Perspectives on Science and Religion
====================================

Exported from Holy-Writings.com on 2026-06-18
1 clipping

1.
Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters.
Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Abdu'l-Bahá,
Perspectives on Science and Religion, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND RELIGION

Selected Extracts

Selections from the Writings and Talks of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá

And among the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh is that religion must be in
conformity with science
and reason, so that it may influence the hearts of men. The foundation must be
solid and must not
consist of imitations.
(Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, par. 227.10)              
     [1]

The third teaching or principle of Bahá’u’lláh is that religion and
science are in complete
agreement. Every religion which is not in accordance with established science
is superstition.
Religion must be reasonable. If it does not square with reason, it is
superstition and without
foundation. It is like a mirage, which deceives man by leading him to think it
is a body of water.
God has endowed man with reason that he may perceive what is true. If we
insist that such and
such a subject is not to be reasoned out and tested according to the
established logical modes of the
intellect, what is the use of the reason which God has given man? The eye is
the organ of sense by
which we view the world of outer phenomena; hearing is the faculty for
distinguishing sounds;
taste senses the properties of objects, such as bitter, sweet; smell detects
and differentiates odors;
touch reveals attributes of matter and perfects our communication with the
outer world; yet after
all, the circle and range of perception by the five senses is exceedingly
limited. But the intellectual
faculty of man is unlimited in its sphere of action. The eye views details
perhaps a mile, but the
intellect can perceive the far East and West. The ear may hear tone
modulations at one thousand
feet, but the mind of man can detect the harmonies of the heavenly spheres as
they swing in their
courses. Mind makes geological discoveries in subterranean depths and
determines the processes
of creation in the earth’s lowest strata. The sciences and arts, all
inventions, crafts, trades and their
products have come forth from the intellect of man. It is evident that within
the human organism
the intellect occupies the supreme station. Therefore, if religious belief,
principle or creed is not in
accordance with the intellect and the power of reason, it is surely
superstition.
(The Promulgation of Universal Peace: Talks Delivered by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
during
His Visit to the United States and Canada in 1912, rev. ed. (Wilmette:
Bahá’í
Publishing Trust, 1982, 2012), pp. 86–87)                                   
       [2]

The third principle or teaching of Bahá’u’lláh is the oneness of
religion and science. Any
religious belief which is not conformable with scientific proof and
investigation is superstition,
for true science is reason and reality, and religion is essentially reality
and pure reason; therefore,
the two must correspond. Religious teaching which is at variance with science
and reason is
human invention and imagination unworthy of acceptance, for the antithesis and
opposite of
knowledge is superstition born of the ignorance of man. If we say religion is
opposed to science,
we lack knowledge of either true science or true religion, for both are
founded upon the premises
and conclusions of reason, and both must bear its test.
(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 148)                                 
       [3]
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                          
 15 September 2013
Page 2

Another cause of dissension and disagreement is the fact that religion has
been pronounced
at variance with science. Between scientists and the followers of religion
there has always been
controversy and strife for the reason that the latter have proclaimed religion
superior in authority
to science and considered scientific announcement opposed to the teachings of
religion. Bahá’u’lláh
declared that religion is in complete harmony with science and reason. If
religious belief and
doctrine is at variance with reason, it proceeds from the limited mind of man
and not from God;
therefore, it is unworthy of belief and not deserving of attention; the heart
finds no rest in it, and real
faith is impossible. How can man believe that which he knows to be opposed to
reason? Is this
possible? Can the heart accept that which reason denies? Reason is the first
faculty of man, and the
religion of God is in harmony with it. Bahá’u’lláh has removed this form
of dissension and discord
from among mankind and reconciled science with religion by revealing the pure
teachings of the
divine reality. This accomplishment is specialized to Him in this Day.
(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 323)                                 
       [4]

Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created beings embody
the
potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual
investigation and scientific
acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and
organisms are deprived
of this potentiality and attainment. God has created or deposited this love of
reality in man. The
development and progress of a nation is according to the measure and degree of
that nation’s
scientific attainments. Through this means its greatness is continually
increased, and day by day
the welfare and prosperity of its people are assured.

All blessings are divine in origin, but none can be compared with this power
of intellectual
investigation and research, which is an eternal gift producing fruits of
unending delight. Man is
ever partaking of these fruits. All other blessings are temporary; this is an
everlasting possession.
Even sovereignty has its limitations and overthrow; this is a kingship and
dominion which none
may usurp or destroy. Briefly, it is an eternal blessing and divine bestowal,
the supreme gift of
God to man. Therefore, you should put forward your most earnest efforts toward
the acquisition
of science and arts. The greater your attainment, the higher your standard in
the divine purpose.
The man of science is perceiving and endowed with vision, whereas he who is
ignorant and
neglectful of this development is blind. The investigating mind is attentive,
alive; the callous and
indifferent mind is deaf and dead. A scientific man is a true index and
representative of humanity,
for through processes of inductive reasoning and research he is informed of
all that appertains to
humanity, its status, conditions and happenings. He studies the human body
politic, understands
social problems and weaves the web and texture of civilization. In fact,
science may be likened to
a mirror wherein the infinite forms and images of existing things are revealed
and reflected. It is
the very foundation of all individual and national development. Without this
basis of
investigation, development is impossible. Therefore, seek with diligent
endeavor the knowledge
and attainment of all that lies within the power of this wonderful bestowal.
(The Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 67–68)                            
      [5]

In such a country [the Arabian Peninsula], and amidst such barbarous tribes,
an illiterate
Man produced a book in which, in a perfect and eloquent style, He explained
the divine attributes
and perfections, the prophethood of the Messengers of God, the divine laws,
and some scientific
facts.
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                          
 15 September 2013
Page 3

Thus, you know that before the observations of modern times—that is to say,
during the
first centuries and down to the fifteenth century of the Christian era—all
the mathematicians of
the world agreed that the earth was the center of the universe, and that the
sun moved. The
famous astronomer who was the protagonist of the new theory discovered the
movement of the
earth and the immobility of the sun.1 Until his time all the astronomers and
philosophers of the
world followed the Ptolemaic system, and whoever said anything against it was
considered
ignorant. Though Pythagoras, and Plato during the latter part of his life,
adopted the theory that
the annual movement of the sun around the zodiac does not proceed from the
sun, but rather from
the movement of the earth around the sun, this theory had been entirely
forgotten, and the
Ptolemaic system was accepted by all mathematicians. But there are some verses
revealed in the
Qur’án contrary to the theory of the Ptolemaic system. One of them is
“The sun moves in a fixed
place,” which shows the fixity of the sun, and its movement around an axis.2
Again, in another
verse, “And each star moves in its own heaven.”3 Thus is explained the
movement of the sun, of
the moon, of the earth, and of other bodies. When the Qur’án appeared, all
the mathematicians
ridiculed these statements and attributed the theory to ignorance. Even the
doctors of Islám,
when they saw that these verses were contrary to the accepted Ptolemaic
system, were obliged
to explain them away.

It was not until after the fifteenth century of the Christian era, nearly nine
hundred years
after Muḥammad, that a famous astronomer made new observations and important
discoveries
by the aid of the telescope, which he had invented.4 The rotation of the
earth, the fixity of the
sun, and also its movement around an axis, were discovered. It became evident
that the verses
of the Qur’án agreed with existing facts, and that the Ptolemaic system was
imaginary.
(Some Answered Questions (Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1984, 2009
printing), pp. 22–24)                                                       
       [6]

… the signs and conditions which have been spoken of all have meanings, and
are not to be
taken literally. Among other things it is said that the stars will fall upon
the earth. The stars are
endless and innumerable, and modern mathematicians have established and proved
scientifically
that the globe of the sun is estimated to be about one million and a half
times greater than the earth,
and each of the fixed stars to be a thousand times larger than the sun. If
these stars were to fall
upon the surface of the earth, how could they find place there? It would be as
though a thousand
million of Himalaya mountains were to fall upon a grain of mustard seed.
According to reason
and science this thing is quite impossible. What is even more strange is that
Christ said: “Perhaps
I shall come when you are yet asleep, for the coming of the Son of man is like
the coming of a
thief.”5 Perhaps the thief will be in the house, and the owner will not know
it.

It is clear and evident that these signs have symbolic signification, and that
they are not
literal. They are fully explained in the Kitáb-i-Íqán. Refer to it.
(Some Answered Questions, pp. 111–112)                                      
     [7]

Copernicus.
Cf. Qur’án 36:37.
Cf. Qur’án 36:38.
Galileo.
Cf. 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet. 3:10.
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                         
15 September 2013
Page 4

From Letters Written on Behalf of Shoghi Effendi

It is very easy indeed for him to understand how you, with your training, are
often tested
and irritated by your contact with some of the believers. But then you must
remember that
your advantages of a reasonable mind and a scientific education have not been
given to all, and
you cannot expect acceptance of Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings to endow
people with these things
automatically! But think of the kind of human beings, if brought up in the
society He
envisages, and taught in homes, schools and universities which were the mirror
and product of
His teachings, which would be produced! There you would really have a new race
of men.

Shoghi Effendi has for years urged the Bahá’ís (who asked his advice, and
in general also)
to study history, economics, sociology, etc., in order to be au courant with
all the progressive
movements and thoughts being put forth today, and so that they could correlate
these to the
Bahá’í teachings. What he wants the Bahá’ís to do is to study more,
not to study less. The more
general knowledge, scientific and otherwise, they possess, the better.
Likewise he is constantly
urging them to really study the Bahá’í teachings more deeply. One might
liken Bahá’u’lláh’s
teachings to a sphere; there are points poles apart, and in between the
thoughts and doctrines that
unite them. We believe in balance in all things; we believe in moderation in
all things—we must
not be too emotional, nor cut and dried and lacking in feeling, we must not be
so liberal as to
cease to preserve the character and unity of our Bahá’í system, nor
fanatical and dogmatic. Very
few people, as you as a psychologist know, have attained perfect equilibrium
in their minds or
their lives—their acts—the same is certainly true of the Bahá’ís, for
anyone who believes in our
teachings can become a Bahá’í and they represent all elements of the
population.
(From a letter dated 5 July 1947 to an individual believer)                   
     [8]

Considering that a century ago nobody knew the nature of matter, and
couldn’t split any
kind of an atom, it should not surprise the scientist that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
states that copper can be
transmuted into gold.

There may come a time, for all we know, when the mass of many atoms can be
changed
by scientists. We have no way of proving, or disproving, at present the
statement of ‘Abdu’l-
Bahá. Just because we cannot demonstrate a contention in the Bahá’í
Teachings does not mean
the contention is not true.

The same holds true of the statement of Bahá’u’lláh in the Íqán,
regarding transmutation
of copper into gold after seventy years, under certain conditions.

We as Bahá’ís must assume that, as He had access to all knowledge, He was
referring to
a definite physical condition which theoretically might exist. Because we
don’t know what this
condition is in scientific terms does not refute Bahá’u’lláh’s
statement at all.

The principle of faith is to accept anything the Manifestation of God says,
once you have
accepted Him as being the Manifestation. That is really the crux of the whole
matter. It is a
question of confidence.
(From a letter dated 14 March 1955 to an individual believer)                 
   [9]
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                        
15 September 2013
Page 5

The Tablet to a Physician was addressed to a man who was a student of the old
type
of healing prevalent in the East and familiar with the terminology used in
those days, and He
addresses him in terms used by the medical men of those days. These terms are
quite different
from those used by modern medicine, and one would have to have a deep
knowledge of this
former school of medicine to understand the questions Bahá’u’lláh was
elucidating.
(From a letter dated 18 December 1945 to an individual believer)              
 [10]

From Letters Written by or on Behalf of the Universal House of Justice

The Guardian was meticulous about the authenticity of historical fact. One of
the friends
in Yazd wrote to him stating that the account given by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in
one of His Tablets about
events related to the martyrdom of some of the believers in that place was in
conflict with known
facts about these events. Shoghi Effendi replied saying that the friends
should investigate the
facts carefully and unhesitatingly register them in their historical records,
since ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
Himself had prefaced His recording of the events in His Tablet with a
statement that it was based
on news received from Yazd.
(From a letter dated 25 July 1974 written by the Universal House of Justice
to an individual believer)                                                    
  [11]

We have been asked to say that there is nothing in the Bahá’í Writings to
support the
conclusion that the Revelation of a Manifestation of God is confined to an
exposition of “values”
or that the infallibility of the Prophets does not extend to and include the
area of historical and
scientific “fact”. On the contrary, in “Some Answered Questions”, p.
23, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá points
out that when the Qur’án was revealed, it contained verses explaining the
movement of the stars
and planets in the universe. Because these statements disagreed with the
established theories
of the time, the verses were ridiculed by all the mathematicians who
“attributed the theory to
ignorance”. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá goes on to say that it was not until 900 years
later, when the telescope
was invented, that the validity of Muḥammad’s statements on this subject
was proven.

Another clear reference to the scope of divine Revelation appears in “Some
Answered
Questions”, p. 218, where ‘Abdu’l-Bahá compares the “universal divine
mind” of the Manifestation
with the limited intellect of man. He states:

The intellectual power of the world of nature is a power of investigation, and
by
its researches it discovers the realities of beings and the properties of
existences;
but the heavenly intellectual power which is beyond nature, embraces things
and
is cognizant of things, knows them, understands them, is aware of mysteries,
realities and divine significations, and is the discoverer of the concealed
verities
of the Kingdom. This divine intellectual power is the special attribute of the
Holy Manifestations...
(From a letter dated 7 August 1978 written on behalf of the Universal House
of Justice to an individual believer)                                         
 [12]
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                         
15 September 2013
Page 6

With reference to your question about the “ether”, the various definitions
of this word as
given in the Oxford English Dictionary all refer to a physical reality, for
instance, “an element”,
“a substance”, “a medium”, all of which imply a physical and objective
reality and, as you say,
this was the concept posited by nineteenth century scientists to explain the
propagation of light
waves. It would have been understood in this sense by the audiences whom
‘Abdu’l-Bahá was
addressing. However, in chapter XVI of “Some Answered Questions”,
‘Abdu’l-Bahá devotes a
whole chapter to explaining the difference between things which are
“perceptible to the senses”
which He calls “objective or sensible”, and realities of the
“intellect” which have “no outward
form and no place”, and are “not perceptible to the senses”. He gives
examples of both “kinds”
of “human knowledge”. The first kind is obvious and does not need
elaboration. To illustrate
the second kind the examples He gives are: love, grief, happiness, the power
of the intellect, the
human spirit and “ethereal matter”. (In the original Persian the word
“ethereal” is the same as
“etheric”.) He states clearly that “Even ethereal matter, the forces of
which are said in physics
to be heat, light, electricity and magnetism, is an intellectual reality, and
is not sensible.” In
other words, the “ether” is a concept arrived at intellectually to explain
certain phenomena. In
due course, when scientists failed to confirm the physical existence of the
“ether” by delicate
experiments, they constructed other intellectual concepts to explain the same
phenomena.

In considering the whole field of divinely conferred “infallibility” one
must be careful to
avoid the literal understanding and petty-mindedness that has so often
characterised discussions
of this matter in the Christian world. The Manifestation of God (and, to a
lesser degree,
‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi) has to convey tremendous concepts
covering the whole field
of human life and activity to people whose present knowledge and degree of
understanding are
far below His. He must use the limited medium of human language against the
limited and
often erroneous background of His audience’s traditional knowledge and
current understanding
to raise them to a wholly new level of awareness and behaviour. It is a human
tendency, against
which the Manifestation warns us, to measure His statements against the
inaccurate standard of
the acquired knowledge of mankind. We tend to take them and place them within
one or other
of the existing categories of human philosophy or science while, in reality,
they transcend these
and will, if properly understood, open new and vast horizons to our
understanding.

Some sayings of the Manifestation are clear and obvious. Among these are laws
of
behaviour. Others are elucidations which lead men from their present level of
understanding to
a new one. Others are pregnant allusions, the significance of which only
becomes apparent as
the knowledge and understanding of the reader grow. And all are integral parts
of one great
Revelation intended to raise mankind to a new level of its evolution.

It may well be that we shall find some statement is couched in terms familiar
to the
audience to which it was first addressed, but is strange now to us. For
example, in answer to
a question about Bahá’u’lláh’s reference to the “fourth heaven” in
the “Kitáb-i-Íqán”, the
Guardian’s secretary wrote on his behalf:

As to the ascent of Christ to the fourth heaven, as revealed in the glorious
“Book of Íqán”, he [the Guardian] stated that the “fourth heaven” is
a term used
and a belief held by the early astronomers. The followers of the Shí‘ih
sect
likewise held this belief. As the “Kitáb-i-Íqán” was revealed for the
guidance
of that sect, this term was used in conformity with the concepts of its
followers.
(Translated from the Arabic)
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                          
15 September 2013
Page 7

In studying such statements, however, we must have the humility to appreciate
the limitations
of our own knowledge and outlook, and strive always to understand the purpose
of Bahá’u’lláh
in making them, trying to look upon Him with His own eyes, as it were.
(From a letter dated 3 June 1982 written on behalf of the Universal House
of Justice to two individual believers)                                      
[13]

With regard to the harmony of science and religion, the Writings of the
Central Figures and
the commentaries of the Guardian make abundantly clear that the task of
humanity, including the
Bahá’í community that serves as the “leaven” within it, is to create a
global civilization which
embodies both the spiritual and material dimensions of existence. The nature
and scope of such
a civilization are still beyond anything the present generation can conceive.
The prosecution of
this vast enterprise will depend on a progressive interaction between the
truths and principles of
religion and the discoveries and insights of scientific inquiry. This entails
living with ambiguities
as a natural and inescapable feature of the process of exploring reality. It
also requires us not to
limit science to any particular school of thought or methodological approach
postulated in the
course of its development. The challenge facing Bahá’í thinkers is to
provide responsible
leadership in this endeavour, since it is they who have both the priceless
insights of the
Revelation and the advantages conferred by scientific investigation.
(From a letter dated 19 May 1995 written on behalf of the Universal House
of Justice to an individual believer)                                         
  [14]

… the principle of harmony between religion and science, while it enables
us, with the help of
reason, to see through the falsity of superstitions, does not imply that truth
is limited to what can
be explained by current scientific concepts. Not only do all religions have
their miracles and
mysteries, but religion itself, and certain fundamental religious concepts,
such as the nature of
the Manifestations of God, are far from being explicable by present-day
scientific theories.
(From a letter dated 16 February 1996 written on behalf of the Universal
House of Justice to an individual believer)                                   
   [15]

In academia, at the present time, the common ground of understanding in
relation to all
aspects of human behaviour is generally materialistic, and rules out of
consideration many factors
such as the reality and fundamental importance of divine revelation in the
life and development of
humankind. Within the Bahá’í community, by definition, the common ground
of understanding
is the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh, and it is within this context that
Bahá’ís pursue scholarship and
freedom of discussion. How, therefore, is a Bahá’í academic to relate the
two variant common
grounds of understanding: the materialistic one which constrains his
professional activity and
the Bahá’í one which is the basis of his whole life?

The path followed by some members of other religions, is to divide their
thinking into two
watertight compartments: their religion and their science. A Bahá’í,
however, firmly believes in
the harmony between religion and science, and should resist all temptation to
dichotomize his
thinking. There are some areas of study, such as chemistry or mathematics, in
which the problem
scarcely arises. But in anything to do with human life, behaviour and history,
it must affect that
whole area of analysis, interpretation and explanation referred to above.
Perspectives on Science and Religion                                          
15 September 2013
Page 8

A Bahá’í academic should, of course, pursue fearlessly the truth of any
matter before him,
but in the elucidation of the facts that he discovers, how can he propound
explanations which
are in flat contradiction to the fundamental teachings of Bahá’u’lláh?
Either he is hypocritically
presenting an explanation which he knows to be untrue, merely for the sake of
following a
particular academic authority, or, if he believes the academic explanation in
contradiction to the
Bahá’í teachings, he should logically conclude that the teachings of
Bahá’u’lláh are in error; in
which case he should courageously face up to the implications of such a
conclusion, and think it
through.

This dilemma lies before every Bahá’í academic, irrespective of the
existence of Bahá’í
review. It is the impression of the Universal House of Justice that most
Bahá’í academics have
been able to solve the problem with little difficulty, by a profound
acceptance of the principle of
the harmony of science and religion, and by the use of wisdom and
understanding in the couching
of their conclusions.
(From a letter dated 24 March 1997 written on behalf of the Universal House
of Justice to an individual believer)                                         
 [16]

Scholarly training and professional experience will have sensitized you to the
implications for the
study of religion of certain assumptions about human nature and the processes
of civilization that a
purely materialistic interpretation of reality has imposed on scholarly
activity of every kind, at least
in the Western world. A related paradigm for the study of religion has
gradually consolidated itself
in the prevailing academic culture during the course of the present century.
It insists that all
spiritual and moral phenomena must be understood through the application of a
scholarly apparatus
devised to explore existence in a way that ignores the issues of God’s
continuous relationship with
His creation and His intervention in human life and history. Yet, from a
Bahá’í point of view, it is
precisely this intervention that is the central theme of the Teachings of the
Founders of the revealed
religions ostensibly being studied.

As a result of this insistence, opinions that should have remained matters of
learned
speculation have tended to assume the character of dogma. Equally regrettable
is an intolerant
attitude toward other perceptions of reality, which too often characterizes
the expression of these
opinions. In the context of historical circumstance, this development is
understandable. The rigid
intolerance exhibited in the past by much of organized religion, together with
the domination of
scholarship long exercised by theological elites, could not but arouse strong
negative reactions.
From a Bahá’í point of view, however, bigotry is retrograde and
unacceptable in whatever form it
chooses to present itself.
(From a message dated 20 July 1997 written on behalf of the Universal House
of Justice to an individual believer)                                         
 [17]
    — Perspectives on Science and Religion (Used by permission of the curator)