« العودة إلى العرض المفرد
مقارنة:
الإنجليزية ⇄
الإنجليزية
لم يُعثر على ترجمات أو نصوص موازية لهذه الوثيقة.
Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Steven Phelps, The Harmony of Science and Religion, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
THE HARMONY OF SCIENCE
AND RELIGION
Steven Phelps
In this chapter:
1 Statement of the principle
2 Antecedent teachings
a Ineffability, metaphor, and epistemic humility
b The intelligibility of the universe and the elevation of rational thought
c Emanation and degrees of being; necessary relationships
d The relativity of religious truth
The principle of the unity of science and religion is one of the foundational teachings of the
Bahá’í Faith (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections no. 71). It was first articulated by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá during
His travels in Europe and North America between 1911 and 1913, where He proclaimed to
audiences in the cultural and economic capitals of the West that both science and religion are
vital, necessary, and indeed spiritual endeavours in humanity’s collective evolution towards the
realization of its highest potential.
To a gathering in Paris in 1911 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá said: ‘We may think of science as one wing
and religion as the other; a bird needs two wings for flight, one alone would be useless’ (Paris
130–131). To an audience in London that same year, He said:
Religion and Science are intertwined with each other and cannot be separated. These are
the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion
which does not concern itself with Science is mere tradition, and that is not the essential.
(London 28–29)
And at a meeting in New York in 1912, He said: ‘The fundamental principles of the Prophets
are scientific, but the forms and imitations which have appeared [from religion] are opposed to
science. If religion does not agree with science, it is superstition and ignorance’ (Promulgation
128). Numerous similar statements were made in the course of His Western travels and in letters
written from this time.
While not explicitly stated in the writings of the Báb or Bahá’u’lláh, the principle of the har-
mony of science and religion is a direct consequence of their teachings on the nature of reality:
211 DOI: 10.4324/9780429027772-20
Steven Phelps
‘Bahá’u’lláh has . . . reconciled science with religion by revealing the pure teachings of the divine
reality’ (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 231). By Bahá’u’lláh’s own declaration, His teachings are at
their heart a re-expression of timeless truths—‘This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in
the past, eternal in the future’ (Kitáb-i-Aqdas para. 182)—and many can be readily identified
as perennial themes in the spiritual and philosophical traditions of East and West. However, it
is in the context of the Bahá’í teachings and through their view of humanity’s progressive and
ever-evolving encounter with the divine that these teachings are understood as grounding a
worldview in which science is seen as essentially in harmony with religion.
Ineffability, metaphor, and epistemic humility
At the heart of Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings is the principle of the ineffability of ultimate Reality and
the inability of human minds to conceive it or of human language to express it:
All that the sages and mystics have said or written have never exceeded, nor can they
ever hope to exceed, the limitations to which man’s finite mind hath been strictly sub-
jected. To whatever heights the mind of the most exalted of men may soar, however
great the depths which the detached and understanding heart can penetrate, such mind
and heart can never transcend that which is the creature of their own conceptions and
the product of their own thoughts.
(Gleanings no. 148)
For Bahá’u’lláh, epistemic humility is thus identified with the highest degree of human attainment:
Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that
Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts
as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery
of the Living God, the Daystar of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This
confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every
mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding, and marketh the culmina-
tion of man’s development.
(Gleanings no. 83)
As a consequence of the inherent limitations of thought and language, the deepest descriptions
of reality, as narrated, for example, in the world’s sacred books and spiritual traditions, must be
couched in the language of metaphor. As told by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in a statement itself couched in
metaphor:
[I]t is from the luminous cup of metaphors and the ethereal chalice of similes that they
that are sore athirst in the vale of bewilderment are given to quaff the life-giving wine
of inner truth and knowledge . . . that the birds of human minds and understandings
may soar beyond the nests of perplexity and bewilderment.
( Makátíb 2: 8, provisional translation)
While certain materialistic philosophers are chided for their lack of epistemic humility and for
their ontological flattening of the world—on several occasions ‘Abdu’l-Bahá playfully compares
them to ‘cows’ in their shared ignorance of higher realities (Promulgation nos. 90, 101, 111)—the
harshest condemnation is reserved for those religious adherents who, mistaking the metaphorical
The harmony of science and religion
language of their sacred scriptures for literal truths and adhering to miraculous accounts whose
true meaning is to be found in the symbolic, have become the cause of much of the conflict in
the world, whether between different faith communities or between science and religion:
All religions of the present day have fallen into superstitious practices, out of harmony
alike with the true principles of the teaching they represent and with the scientific
discoveries of the time. Many religious leaders have grown to think that the impor-
tance of religion lies mainly in the adherence to a collection of certain dogmas and
the practice of rites and ceremonies! Those whose souls they profess to cure are taught
to believe likewise, and these cling tenaciously to the outward forms, confusing them
with the inward truth. Now, these forms and rituals differ in the various churches and
amongst the different sects, and even contradict one another; giving rise to discord,
hatred, and disunion. The outcome of all this dissension is the belief of many cultured
men that religion and science are contradictory terms, that religion needs no powers
of reflection, and should in no wise be regulated by science, but must of necessity be
opposed, the one to the other. The unfortunate effect of this is that science has drifted
apart from religion, and religion has become a mere blind and more or less apathetic
following of the precepts of certain religious teachers, who insist on their own favorite
dogmas being accepted even when they are contrary to science. This is foolishness, for
it is quite evident that science is the light, and, being so, religion truly so-called does
not oppose knowledge. We are familiar with the phrases ‘Light and Darkness,’ ‘Reli-
gion and Science.’ But the religion which does not walk hand in hand with science is
itself in the darkness of superstition and ignorance. Much of the discord and disunion
of the world is created by these man-made oppositions and contradictions.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris no. 44)
As to the contents of these metaphors themselves, two related metaphors explaining the origins
of the universe, both of ancient origin (characteristically Neoplatonist but with even earlier
roots) and reaffirmed in the Bahá’í teachings, provide the theological foundation of the Bahá’í
view of science in harmony with religion, although, as with other metaphors of the sacred, they
can be mistakenly interpreted along literal lines.
The intelligibility of the universe and the elevation of rational thought
The first of these metaphors is that the universe is the creation of a ‘mind’ or ordering principle,
called variously in the Bahá’í Writings the ‘Primal Will’ (mashíyyat-i-ulá), ‘First Intellect’ (al-
‘aql-i-awwal), and the ‘word of God’ (kalimátu’lláh, the logos of the ancient Greeks and the
Gospel of John) (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 53). It is typically anthropomor-
phized as the action of a divine Being Who has a specific plan and loving intention for creation.
As Bahá’u’lláh stated, assuming the voice of the Divine: ‘I loved thy creation, hence I created
Thee. Wherefore, do thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit
of life’ (Arabic Hidden Words no. 4).
The work of ‘mind’ leaves its imprint within all things, from the form and function of living
creatures to the structure of physical law itself. As such, it transcends the usual interpretation
of mind as a faculty strictly connected with the human brain. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá employed such an
expansive definition of mind when He stated, ‘All that we see around us is the work of mind. It
is mind in the herb and in the mineral that acts on the human body, and changes its condition’
(London 95).
Steven Phelps
The pervasiveness of mind within all things explains why the universe is intelligible and why
it follows predictable and orderly laws which improbably yield up their secrets to rational inves-
tigation. As ‘Abdu’l-Bahá stated, ‘nature is subject to a sound organization, to inviolable laws,
to a perfect order, and to a consummate design, from which it never departs’ (Some Answered
Questions no. 1). The scientist who is able to deduce the mathematical form of these laws is thus
accorded the highest praise:
The greatest attainment in the world of humanity has ever been scientific in nature.
It is the discovery of the realities of things. . . . The highest praise is due to men who
devote their energies to science, and the noblest center is a center wherein the sciences
and arts are taught and studied. . . . Verily, mind is the supreme gift of God. Verily,
intellect is the effulgence of God.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 348–350)
Emanation and degrees of being; essential relationships
The second and related metaphor which deeply informs the Bahá’í concept of the relationship
between science and religion is that the creation of the universe takes place through an eternal
process of ‘emanation’: it is like the rays of the sun, which partake of the attributes of the sun
(light and heat) and are sustained at every moment by its shining, while remaining separate from
it in essence (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 53). And, similar to how the rays of the
sun travel progressively further from their source, the process of emanation takes place in stages
or degrees comprising a descending arc (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 81).
The stages in this ‘arc of descent’ can be observed in the ancient division of being into min-
eral, vegetable, animal, and human kingdoms (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 55).
Through these degrees, which are degrees of gradually awakening consciousness, an infinite
diversity of expressions is produced, through which the purpose of creation in manifesting the
divine names and attributes is best fulfilled (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 32).
The pattern of the original source is repeated within each stage of the emanative arc, whether
on the arc of descent or the arc of ascent, introducing a principle of correspondence between
different degrees of being:
Know thou that whatsoever can be found in this mortal world, this realm of limi-
tation—every name and description, every form and attribute that can be seen or
heard—hath, in each world of the worlds of God, manifestations and appearances
corresponding to and befitting that world, and appearing with another name, another
description, another form and another attribute.
(Bahá’u’lláh, Má’idiy-i-Ásamání 7: 120, provisional translation)
This relationship of correspondence holds true between the degrees of being often called the
‘material’ and the ‘spiritual’: ‘The spiritual world is like unto the phenomenal world. They are
the exact counterpart of each other. Whatever objects appear in this world of existence are the
outer pictures of the world of heaven’ (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 10), although, viewing the
emanative arc as a whole, the very division of the world into a physical and a spiritual dimension
is a consequence of our limited human perspective. At any point in the circle of existence, the
‘spiritual’ is simply a term for the degrees which lie ahead:
the truth is that the world of existence is a single world, although its stations are mani-
fold in accordance with the manifold realities of things. For instance, the world of
The harmony of science and religion
mineral, plant, and animal existence is the same world. Despite this, the animal world in
relation to the world of the vegetable is a spiritual reality and another world and abode.
(Abdu’l-Bahá, Amr va Khalq 1: 202, provisional translation)
The relativizing of the categories of the material and the spiritual into matters of perspective,
which is a feature of the holistic viewpoint of emanation, is particularly evident in the identi-
cal definitions given to ‘religion’ and ‘nature’ as comprising the interrelationships that bind all
things together:
[R]eligion consists in the necessary relationships deriving from the realities of things.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 40)
By nature is meant those inherent properties and necessary relations derived from the
realities of things.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Forel 13)
The same principle can also be seen at work in the collapsing by Bahá’u’lláh of the traditionally
distinct categories of natural action and divine action:
Nature is God’s Will and is its expression in and through the contingent world. It is a
dispensation of Providence ordained by the Ordainer, the All-Wise. Were anyone to
affirm that it is the Will of God as manifested in the world of being, no one should
question this assertion.
(Tablets 142)
The relativity of religious truth
While the consequences of the rich metaphors of ‘mind’, ‘emanation’, and related ideas for the
conception of the essential unity of science and religion, as cast through the lens of the Bahá’í
teachings, are far-reaching, the Bahá’í Writings nowhere propose that differing conceptions
of the divine and its relationship with the world can somehow be reduced to a single correct
dogmatic formulation. They rather acknowledge that diversity of viewpoint, even in matters of
ultimate theological import, is a feature of the human condition, for religious truth is relative—
in time, between one era of human civilization and the next, but also between different people
at the same point in time:
[S]ince all do not possess the same degree of spiritual understanding, certain statements
will inevitably be made, and there shall arise, as a consequence, as many differing
opinions as there are human minds and as many divergent beliefs as there are created
things. This is certain and settled, and can in no wise be averted. . . . Our aim is that
thou shouldst urge all the believers to show forth kindness and mercy and to overlook
certain shortcomings among them, that differences may be dispelled; true harmony be
established; and the censure and reproach, the hatred and dissension, seen among the
peoples of former times may not arise anew.
(Bahá’u’lláh, Call 3.6–7)
Therefore, a diversity of views about science and religion can be expected to persist into the
future, from those who, informed by metaphysical dualism, present science and religion as
Steven Phelps
essentially separate domains of knowledge to those who pursue more non-dualistic themes that
stress the unity that lies behind the world of ever-changing appearances. These views are able
to coexist within the community through a shared conviction that a greater harmony underlies
its differences, through mutual love and respect, and through a consultative framework that
ensures that action is taken in unity even when differences persist. The ultimate test of all such
theories, for Bahá’ís, is whether they function as remedies: whether they serve the cause of
actuating human potential and propelling forward an ever-advancing civilization consistently
with established facts.
Religion and divine teachings are like unto a remedy. A remedy must produce the
condition of health. If it occasions sickness, it is wiser and better to have no remedy
whatever. This is the significance of the statement that if religion becomes the cause
of warfare and bloodshed, irreligion and the absence of religion are preferable among
mankind.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 298)
References and further reading
‘Abdu’l-Bahá. (1330AH/1912) Makátíb-i-‘Abdu’l-Bahá, vol. 2, Cairo: Matba‘at Kurdistan al-‘Ilmíyyah,
https://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/ab/.
———. (1978) Auguste Forel and the Bahá’í Faith, Oxford: George Ronald, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/tablet-august-forel/.
———. (1982) The Promulgation of Universal Peace, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.org/
library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/promulgation-universal-peace/.
———. (1985) Amr va Khalq, vol. 1, Hofheim: Bahá’í-Verlag, https://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/c/AK1/.
———. (1987) ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London, Oxford: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, https://reference.bahai.org/
en/t/ab/ABL/.
———. (1995) Paris Talks, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/paris-talks/.
———. (2009) Some Answered Questions, rev. trans., Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.
org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/some-answered-questions/.
Bahá’u’lláh. (1935) Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.
bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/gleanings-writings-bahaullah/.
———. (129BE/1973) Má’idiy-i-Ásmáni, vol. 7, Iran: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, https://reference.bahai.
org/fa/t/b/.
———. (1978) Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust,
www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/tablets-bahaullah/.
———. (2018) The Call of the Divine Beloved, Haifa: Bahá’í World Centre, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/bahaullah/call-divine-beloved/.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
THE HARMONY OF SCIENCE
AND RELIGION
Steven Phelps
In this chapter:
1 Statement of the principle
2 Antecedent teachings
a Ineffability, metaphor, and epistemic humility
b The intelligibility of the universe and the elevation of rational thought
c Emanation and degrees of being; necessary relationships
d The relativity of religious truth
The principle of the unity of science and religion is one of the foundational teachings of the
Bahá’í Faith (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections no. 71). It was first articulated by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá during
His travels in Europe and North America between 1911 and 1913, where He proclaimed to
audiences in the cultural and economic capitals of the West that both science and religion are
vital, necessary, and indeed spiritual endeavours in humanity’s collective evolution towards the
realization of its highest potential.
To a gathering in Paris in 1911 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá said: ‘We may think of science as one wing
and religion as the other; a bird needs two wings for flight, one alone would be useless’ (Paris
130–131). To an audience in London that same year, He said:
Religion and Science are intertwined with each other and cannot be separated. These are
the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion
which does not concern itself with Science is mere tradition, and that is not the essential.
(London 28–29)
And at a meeting in New York in 1912, He said: ‘The fundamental principles of the Prophets
are scientific, but the forms and imitations which have appeared [from religion] are opposed to
science. If religion does not agree with science, it is superstition and ignorance’ (Promulgation
128). Numerous similar statements were made in the course of His Western travels and in letters
written from this time.
While not explicitly stated in the writings of the Báb or Bahá’u’lláh, the principle of the har-
mony of science and religion is a direct consequence of their teachings on the nature of reality:
211 DOI: 10.4324/9780429027772-20
Steven Phelps
‘Bahá’u’lláh has . . . reconciled science with religion by revealing the pure teachings of the divine
reality’ (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 231). By Bahá’u’lláh’s own declaration, His teachings are at
their heart a re-expression of timeless truths—‘This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in
the past, eternal in the future’ (Kitáb-i-Aqdas para. 182)—and many can be readily identified
as perennial themes in the spiritual and philosophical traditions of East and West. However, it
is in the context of the Bahá’í teachings and through their view of humanity’s progressive and
ever-evolving encounter with the divine that these teachings are understood as grounding a
worldview in which science is seen as essentially in harmony with religion.
Ineffability, metaphor, and epistemic humility
At the heart of Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings is the principle of the ineffability of ultimate Reality and
the inability of human minds to conceive it or of human language to express it:
All that the sages and mystics have said or written have never exceeded, nor can they
ever hope to exceed, the limitations to which man’s finite mind hath been strictly sub-
jected. To whatever heights the mind of the most exalted of men may soar, however
great the depths which the detached and understanding heart can penetrate, such mind
and heart can never transcend that which is the creature of their own conceptions and
the product of their own thoughts.
(Gleanings no. 148)
For Bahá’u’lláh, epistemic humility is thus identified with the highest degree of human attainment:
Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that
Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts
as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery
of the Living God, the Daystar of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This
confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every
mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding, and marketh the culmina-
tion of man’s development.
(Gleanings no. 83)
As a consequence of the inherent limitations of thought and language, the deepest descriptions
of reality, as narrated, for example, in the world’s sacred books and spiritual traditions, must be
couched in the language of metaphor. As told by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in a statement itself couched in
metaphor:
[I]t is from the luminous cup of metaphors and the ethereal chalice of similes that they
that are sore athirst in the vale of bewilderment are given to quaff the life-giving wine
of inner truth and knowledge . . . that the birds of human minds and understandings
may soar beyond the nests of perplexity and bewilderment.
( Makátíb 2: 8, provisional translation)
While certain materialistic philosophers are chided for their lack of epistemic humility and for
their ontological flattening of the world—on several occasions ‘Abdu’l-Bahá playfully compares
them to ‘cows’ in their shared ignorance of higher realities (Promulgation nos. 90, 101, 111)—the
harshest condemnation is reserved for those religious adherents who, mistaking the metaphorical
The harmony of science and religion
language of their sacred scriptures for literal truths and adhering to miraculous accounts whose
true meaning is to be found in the symbolic, have become the cause of much of the conflict in
the world, whether between different faith communities or between science and religion:
All religions of the present day have fallen into superstitious practices, out of harmony
alike with the true principles of the teaching they represent and with the scientific
discoveries of the time. Many religious leaders have grown to think that the impor-
tance of religion lies mainly in the adherence to a collection of certain dogmas and
the practice of rites and ceremonies! Those whose souls they profess to cure are taught
to believe likewise, and these cling tenaciously to the outward forms, confusing them
with the inward truth. Now, these forms and rituals differ in the various churches and
amongst the different sects, and even contradict one another; giving rise to discord,
hatred, and disunion. The outcome of all this dissension is the belief of many cultured
men that religion and science are contradictory terms, that religion needs no powers
of reflection, and should in no wise be regulated by science, but must of necessity be
opposed, the one to the other. The unfortunate effect of this is that science has drifted
apart from religion, and religion has become a mere blind and more or less apathetic
following of the precepts of certain religious teachers, who insist on their own favorite
dogmas being accepted even when they are contrary to science. This is foolishness, for
it is quite evident that science is the light, and, being so, religion truly so-called does
not oppose knowledge. We are familiar with the phrases ‘Light and Darkness,’ ‘Reli-
gion and Science.’ But the religion which does not walk hand in hand with science is
itself in the darkness of superstition and ignorance. Much of the discord and disunion
of the world is created by these man-made oppositions and contradictions.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris no. 44)
As to the contents of these metaphors themselves, two related metaphors explaining the origins
of the universe, both of ancient origin (characteristically Neoplatonist but with even earlier
roots) and reaffirmed in the Bahá’í teachings, provide the theological foundation of the Bahá’í
view of science in harmony with religion, although, as with other metaphors of the sacred, they
can be mistakenly interpreted along literal lines.
The intelligibility of the universe and the elevation of rational thought
The first of these metaphors is that the universe is the creation of a ‘mind’ or ordering principle,
called variously in the Bahá’í Writings the ‘Primal Will’ (mashíyyat-i-ulá), ‘First Intellect’ (al-
‘aql-i-awwal), and the ‘word of God’ (kalimátu’lláh, the logos of the ancient Greeks and the
Gospel of John) (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 53). It is typically anthropomor-
phized as the action of a divine Being Who has a specific plan and loving intention for creation.
As Bahá’u’lláh stated, assuming the voice of the Divine: ‘I loved thy creation, hence I created
Thee. Wherefore, do thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit
of life’ (Arabic Hidden Words no. 4).
The work of ‘mind’ leaves its imprint within all things, from the form and function of living
creatures to the structure of physical law itself. As such, it transcends the usual interpretation
of mind as a faculty strictly connected with the human brain. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá employed such an
expansive definition of mind when He stated, ‘All that we see around us is the work of mind. It
is mind in the herb and in the mineral that acts on the human body, and changes its condition’
(London 95).
Steven Phelps
The pervasiveness of mind within all things explains why the universe is intelligible and why
it follows predictable and orderly laws which improbably yield up their secrets to rational inves-
tigation. As ‘Abdu’l-Bahá stated, ‘nature is subject to a sound organization, to inviolable laws,
to a perfect order, and to a consummate design, from which it never departs’ (Some Answered
Questions no. 1). The scientist who is able to deduce the mathematical form of these laws is thus
accorded the highest praise:
The greatest attainment in the world of humanity has ever been scientific in nature.
It is the discovery of the realities of things. . . . The highest praise is due to men who
devote their energies to science, and the noblest center is a center wherein the sciences
and arts are taught and studied. . . . Verily, mind is the supreme gift of God. Verily,
intellect is the effulgence of God.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 348–350)
Emanation and degrees of being; essential relationships
The second and related metaphor which deeply informs the Bahá’í concept of the relationship
between science and religion is that the creation of the universe takes place through an eternal
process of ‘emanation’: it is like the rays of the sun, which partake of the attributes of the sun
(light and heat) and are sustained at every moment by its shining, while remaining separate from
it in essence (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 53). And, similar to how the rays of the
sun travel progressively further from their source, the process of emanation takes place in stages
or degrees comprising a descending arc (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 81).
The stages in this ‘arc of descent’ can be observed in the ancient division of being into min-
eral, vegetable, animal, and human kingdoms (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 55).
Through these degrees, which are degrees of gradually awakening consciousness, an infinite
diversity of expressions is produced, through which the purpose of creation in manifesting the
divine names and attributes is best fulfilled (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 32).
The pattern of the original source is repeated within each stage of the emanative arc, whether
on the arc of descent or the arc of ascent, introducing a principle of correspondence between
different degrees of being:
Know thou that whatsoever can be found in this mortal world, this realm of limi-
tation—every name and description, every form and attribute that can be seen or
heard—hath, in each world of the worlds of God, manifestations and appearances
corresponding to and befitting that world, and appearing with another name, another
description, another form and another attribute.
(Bahá’u’lláh, Má’idiy-i-Ásamání 7: 120, provisional translation)
This relationship of correspondence holds true between the degrees of being often called the
‘material’ and the ‘spiritual’: ‘The spiritual world is like unto the phenomenal world. They are
the exact counterpart of each other. Whatever objects appear in this world of existence are the
outer pictures of the world of heaven’ (‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 10), although, viewing the
emanative arc as a whole, the very division of the world into a physical and a spiritual dimension
is a consequence of our limited human perspective. At any point in the circle of existence, the
‘spiritual’ is simply a term for the degrees which lie ahead:
the truth is that the world of existence is a single world, although its stations are mani-
fold in accordance with the manifold realities of things. For instance, the world of
The harmony of science and religion
mineral, plant, and animal existence is the same world. Despite this, the animal world in
relation to the world of the vegetable is a spiritual reality and another world and abode.
(Abdu’l-Bahá, Amr va Khalq 1: 202, provisional translation)
The relativizing of the categories of the material and the spiritual into matters of perspective,
which is a feature of the holistic viewpoint of emanation, is particularly evident in the identi-
cal definitions given to ‘religion’ and ‘nature’ as comprising the interrelationships that bind all
things together:
[R]eligion consists in the necessary relationships deriving from the realities of things.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions no. 40)
By nature is meant those inherent properties and necessary relations derived from the
realities of things.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Forel 13)
The same principle can also be seen at work in the collapsing by Bahá’u’lláh of the traditionally
distinct categories of natural action and divine action:
Nature is God’s Will and is its expression in and through the contingent world. It is a
dispensation of Providence ordained by the Ordainer, the All-Wise. Were anyone to
affirm that it is the Will of God as manifested in the world of being, no one should
question this assertion.
(Tablets 142)
The relativity of religious truth
While the consequences of the rich metaphors of ‘mind’, ‘emanation’, and related ideas for the
conception of the essential unity of science and religion, as cast through the lens of the Bahá’í
teachings, are far-reaching, the Bahá’í Writings nowhere propose that differing conceptions
of the divine and its relationship with the world can somehow be reduced to a single correct
dogmatic formulation. They rather acknowledge that diversity of viewpoint, even in matters of
ultimate theological import, is a feature of the human condition, for religious truth is relative—
in time, between one era of human civilization and the next, but also between different people
at the same point in time:
[S]ince all do not possess the same degree of spiritual understanding, certain statements
will inevitably be made, and there shall arise, as a consequence, as many differing
opinions as there are human minds and as many divergent beliefs as there are created
things. This is certain and settled, and can in no wise be averted. . . . Our aim is that
thou shouldst urge all the believers to show forth kindness and mercy and to overlook
certain shortcomings among them, that differences may be dispelled; true harmony be
established; and the censure and reproach, the hatred and dissension, seen among the
peoples of former times may not arise anew.
(Bahá’u’lláh, Call 3.6–7)
Therefore, a diversity of views about science and religion can be expected to persist into the
future, from those who, informed by metaphysical dualism, present science and religion as
Steven Phelps
essentially separate domains of knowledge to those who pursue more non-dualistic themes that
stress the unity that lies behind the world of ever-changing appearances. These views are able
to coexist within the community through a shared conviction that a greater harmony underlies
its differences, through mutual love and respect, and through a consultative framework that
ensures that action is taken in unity even when differences persist. The ultimate test of all such
theories, for Bahá’ís, is whether they function as remedies: whether they serve the cause of
actuating human potential and propelling forward an ever-advancing civilization consistently
with established facts.
Religion and divine teachings are like unto a remedy. A remedy must produce the
condition of health. If it occasions sickness, it is wiser and better to have no remedy
whatever. This is the significance of the statement that if religion becomes the cause
of warfare and bloodshed, irreligion and the absence of religion are preferable among
mankind.
(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Promulgation 298)
References and further reading
‘Abdu’l-Bahá. (1330AH/1912) Makátíb-i-‘Abdu’l-Bahá, vol. 2, Cairo: Matba‘at Kurdistan al-‘Ilmíyyah,
https://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/ab/.
———. (1978) Auguste Forel and the Bahá’í Faith, Oxford: George Ronald, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/tablet-august-forel/.
———. (1982) The Promulgation of Universal Peace, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.org/
library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/promulgation-universal-peace/.
———. (1985) Amr va Khalq, vol. 1, Hofheim: Bahá’í-Verlag, https://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/c/AK1/.
———. (1987) ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London, Oxford: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, https://reference.bahai.org/
en/t/ab/ABL/.
———. (1995) Paris Talks, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/paris-talks/.
———. (2009) Some Answered Questions, rev. trans., Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.bahai.
org/library/authoritative-texts/abdul-baha/some-answered-questions/.
Bahá’u’lláh. (1935) Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, www.
bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/gleanings-writings-bahaullah/.
———. (129BE/1973) Má’idiy-i-Ásmáni, vol. 7, Iran: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, https://reference.bahai.
org/fa/t/b/.
———. (1978) Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Wilmette, IL: Bahá’í Publishing Trust,
www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/bahaullah/tablets-bahaullah/.
———. (2018) The Call of the Divine Beloved, Haifa: Bahá’í World Centre, www.bahai.org/library/
authoritative-texts/bahaullah/call-divine-beloved/.
اختر نصًّا ثانيًا لقراءته بالتوازي — ترجمةً، أو أيّ نصٍّ آخر.
اختر نصًّا آخر