Can't a manifestation make restitution for the sins of man if he so wishes?
Yes, but then we are talking about the Baha'i Faith not Islam. While the concept of Manifestation exists in Shi'ite Islam, most Sunnis would not accept it. However, in Shi'ite Islam the martyrdom of the Imam Husayn has that redemptive power.
If I can be forgiven for going into more depth about the Baha'i concept of atonement and sacrifice, there are passages in the Baha'i Writings that appear to accept the notion of atonement and sacrifices for sin. For instance:
"That which thou hast heard concerning Abraham, the Friend of the All-Merciful, is the truth, and no doubt is there about it. The Voice of God commanded Him to offer up Ishmael as a sacrifice, so that His steadfastness in the Faith of God and His detachment from all else but Him may be demonstrated unto men. The purpose of God, moreover, was to sacrifice him as a ransom for the sins and iniquities of all the peoples of the earth. This same honor, Jesus, the Son of Mary, besought the one true God, exalted be His name and glory, to confer upon Him. For the same reason was Husayn offered up as a sacrifice by
Muhammad, the Apostle of God.
No man can ever claim to have comprehended the nature of the hidden andmanifold grace of God; none can fathom His all-embracing mercy. Such hath been the perversity of men and their transgressions, so grievous have been the trials that have afflicted the Prophets of God and their chosen ones, that all mankind deserveth to be tormented and to perish. God's hidden and most loving providence, however, hath, through both visible and invisible agencies, protected and will continue to protect it from the penalty of its wickedness. Ponder this in thine heart, that the truth may be revealed unto thee, and be thou steadfast in His path." Gleanings 75-76.
Likewise He speaks of Himself:
"Fix your gaze upon Him Who is the Temple of God amongst men. He, in truth, hath offered up His life as a ransom for the redemption of the world. He, verily, is the All-Bountiful, the Gracious, the Most High.If any differences arise amongst you, behold Me standing before your face, and overlook the faults of one another for My name's sake and as a token of your love for My manifest and resplendent Cause." Gleanings, 314.
So the Writings do speak of ransom but they also speak of repentance as being the sole prerequisite of forgiveness. We even have references to the kind of 'death-bed' conversions that some people make fun of Christianity for:
"He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for none knoweth what his own end shall be. How often hath a sinner, at the hour of death, attained to the essence of faith, and, quaffing the immortal draught, hath taken his flight unto the celestial Concourse. And how often hath a devout believer, at the hour of his soul's ascension, been so changed as to
fall into the nethermost fire." KI 194-95
He likewise says; "Should anyone be afflicted by a sin, it behoveth him to repent thereof and return unto his Lord. He, verily, granteth forgiveness unto whomsoever He willeth, and none may question that which it pleaseth Him to ordain."
Repentance doesn't mean simply feeling sorry for one sins, it means turning towards God. One story that is told about Muslim mystic Rabi'a is that one day she came upon Hasan al-Basra (an earlier Muslim mystic) who was weeping and wailing over his sins, saying what a wretched man he was. Rabi'a said, "Yes, you are. Because had you truly turned towards God you would be looking at Him and not noticing your own sins."
If repentance is the only prerequisite for forgiveness why then does Baha'u'llah speak of 'ransoms'? Perhaps it is because only these kinds of sacrifices which make true repentance, true focusing on God out of love possible. This is what another medieval Christian theologian, Peter of Abelard argued. He held that the Crucifixion was necessary to forgive men's sin not because it was required on God's part but because only such a dramatic expression of God's love would enable people to repent and cause them to turn towards Him.
It strikes me that this form of atonement, unlike Anselm's formulation
is relational. But it is also something which could not be done once and never again as in Christianity. If it is indeed grounded in God's determination to reach us, instead of satisfying some abstract requirements of the Divine Essence, then it would happen again and again as Baha'u'llah seems to affirm.
I think there is a great danger in seeing God as static, understandable by human categories like justice and mercy as Anselm liked to do. The God of Abraham was a Living God, a Person and like all persons (and unlike pure essences) He had a Will, one like all wills was subject to change on occasion. It seems to me this attempt to make God fit our mental conceptions, to put Him
into a predictable box is in the end, a form of idolatry. The Living God is not so predictable. He fulfills prophecies in ways we don't expect, and at times appears to fulfill them not at all.
Now that is a very long answer to your very short question.
