses “wine” literally as
“beverage,” but he also uses it metaphorically to express “mystical ecstasy.” In
this stanza, “wine” is clearly symbolic:

#262 In taverns better far commune with Thee
Than pray in mosques and fail Thy face to see!
Oh, first and last of all Thy creatures Thou
‘Tis Thine to burn, and Thine to cherish me!

In this stanza, the meaning of “wine” is literal:

#349 Tell Khayyam, for a master of the schools,
He strangely misinterprets my plain rules:
Where have I said that wine is wrong for all?
“Tis lawful for the wise, but not for fools.

In all Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), there is tension
between GOOD WORKS and GRACE as the basis for Salvation. Is Heaven
earned by good works or does God’s unconditional love insure our place in
Heaven?   Another paradox involves EVIL: If God is all-powerful, why does evil
endure?

#102 If grace be grace, and Allah gracious be,
Adam from Paradise why banished He?
Grace to poor sinners shown is grace indeed;
In grace hard-earned by works no grace I see.

This verse speaks to the philosophy of the late Russian mystic Rasputin who
saw sin as a prerequisite to redemption:

#46 Khayyam! Why weep you that your life is bad?
What boots it thus to mourn? Rather be glad.
He that sins not can make no claim to mercy,
Mercy was made for sinners – be not sad.

Omar touches on the idea of predestination, which is a major theological
position in Islam, as well as the “Christianity” of Protestant Reformer John
Calvin. As an astronomer, Omar is aware of the predictability of most of the
visible cosmos, and he fears that predestination is a possibility:

#100 When Allah mixed my clay, He knew full well
My future acts, and could each one foretell;
Without His will no act of mine was wrought;
Is it then just to punish me in Hell?

One of the recurring analogies in Omar’s poetry is God as “potter” and
humankind as “pots.” Literally, we are made of dust, and to dust we return.
Omar reminds us that the clay in our earthenware cup could, in the past, have
been human!

#32 This jug did once like me, love’s sorrows taste,
And bonds of beauty’s tresses once embraced.
This handle, when you see upon its side,
Has many a time twined round a slender waist!

He acknowledges the possibility that there may be no afterlife:

#107 Drink wine! Long must you sleep within the tomb,
Without a friend, or wife to cheer your gloom;
Hear what I say, and tell it not again,
“Never again can withered tulips bloom.”

He hopes that, at death, all our questions will be answered:

#87 Make haste! Soon must you quit this life below,
And pass the veil, and Allah’s secrets know;
Make haste to take your pleasure while you may,
You wot not whence you come, nor whither go.

This stanza is a favorite of mine and Joseph Campbell’s:

#491 Man is a cup, his soul the wine therein,
Flesh is a pipe, spirit the voice within;
O Khayyam, have you fathomed what man is?
A magic lantern with a light therein!

Omar knows he is a heretic and cannot be otherwise:

#60 From Mosque an outcast, and to church a foe,
Allah! Of what clay didst thou form me so?
Like sceptic monk or ugly courtesan,
No hopes have I above, no joys below.

Omar is comfortable with Christianity – in the sense that all religions are one:

#293 Did no fair rose my paradise adorn,
I would make shift to deck it with a thorn;
And if I lacked my prayer-mats, beads, and Shaikh,
Those Christian bells and stoles I would not scorn.

A discussion about Omar wouldn’t be complete without mentioning his affinity for
Zoroastrians. Another Sufi, Attar of Nishapur, went so far as to declare, “We are
the eternal Magians – we’re not Moslems.” Attar felt that the Islamic religion, as
it was practiced, lacked the quality of love that dominated the old Persian
religion of Zoroaster and Christianity. In the next verse, Omar talks about being
a Zoroastrian and not being a good Moslem:

#281 Ofttimes I plead my foolishness to Thee,
My heart contracted with perplexity;
I gird me with the Magian zone, and why?
For shame so poor a Moslem to be.

Some scholars postulate that Omar was a Zoroastrian and that his frequent use
of “tavern” is a symbol for “Magian fire temple,” but the following verse suggests
otherwise:

#334 Am I a wine-bibber? What if I am?
Zoroastrian or infidel? Suppose I am?
Each sect miscalls me, but I heed them not,
I am my own, and what I am, I am.

Sufiism is pantheist or panentheist. Pantheist means that God is all.
Panentheist means that God is all and more. Panentheism is acceptable to
Islam – as it is to Christianity, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism. The next verse
speaks to this:

#389 Nor you nor I can read the eternal decree
To that enigma we can find no key;
They talk of you and me behind the veil
But, if that veil be lifted, where are we?

The mystic knows the panentheistic reality that God is everywhere, although
many people fail to realize this or take the time to recognize it. The following
verse echoes William Blake’s idea that, if the doors of perception were
cleansed, all could see the reality of God and God’s Universe:

#247 The world is baffled in its search for Thee,
Wealth cannot find Thee, no , nor poverty;
Thou’rt very near us, but our ears are deaf,
Our eyes are blinded that we may not see!

Omar also expressed his belief that nothing bad can come from God – the same
doctrine of Universal Salvation espoused by Zoroaster and Universalist
Christians:

#305 Allah, our Lord, is merciful, though just;
Sinner! Despair not, but His mercy trust!
For though today you perish in your sins,
Tomorrow He’ll absolve your crumbling dust.

#318 Sure of thy grace, for sins why need I fear?
How can the pilgrim faint whilst Thou art near?
On the last day Thy grace will wash me white,
And all my “black record” will disappear.

#193 They say, when the last trump shall sound its knell,
Our Friend will sternly judge, and doom to hell.
Can aught but good from perfect goodness come?
Compose your trembling hearts, ‘twill all be well.

#276 O Thou! Who know’st the secret thoughts of all,
In time of sorest need who aidest all,
Grant me repentance, and accept my plea,
O Thou who dost accept the pleas of all!

#204 Can alien Pharisees Thy kindness tell,
Like us, Thy intimates, who nigh Thee dwell?
Thou say’st, “All sinners will I burn with fire.”
Say that to strangers, we know Thee too well!

This last verse refers to mystical insight in which the knowledge of God is gained
directly. Like mystics and Universalists everywhere, Omar knows that in the end,
we will ALL be united with God.

Ken R. Vincent is Webmaster for the UNIVERSALIST HERALD (www.universalist-
hearld.net).

One Universal Principle Which Still Makes Sense
By John C. Morgan

“The attempt to find a common point of view is better than manipulative
contempt for it.”
--Simon Blackburn, Professor of Philosophy, Cambridge University, England

One major ethical dilemma today is that many many believe everything is
relative. According to this modern view, there are no universal truths; hence
everything is determined by culture, history or individual quirks.
When no truth is more important than any other, nothing finally matters because
there is no way to judge anything as being more important than anything else. A
cartoon expresses this idea:
Charlie Brown is seen at a school play. Dressed in a witch doctor’s outfit, he
says to the audience: “It doesn’t matter what you believe, as long as you are
sincere.”
Typically the more cynical in our midst use ethical relativism as justification for
their actions. They may cheat, steal or lie because in the scheme of things no
actions are more ethically correct than any others because nothing really is right
or wrong, good or bad.
I find the modern view that we cannot judge behaviors by any universal standard
to be intellectually lazy and morally bankrupt.   If you don’t believe this, I would
challenge you to compare those who murdered some fourteen million people in
the Nazi campaign to eliminate Jews, dissidents, and others, to those who at
great peril to themselves rescued countless thousands from ending up in
concentration camps.
If you have never visited a holocaust memorial, you should to remind yourself of
what happens when people are treated as less than human beings. Or, read
the story of slaves in our country to see that it can happen here. Closer to
home, think what happens to our values when only profits rule without any
concern for people.
It does matter what you believe.   The difference between people who believe
there is
no price to be put on a human life and those who believe some lives aren’t worth
much is greater than the difference between our galaxy and one light years
away.
One of the greatest of all philosophers, Immanuel Kant, coined the term,
“categorical imperative” to mean that there was a universal ethical law.   Without
waxing academic, one might describe this law in words your mother might have
used before you did something to someone or to yourself that might trouble you
later. Mother would ask: “What if everyone did that?”
Ask Kant’s question the next time you think about cheating on someone or
stealing or lying or worse, abusing another person: “What if everyone did
that?”
Once upon a time most of us knew the Golden Rule, even if we didn’t practice it
as often as we might hope: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto
you.”
I believe the Golden Rule is universal, thought it has been stated differently in
many ways.
Here are a few:
* What you don’t want done to yourself, don’t do to others.(Confucius, 6th
Century, B.C.)
* Do not do unto others all that which is not well for oneself. (Zorastrianism, 5th
Century, B.C.)
* Hurt not others with that which pains thyself. (Buddhist, 4th Century B.C.)
* May I do unto others as I would that they should do unto me (Plato, 4th
Century, B.C.)
* Do naught to others which if done to thee would give thee pain.(Hindu, 3rd
Century, B.C.)
* What is hateful to yourself, don’t do to others. (Judaism, lst Century B.C.)
* Whatsoever ye would that others should do to you, do ye also even to them.
(Jesus, 1st Century, A.D.)
* Treat others as thou wouldst be treated thyself. (Sikhism, 16th Century, A.D.)
* What if everybody did that? (Kant’s ethical principle called the “categorical
imperative,”
19th Century)
* Don’t mess with others as you wouldn’t want to be messed with yourself (street
philosopher, Philadelphia, 21st Century)

(John C. Morgan is a Contributing Editor to the Herald and also teaches
philosophy and ethics at a community college.)

UNIVERSALISM: MAKING THE SOUL SMILE
by Patrick Murfin

At its core universalism is simply the stubborn refusal to believe that the
universe is malevolent. It has been dressed up and silk and satin, coarse
homespun, saffron robes, the quaint attire of countless clans and folk cultures,
but that is the one absolute that unites them all whether they would recognize
the label “universalist” or not. It dwells within us today not because of historic
connections, although those connections are undeniable, not because of the
bonds of denomination, though bonds are strong, but because we generally
share that simple affirmation.

In the earliest days of The Church, before there even was really any Church at
all, when the very breath of Joshua Bin Josef, called Jesus the Nazarene still
seemed to rustle the palm fronds and whisper through the olive groves, many of
his fumble followers believed his word had changed everything. Yahweh, the
fierce and jealous Sky God, who demanded sacrifice, punished those who would
not shower Him with unremitting flattery, and tormented those tempted by the
charms of neighboring gods was transformed. By Jesus, through Jesus, for
Jesus, it made no real difference. Jesus, part and parcel with God himself, Jesus
the Son, Jesus the Spirit, Jesus the Man Messenger, it made no difference.
What did matter was that Jesus was somehow mixed up with this new God, a
God of forgiveness, of love, of a righteousness that transformed lives rather
than adhering with blind obedience to lifeless ritual, a God of Jews and Gentiles
a like yearning for reconciliation with all of his people.

The God that Jesus brought to these people wanted to gather them all to him, to
elevate them somehow after earthly death to a place by his side in Paradise.
The people were happy in this thought. Of course a Bishop here and a Bishop
there might, in brotherly correspondence differ as to the details of the
arrangements. Some Jews still clove to Jesus as their particular Messiah. Up in
the Hellenic world some obsessed with ways to fit the message into the systems
of the Greek Philosophers. For a long time, despite Roman persecutions most of
these new Christians, as they had come to call themselves, were united in this
cheerful universalism.

For others the gods were the Old Wise Ones who chuckled at humanity’s
foolishness while forgiving its folly. There were trickster gods ever ready to
teach a gentle lesson. There were the enveloping arms and nurturing breasts of
Mother Goddesses. Life for these folks was a blessing, not a curse which must
be endured. Every tree and stone manifested the goodness of creation which
was inseparable from the holy. These people, too, were universalists.

In the East Lao Tse taught his followers about the light and the dark, the light in
the dark, the yin and the yang. Some would read his teachings and believe that
they were about enduring without complaint the evils and trials that the world
rained down upon them. Placid acceptance was seen to be the key. Resistance
or any measure to change one’s lot or station was considered a shameful
arrogance and a disruption of a cosmic unity—another bleak hope for the
oppressed and a comfort for the oppressors. Yet otherd would read the same
teachings and always find the yin buried deeply in the yang, the hope in the
depths of despair. These were universalists.

The subtlety of the Hindu system, which so entranced Ralph Waldo Emerson,
acknowledged the essential unity of one great, unifying divinity which we in the
West might call God. But such a god was so great, so powerful, so vast, and so
unfathomable that he/she/it could only be comprehended by humans in diverse
and particular manifestations. In the Hindu tradition the three main faces of God,
were Brahma the Creator, Vishnu the Preserver, and Shiva the Destroyer. In
addition each of these had a female mate/counterpart with similar properties and
powers. And all had further incarnations, forms and avatars each with special
powers and characteristics. Below this trinity were literally thousands of other
names of God with a bewildering array of human and non-human faces each
representing a subtle but unique attribute of the essentially infinite. In such a
system devotees couldn pick and choose which face of God, which incarnation
to worship. Thus one religious tradition birthed a thousand cults. Those who see
the world as corrupt and evil could choose to worship Shiva and his feminine
counterpart Kali, the wrathful angel of destruction bent on scourging humanity of
its sins. Others could select from the Avatars of Lord Vishnu including Krisha the
Divine Lover, Balaran or Buddha the Sage, or Kalki the completer and savior.
These celebrated the light and the goodness of creation, the infinite perfectibility
of humanity. And these were universalists.

The followers of the Buddha would have little truck with Christian notions of
salvation, bodily resurrection, and eternal life in the dazzling company of the
Almighty. God or gods were unimportant to them, trifles if they existed,
meaningless in their absence. Instead they believed that a well lived life--
reverent, kind and generous—which also cultivated inner peace, serenity and
openness to a greater, non-personal holiness which united the universe, was
the essential religion. But some Buddhists would come to view the world as its
own kind of Hell and the endless rounds of re-incarnation of the soul in various
states of degradation a just punishment until enlightenment can be achieved
and escape from all travail made possible by the blissful nothingness of union
with the greater. It was a bleak world and forlorn hope nearly impossible to
achieve. Yet others, professing on the surface the same beliefs, managed to
find bliss in each drawn breath, each moment lived with perfect awareness of the
marvelous now, each connection with another soul, its own echo of the vastness
of the universal One. They were universalists

Back in the West, the Church ossified into a powerful monolith with vast temporal
as well a celestial authority. But always, somewhere, some heedless soul would
pop up and wonder at the fragility of the imposing edifice. On reading scripture
for themselves, which be came possible after the invention of the printing press,
they found that doctrines of original sin, damnation, and the identity of Jesus
with the substance of God were no where to found in his teachings as recorded
in the Gospels. The Protestant Reformation was off and running as men and
women relied on their own reason to parse out the meaning of scripture. The
Reformation shot off in different and contradictory directions. In many places, as
among the German Anabaptists, some English Quakers, and other, the joyous
insights of universalism were rediscovered

On the other hand John Calvin in Geneva, John Knox in Edinburgh and others
went in an entirely different direction. Central to the dispute between Luther and
the Church which had started the Reformation was the concept of Salvation by
Good Works—the idea that an exemplary life filled with charity and beneficence
(especially to needy clergy or church coffers) could win salvation. All of the
Reformers maintained that salvation was solely a gift of grace by God and could
not be earned except by utter faith in Jesus Christ, Son of God and the only
Savior. All others, the vast majority, were condemned to eternal damnation and
nothing they could do, say, or profess would change the outcome.

This was the religion of the Pilgrim Fathers, of the Puritans, and even the
dissenters like the Methodists and Baptists. But on New England stone farms
and in Pennsylvania taverns the notion grew that this Calvinism of
predestination and election was so much poppycock. Thus was universalism
born in this country. The Good News went out that God was both loving and
forgiving, unwilling to cast any of his children into torments. Spread by the likes
of George de Bennville, Elhanan Winchester, John Murray, Caleb Rich and
Hosea Ballou universalism grew into Universalism, one of America’s leading
denominations.

Universalism’s pious adherents were mostly simple folk—farmers and artisans,
laborers and petty merchants, the slat of the earth types from country side to
rural village to industrializing town. They were happy in the sure joy that they
were destined to sit with God. And not just themselves alone as a reward for
placing the correct bet on the winning theology, they knew they would share
Glory with all of humanity. They wanted to manifest their gratitude to God by
living exemplary lives deserving of His gracious Gift. They also treasured reason
and the ability of human beings to be agents for change in their own lives and
communities. They saw it as their job to make a heaven on earth reflecting the
Paradise to come. In such a world justice would “flow down like water in never
ending streams.” So they fought against slavery and for the rights of women,
condemned capital punishment and sought prison reform, demanded humane
care of the insane, justice for Native Americans, and a fair shake for workers
then under the oppressive heal of unapologetic capital. What became known as
the Social Gospel flowed naturally out of their Universalist vision.

American Universalism remained essentially a Christian sect with an abnormally
sunny disposition. Then the wide world came knocking at its provincial doors
and when those doors were thrown open something entirely new was made
possible.

In 1893 the World Parliament of Religion was held in Chicago in conjunction with
the Columbian Exposition. For the first time Americans could hear directly from
the great religions of Asia—Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism,
Jainism, Zorastorism—as well as from the practitioners of local native cults the
world over and a variety of other Christians, Jews, and Muslims. It was a
stunning development. Some Universalists recognized a certain kinship in the
practical teachings of all religions and observed how each functioned in the
context of its traditional culture. Perhaps, they began to surmise, Jesus Christ
was no an essential agent after all, just one of many messengers of God’s
greater truth. And if all humanity was indeed reconciled to God upon death, the
forms of worship practiced on Earth were not critical.

By the early Twentieth Century Clarence Skinner and others were re-inventing
Universalism in a post Christian context. They wanted it to become a truly
universal religion capable of embracing and understanding the breadth of
religious express over the wide world. They emphasized the essential kinship of
all humanity, expressing a universal love that defied the deadly divisions of
nationalism, creed and class which were then turning the new century into the
most blood soaked in history. They joined with emerging Humanists in placing
the fate of the species in the hands of its members, who had the ultimate power
to transform the world.

As a church and religious body, Universalism ebbed and withered. By the time of
its merger with the Unitarians in 1961 it was a feeble shell of its former self. But
though the body was weak, the essential idea was strong. Many thought
Universalism would be swamped by larger and better organized Unitarianism and
its oh-so-rational and cerebral brand of religion. But almost unnoticed
Universalism became the flame in the UU Chalice, the burning light of hope.

Today when our movement welcomes and cherishes the voices of a thousand
temples, we are Universalist. When the cries of the wounded and oppressed can
not be ignored, we are Universalist. When we stand before the mob and declare
the essential worth and dignity of every person, including gays and lesbians
yearning to build families, we are Universalist. When in the face of despair, we
refuse to cede hope, we are Universalist. When we search for language to
express our longing for union with the Greater, we are Universalist.

Universalism is Faith and Hope—the Hope that makes the soul smile.

Partrick Murfin can be e-mailed at: pmurfin@sbcglobal.net

Magic, Deeds, and Universalism
by Ken R. Vincent

When I was a freshman at Baylor University, I took a required religion class from
Prof. Kyle Yates. Professor Yates was one of the scholars who worked on the
Revised Standard Version of the Old Testament (a.k.a. the Hebrew Bible).
When we got to the Persian period of Hebrew history, he began to talk about
Zoroaster, the prophet of the Magi. Inspired by his lectures, I went to the library
and read the hymns of Zoroaster and thought to myself, “Wow! God talked to
someone who wasn’t Jewish!” This started my life-long quest for the generic
God in the world’s religions.

For many years, I’ve been active in interfaith work, and my friends and
colleagues here in Houston form a tapestry of the world’s religions. I have
learned from them. Now that I’m retired, I’m a little old man who lives on the
fourth floor of the Rice University Library, still steeped in the world’s religions.

Today, I will be your guide to the Afterlife. You may have been hoping for
Beatrice and Dante, but the worship committee wasn’t quite able to conjure them
up. I’m going to give you a three-layer view of how people --- both ancient and
modern --- have viewed Afterlife. This is what we in psychology call a
“developmental” view of religion because it reflects the way both individuals and
societies normally mature.

The most rudimentary level of religious development is MAGIC, which includes
bribery or other manipulation of the gods in order to guarantee a positive
outcome for your Afterlife. In the middle layer, Afterlife is dependent on your
DEEDS during your life on Earth, and the history of religious art illustrates the
development of this idea across time and cultures. (Interestingly, MAGIC has
often been practiced in conjunction with GOOD DEEDS.) The top layer of
development is UNIVERSALISM, the concept that God is too good to condemn
anyone to Eternal Hell, and that all humans will go to Heaven, either immediately
or eventually.

One important thing to know about the study of comparative religion is that it is a
wide-open field with many scholars from various disciplines participating, such
as Joseph Campbell (literature), Mircea Eliade (history), Paul Brunton
(philosophy), Karl Jung (psychiatry), and Sir James Frazier (anthropology).
Today, we’ll touch on the Afterlife from the perspectives of religion, history,
psychology, sociology, and art.

Most people in the world, regardless of their religion, believe that judgment for
the Afterlife is determined by one’s deeds in this life. Simply stated, if your good
deeds outweigh your bad deeds, you go to Heaven. But if your bad deeds
outweigh your good deeds, you go to Hell.

This is the story of humanity. My point is that human beings across time and
culture share one story, although I must tell you that in the East, after an
intermediate stage of Heaven or Hell, you have a “sequel” --- called
“reincarnation”. In other words, in the East, your deeds affect not only your
intermediate destination of Heaven or Hell, but also determine the condition of
your next life.

The oldest judgment scene we have in art is a depiction of the EGYPTIAN Book
of the Dead which has been seen in tomb art as early as about 3,000 BCE.
After the deceased goes into the darkness (which is the body of Nut), he or she
comes forth into the light, into the Great Hall of Truth. Osiris is the King of the
Afterlife, and Isis is his queen. For over 3,500 years, Osiris was known as the
“Resurrection and the Life”. Your deeds in life were judged by weighing your
heart against a feather, and woe to those whose heart is heavy with sin!

Next we have judgment in ZOROASTRIANISM, the religion of the Magi. Here,
three angels preside over judgment --- Mithra, Sarosha, and Rashnu.   Rashnu
holds the scales, Sarosha is the judge, and Mithra listens to appeals. Your
good deeds are weighed against your bad deeds, and then you pass over a
bridge. If your good deeds are heavier, the bridge is wide open to you, and you
pass over easily. If your evil deeds outweigh your good ones, the bridge
becomes narrow, and you fall into Hell. This razor-sharp bridge imagery lives on
in Shi’ite Islam.

In the HEBREW Bible, in the Book of Daniel (12:1-3), it is the Archangel Michael
who presides over the resurrection. Judaism for the most part forbids artwork,
but in Christianity, Michael takes his place right below Jesus in the judgment of
the dead. It is Michael who holds the scales in which your deeds are weighed.
This same scene is repeated in ISLAM, but here the Archangel holding the
scales is Gabriel.

Next we move from West to East. Most Westerners think that reincarnation is
instantaneous, but this is not generally so. For the overwhelming majority of
HINDUS and BUDDHISTS, there is an intermediate state between death and re-
birth. This intermediate state is presided over by Yama or Yamaraj. In HINDU
mythology, Yama was the first king and king of the dead. His assistants weigh
your good deeds and, depending on the outcome, you go to Heaven or Hell for
three generations. In BUDDHISM, as in its parent religion, Yama judges the
dead. Yama is known as “Yama” in Tibet, Nepal, Southeast Asia and Western
China. In Eastern China, Korea, and Japan, his name changes, but he is always
the same fair judge of the dead. Where he is the king of Heaven in Hinduism,
he presides over Hell in Buddhism. In the Tibetan Book of the Dead, a twelfth-
century Buddhist work, the intermediate state lasts for 49 days before you are
re-born.

(Thai folk art courtesy of Todd Murphy)

Now let’s step back to analyze the way MAGIC is used to influence Afterlife.
Obviously, we are aware of cultures in both the Eastern and Western
hemispheres that have used human or animal sacrifice to bribe the gods to do
or not do something the petitioner asks. However, this practice has been
abandoned by the world’s major religions and can be found in only indigenous
religions today. On the other hand, belief in magical powers is still very much a
part of our modern culture when it comes to “stacking the deck” in favor of a
Heavenly Afterlife.

In most religion, there is a tension between the moral justice of judgment
according to deeds and magic to insure a positive verdict. The keys to effective
magic are that, 1) you have to be “in the club”, and 2) you or your priest must
know the “secret words”.

In ancient Egypt, the scales of judgment are older than the pyramids, but they
co-exist with the magic text of the Egyptian Book of the Dead that enables the
deceased to overcome past sins. Countering this are not only the scales, but
the instruction for Merikare (2200 BCE) which reinforces the idea of judgment
according to deeds.

Additionally, there is the story of Si-Osiris (son of Osiris) and his father, Setne
Khaemwise (fourth son of Ramesses II). Si-Osiris is a seer. He and his father
watch a funeral procession in which a rich man was being carried with his
elaborate belongings to a princely tomb. Shortly after this, they observed the
funeral of a poor man wrapped only in a cloth who was being taken for burial in
the desert sand. The Egyptian prince remarks to his son that he hopes for a
good funeral in preparation for a glorious Afterlife, but his seer son remarks that
all things are not as they appear to be. He puts his father into a trance, and the
two are transported to the land of the dead where the evil rich man is suffering a
hellish fate and the righteous poor man is being comforted by Osiris, Isis, and
the Egyptian gods, and is living afterlife in regal splendor.

This shows the development of morality and justice in the Egyptian religion, and
some Christian scholars think this is the origin of the story of the rich man and
Lazarus in the Gospel of Luke (Lk 16:19-31).   The main point here is to
underscore the great antiquity of the belief that salvation is by works.

In ancient Greece, the Afterlife in very early times was seen as a very gloomy
place where everyone went. But by the time of Plato, the idea of judgment
according to deeds had developed. In Plato’s Republic, the story is told about
Er, the world’s oldest recorded near-death experiencer, who revives on his
funeral pyre and tells of a judgment at death by three judges. The good ascend
to Paradise, and the evil descend to Hell. But after a period of time, Plato also
mentions the possibility of reincarnation. Pythagoras also was an advocate of
reincarnation. In the mysteries that were popular in the later Greek and Roman
periods, we are given a chance for an “up-grade” in the Afterlife via the magical
rites of the mysteries of Orpheus, Dionysus, Demeter and Persephone, Mithra,
Isis and Osiris, etc. According to the mysteries of Orpheus, one of the things
you were to say was, “I am a child of Earth and the starry Heaven, but Heaven is
my home”. Here again, you have to be in the club, and you have to know the
secret words.

In ancient Judaism, the sins of the Jewish people were magically put into a goat
(scapegoat) on the Day of Atonement. Here again, you have to be “in the club”
and you (or the priest) have to know the secret words (Lev. 16:21-22). Modern
Jews no longer do this, knowing that God hears our prayers.

Judaism in its early years presented a shadowy Afterlife called Sheol which was
very similar to the Hades of early Greece. Jewish writing from 400 – 100 BCE
which is found in the Catholic, Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Coptic Christian
Bibles (which Protestants refer to as the Apocrypha) have some references to a
Heaven or Hell state prior to the last judgment (II Esdras 7:75-101).   The
Apocryphal books also abound with angels who are named (e.g. Raphael in the
Book of Tobit). The Jewish Pseudepigrapha (200 BCE – 70 CE) have Heaven
and Hell (especially Enoch I, II, and III). These books of Enoch are not in the
Hebrew Bible, and only 1st Enoch made it into the Coptic Christian Bible. The
books were, however used by the Essenes and figure into the Judaism prior to
the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. The Rule of Community (also known as
the Manual of Discipline) and the War of the Sons of Light and the Sons of
Darkness in the Dead Sea Scrolls of the Essenes are especially rich in imagery
of Heaven and Hell. After 70 CE, Rabbinic Judaism developed, and the resulting
Hebrew Bible has references to Sheol, the Messianic Time and to the Last
Judgment in the Book of Daniel.

In Christianity, this magic level is practiced by those who say that “belief in
Jesus” assures an exclusive ticket to Heaven. You have to be “in the club” (that
is, be a Christian), and you have to know the secret words, which in
Fundamentalist Christianity are found in John 3:16 or John 14:6. While Liberal
Christians and many moderate Christians see Jesus as the “suffering servant”
of Isaiah who died to bring us the word, Fundamentalist Christians delight in
being “saved”. That belief alone will save you is an idea as old as the followers
of the Hindu gods Shiva and Lord Krishna. Its positive side is the devotional
path in which the followers identify with and emulate the god. In Christianity, we
see this positive emulation in those kind and loving souls who model their lives
on Jesus. One is reminded of the words of the beautiful old Gospel hymn, “In
the Garden”: “He walks with me, and He talks with me, and He tells me I am His
own”. In Hinduism, the devotional path is expressed in the prayer, “Krishna,
Krishna, Hare, Hare”, in other words, “Krishna, Krishna, Redeemer, Redeemer”.

Magic in Hinduism is best illustrated by the idea that if you die with the name of
Vishnu or one of his incarnations, such as Rama or Krishna, on your lips all of
your sins are taken away and you go straight to Nirvana (heaven). There are
times when we all need a little magic. The last words of Gandhi were Rama,
Rama.

In Buddhism, magic is represented in the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Being “in
the club” (that is, being Buddhist) and having your relative or a monk read the
secret words of the Book of the Dead by your corpse. This will enable you to
become aware in the Afterlife and chose the things which will assure you a good
re-birth. Also in Pure Land Buddhism by invoking the name of the Buddha at
death, you will be transported to a Pure Land of Bliss in the West by Amitabha
(the Buddha of Infinite Light), who is also known as O-Mi-To (China) and Amida
(Japan)(Flotz, 2004, p. 73; Nigosian, 2000, p. 89 ). There you can continue the
process of liberation under blissful conditions. Another “savior” Bodhisattva is Ti-
tsang and anyone who chants his name will have their sins wiped away (Teiser,
1988, p. 187).

Having looked at the developmental level below judgment by deeds, let us look
at the level above it --- UNIVERSALISM. The concept of Universalism as an idea
is as old as Zoroaster. Around 1600 – 1200 BCE (like Moses, the exact date of
his life is not know), Zoroaster preached these basic concepts; see if they sound
familiar: “God - Satan, Good - Evil, Light - Darkness, Angels - Demons, Death -
Judgment, Heaven - Hell, and at the end of time, Resurrection of the Body and
Life Everlasting”. He also preached that, “There is a long period of punishment
for the wicked and reward for the pious, but thereafter, eternal joy shall reign
forever” (Yasna 30.11). In other words, Hell is for rehabilitation, not for torture.

This idea may be as old as Zoroaster, but it is as new as modern-day near-
death experiencers, many of whom died into Hell but found themselves rescued
when they called out to God or (in the West) called out to God or Jesus.

In Judaism, Universalism is reflected in the Messianic Time described primarily in
the Book of Isaiah (Is 2:2 & 4, 12:1-2, 25:6-8, 39:3, 5, 66:18 & 23, Jer 31:31-
34). The Rabbis of the Midrash say that one can stay in Hell only one year.

In Christianity, the idea of Universalism is a very old and enduring theological
position. Its major proponent in early Christianity was Origen (185 – 254 CE). In
the nineteenth century, the Universalist Church was for a time the fifth or sixth
largest denomination in the United States. In the twenty-first century,
Universalism is advocated by Christians from diverse backgrounds, including
some post-Vatican II Catholics and Primitive Baptists. The Biblical references
which support Universal Salvation are second in number only to Good Works as
the way to Salvation.

Other religions have Universalist hopes too. Although not in the Koran, it is
written in the Hadith (the oral history of Mohammad) that, “Surely a day will come
over Hell when there shall not be a human soul in it”. The Bahai religion sees a
continuous progression of souls toward perfection after death. In the East,
Hinduism and its children --- Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism --- all allow for the
potential for all to be saved. When Pam and I attended the Jade Buddha
Temple a few years ago, they were singing, “We are not discouraged by the
time it takes to save all the humans and all of the animals”.

When one looks at the plight of humanity through the eyes of a parent, it is easy
to see that Universalism makes sense. God is infinitely nicer than the best
human beings you know. If you are a panentheist like me, you know that God is
in all of us, and we are all in God. God knows the assets and limitations of each
human soul. Unlike the State Board of Pardons and Parole, God knows how to
rehabilitate people.

Once upon a time before time mattered, people worshiped the Great Spirit, saw
every living thing as possessing a spirit, and saw Afterlife as a Happy Hunting
Ground. That sounds Universalist to me. So maybe we have come full circle.
To quote Jesus in the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, “Have you discovered
the beginning, then, so that you are seeking the end? For where the beginning
is, the end will be.”

As a Universalist Christian, I look forward to the time when, as Jesus taught, God
will save the Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son.

This article, "Magic, Deeds, and Universalism", is an appendix in Dr. Vincent 's
latest book : The GOLDEN THREAD, GOD'S PROMISE OF UNIVERSAL
SALVATION.

Interfaith