Nader Saiedi's "Logos and Civilization"

[Kent Johnson]

I have just ordered the book Nader Saiedi's "Logos and Civilization"
because someone on another list mentioned it. I read a review that
interestingly said Saiedi went through Baha'i peer review but not academic
peer review. He is, apparently, thinking outside the box built by Greek
Philosophy to Islam to Baha'i, and taking Baha'u'llah at His word, using
original sources.

I am thinking, if that is the case, there must be a story there about how
the book was written.

Has anyone here read it yet?

--Kent

[Susan Maneck]

I read a review that
> interestingly said Saiedi went through Baha'i peer review but not academic
> peer review.

Dear Kent,

The book had some kind of review but I'm not sure it could be called
Baha'i review or academic review. It was the Association of Baha'i
Studies which handled the review which is a bit unusual given the fact
the book was published in the United States not Canada and never went
through the Baha'i review process there.

He is, apparently, thinking outside the box built by Greek
> Philosophy to Islam to Baha'i, and taking Baha'u'llah at His word, using
> original sources.

I'm not sure I would describe his method that way. Keep in mind that
whenever someone says they are just taking scripture at its word, they
are taking their own personal interpretation of scripture. What Nader
appears to be critical of is the method utilized by academics who
attempt to understand texts, including scripture, within the context
in which they were written. What Nader is concerned to do is
demonstrate how Baha'u'llah's thought goes so much beyond the mystical
and philosophical premises of His time. In some ways, that is a lofty
ideal but I find he does this in such a way that does not do justice
to the Muslim thinkers he is comparing Baha'u'llah to. This is
especially the case in dealing with Sufism. I found his representation
of Sufi mysticism to be almost a caricature of the Sufi thought I have
studied. A more sympathetic treatment of Sufism would have found more
commonalities than differences in Baha'u'llah's Writings.

> I am thinking, if that is the case, there must be a story there about how
> the book was written.

I think it was largely written in response to the way Baha'u'llah was
being represented on Talisman. Nader spends a lot of time criticizing
Juan Cole and Anthony Lee's views. Most other academic research in
this area was either ignored or dismissed as 'reductionist.'

And yes, I obviously read the book. Right now he is coming out with
another book on the Bab's Writings.

warmest, Susan