# Scholarship and the Baha'i Community

*Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-18 — 1 clipping.*

---

> Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Moojan Momen, Scholarship and the Baha'i Community, bahai-library.com.
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
> 
> Published in the Journal of Bahá’í Studies Vol. 1, number 1 (1988)
> © Association for Bahá’í Studies 1988
> 
> Scholarship and the Bahá’í Community
> Moojan Momen
> 
> Abstract
> As the Bahá’í Faith emerges from obscurity, Bahá’í scholars will have an important role in three fields: the
> presentation of Bahá’í Faith to the world; the defense of the Bahá’í Faith from attacks; and the intellectual
> growth and development of the Bahá’í community. This paper discusses the question of the place of scholarship
> in the Bahá’í community. The value of Bahá’í studies to the Bahá’í community is analyzed. The problems that
> may arise for Bahá’í scholars in relation to their own spiritual life and also in relation to the Bahá’í community
> are discussed. Some suggestions are then made with regard to the question of what academic approaches are
> most likely to be fruitful in the study of the Bahá’í Faith. Finally, consideration is given to the mutual
> obligations of the Bahá’í scholar and the Bahá’í community (in particular, the Bahá’í administrative
> institutions). Every Bahá’í who surveys the vast range of doctrines and concepts enshrined in the holy writings
> of the Bahá’í Faith or whose imagination is captured by the intensity of its brief history must, to some extent, be
> inspired to make a more thorough study of some aspect that interests him or her. To some is given the good
> fortune to have both the opportunity and inclination to put this study on a more formal basis. Whether this be at
> an institute of learning or through private study and research, there are many areas of the teachings and history
> of the Bahá’í Faith that invite painstaking research and thoughtful analysis. Such study is of great benefit to the
> Bahá’í community as a whole, quite apart from the immense satisfaction that it can bring to the individual
> student. There are also dangers in such study, particularly for the individual concerned, and often the extent of
> this danger is not appreciated by someone just setting out on such a course of study.
> 
> Résumé
> Alors que la foi bahá’íe sort de l’obscurité, universitaires, érudits et hommes de science bahá’ís vont avoir à
> jouer un rôle important dans trois domaines particuliers: présenter la foi bahá’íe au monde; protéger la foi des
> attaques dont elle sera l’objet; contribuer à la maturation intellectuelle et au développement de la communauté
> bahá’íe. L’article développe trois points essentiels: la place du savoir et de l’activité scientifique dans la
> communauté bahá’íe; la validité des études bahá’íes pour la communauté bahá’íe elle-même; les problèmes
> rencontrés par les hommes de science bahá’íe aussi bien au sein de leur propre vie spirituelle qu’en relation avec
> la communauté bahá’íe. Suivent quelques suggestions quant au choix des approches et des champs d’études les
> mieux susceptibles de produire des résultats tangibles. Finalement, l’article analyse le rapport d’obligations
> mutuelles qui devrait présider aux relations entre le lettré bahá’íe et la communauté bahá’íe, et plus
> particulièrement entre le lettré et les institutions administratives. Tout bahá’í qui passe en revue l’éventail
> impressionnant de doctrines et de concepts enchâssé dans les écrits sacrés de la foi bahá’íe ou dont l’imagination
> se trouve transportée par l’intensité de sa brève histoire, se doit, dans la mesure de ses moyens, d’effectuer une
> étude aussi poussée que possible des aspects qui l’intéressent. Certains ont la chance d’avoir à la fois la
> possibilité et le désir de donner à leur étude un cadre plus formel. Que de telles études se déroulent au sein d’un
> établissement universitaire ou soient le fruit d’un intérêt personnel, les enseignements et l’histoire de la foi
> bahá’íe invitent à une recherche minutieuse et à une analyse poussée. De telles études, outre qu’elles procurent
> une profonde satisfaction à ceux qui les conduisent, profitent grandement à la communauté bahá’íe dans son
> ensemble. Toutefois, de telles études présentent aussi certains dangers, particulièrement pour la personne
> concernée, et bien souvent, l’ampleur de ce danger n’est pas évidente pour celui que se lance dans cette voie.
> 
> Resúmen
> Según la Fe Bahá’í emerge de la oscuridad, los eruditos Bahá’ís tendrán un papel importante en tres campos: la
> presentación de la Fe Bahá’í al mundo; la defensa de la Fe Bahá’í contra ataques; y el aumento y desarollo
> intelectual de la comunidad Bahá’í. Este artículo discute la cuestion del lugar de la erudición en la comunidad
> Bahá’í. Se análiza el valor de los estudios Bahá’ís en la comunidad Bahá’í. Se discuten los problemas que
> podrán tener los eruditos Bahá’ís en relación a la comunidad Bahá’í. Se dan sugestiones concerniente a la
> cuestion de que métodos académicos son más capaces de dar frutos en el estudio de la Fe Bahá’í. Finalmente, se
> le da consideración a la obligación mutua de los eruditos Bahá’ís y de la comunidad Bahá’í (en particular, las
> instituciones administrativas Bahá’ís). Cada Bahá’í que inspecciona el vasto alcance de las doctrinas y
> conceptos venerados en las escrituras sagradas de la Fe Bahá’í o que encuentra su imaginación capturada por la
> intensidad de su corta historia debe, hasta cierto punto, ser inspirado a estudiar con más detalle algún aspecto
> que le interesa. A algunos se le ha dado la buena fortuna de tener tanto la oportunidad y la inclinación de hacer
> este estudio de una manera más formal. Ya sea en una institución académica o estudio e invistigación privada,
> hay muchas areas de las enseñanzas e historia de la Fe Bahá’í que invitan a una investigación minuciosa y un
> análisis concienzudo. Dicho estudio es de gran beneficio para toda la comunidad Bahá’í, muy a parte de la
> inmensa satisfacción que le brinda al estudioso. También hay peligro en tal estudio, particularmente para el
> individuo envuelto y, a menudo la magnitud de este peligro no es apreciada por una persona que justo está
> empezando tal estudio.
> 
> E    very Bahá’í who surveys the vast range of doctrines and concepts enshrined in the holy writings of the
> Bahá’í Faith or whose imagination is captured by the intensity of its brief history must, to some extent, be
> inspired to make a more thorough study of some aspect that interests him or her. To some is given the good
> fortune to have both the opportunity and inclination to put this study on a more formal basis. Whether this be at
> an institute of learning or through private study and research, there are many areas of the teachings and history
> of the Bahá’í Faith that invite painstaking research and thoughtful analysis. Such study is of great benefit to the
> Bahá’í community as a whole, quite apart from the immense satisfaction that it can bring to the individual
> student. There are also dangers in such study, particularly for the individual concerned, and often the extent of
> this danger is not appreciated by someone just setting out on such a course of study.
> 
> The Value of Bahá’í Studies to the Bahá’í Community
> The value of Bahá’í scholarship to the Bahá’í community scarcely requires elucidation, although there are
> always fundamentalist elements in any religious community that deny the need for any delving into or analyzing
> their religion. In 1932, the following statement was written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi: “Shoghi Effendi surely
> hopes that before long the Cause may produce scholars that would write books which would be far deeper and
> more universal in scope [than Esslemont’s Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era]” (Dawn 38). And in 1949: “It seems
> what we need now is a more profound and coordinated scholarship...” (Gift 25). More recently, the Universal
> House of Justice has stated that it “regards Bahá’í scholarship as of great potential importance for the devel-
> opment and consolidation of the Bahá’í community as it emerges from obscurity.”1
> The writings of Bahá’u’lláh, extensive as they are, present only a framework of what will in the future evolve to
> be the Bahá’í Faith. There will always be a need for individual Bahá’ís to explore the meaning of Bahá’u’lláh’s
> teaching and to present them afresh in the context of the contemporary thought of each generation. For, as social
> conditions change and evolve, the relevance and application of Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings to society will change,
> and their changing relationship must be thought out and expressed in each generation. Otherwise, the
> presentation of Bahá’í teachings to the non-Bahá’í world will cease to be challenging or relevant.
> The role of Bahá’í scholarship in this process of revitalizing and bringing up to date the application of
> Bahá’í teachings is of great importance as it is potentially the greatest impetus for such rethinking and
> development. As long ago as 1949, the following statement was written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi:
> 
> The world has—at least the thinking world—caught up by now with all the great and universal principles
> enunciated by Bahá’u’lláh over 70 years ago, and so of course it does not sound “new” to them. But we
> know that the deeper teachings, the capacity of His projected World Order to re-create society, are new and
> dynamic. It is these we must learn to present intelligently and enticingly to such men! (Gift 25)
> 
> And in the same month, the following letter was written to another individual:
> 
> We need Bahá’í scholars, not only people far, far more deeply aware of what our teachings really are, but
> also well read and educated people, capable of correlating our teachings to the current thoughts of the
> leaders of society. (Shoghi Effendi qtd. in Bahá’í Studies Bulletin 47)
> 
> It would, however, be important that in seeking to apply the Bahá’í teachings to contemporary problems,
> we avoid the risk referred to by the Universal House of Justice in their statement that “attempting to make the
> Bahá’í Faith relevant to modern society is to incur the grave risk of compromising the fundamental verities of
> our Faith in an effort to make it conform to current theories and practices” (Letter, 21 July 68).
> Well-grounded Bahá’í scholars, moreover, provide one of the strongest bulwarks of the Bahá’í community
> in defending itself from the attacks of its enemies. For only through drawing on a body of knowledge can an
> adequate response be made to those who would launch a verbal or written attack on the history and teachings of
> the Bahá’í Faith, no matter how unfounded and ill-informed such an attack may be. Once again, only through
> the development of Bahá’í scholarship can such a body of knowledge be built. In a letter written on behalf of
> Shoghi Effendi in 1942, there is the following statement:
> There is an answer in the teachings for everything; unfortunately the majority of the Bahá’ís, however
> intensely devoted and sincere they may be, lack for the most part the necessary scholarship and wisdom to
> reply to and refute the claims and attacks of people with some education and standing.... (Unfolding 439)
> 
> Among the benefits that Bahá’í scholarship can bring to the Bahá’í community may be included the fact
> that the publication of detailed studies of the teachings and history of the Bahá’í Faith may inspire other Bahá’ís
> and stimulate them to deepen themselves in their religion.
> 
> Problems and Dangers of Bahá’í Scholarship
> There are also dangers and problems associated with Bahá’í scholarship. Some of these affect only the
> individual concerned, while others affect the individual’s relationship to the Bahá’í community.
> The greatest and most common challenge facing Bahá’í scholars is that after expending great effort in
> study and acquiring extensive knowledge about the Bahá’í Faith, one will be tempted to regard oneself as being
> better in some way than the generality of Bahá’ís who do not know as much about their Faith. This attitude is as
> old as religion itself. The idea that knowledge and learning bestow spiritual superiority is to be found in the
> religions of both the Judaeo-Christian-Muslim and the Hindu-Buddhist traditions and has led to the
> establishment of priesthoods and learned classes who presume to sit in judgement on their fellow believers and
> who have even arrogated to themselves the power of absolving sins. Yet, it is precisely this belief that is refuted
> in Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings. Neither spirituality nor wisdom, or even discernment, according to Bahá’í teachings,
> are necessarily brought about by learning and knowledge. Indeed, learning and knowledge can, in some
> circumstances, be “the most grievous of all veils” (Bahá’u’lláh, Íqán 188). This pride, which may well develop
> so insidiously that it is not recognized by the one so afflicted, can lead the scholars to being impatient and
> intolerant towards the rest of the Bahá’í community. This is, of course, in complete contradiction to the spirit of
> Bahá’u’lláh’s statement:
> 
> Should anyone among you be incapable of grasping a certain truth, or be striving to comprehend it, show
> forth, when conversing with him, a spirit of extreme kindliness and good-will. Help him to see and
> recognize the truth, without esteeming yourself to be, in the least, superior to him, or to be possessed of
> greater endowments. (Gleanings 8)
> 
> Those setting out to do research on the Bahá’í Faith should think about several aspects of their work. The very
> task of looking at one’s own religion requires that one distance oneself from it to a certain extent. This change of
> perspective may radically alter one’s conception about one’s religion. For some, this may be merely the
> preliminary to building a more profound conception of the Faith, but to others, it may be a spiritually shattering
> experience. For if one analyzes the minutiae of a religion or tries to assess all of the social and economic factors
> that may have influenced its inception and progress, one may eventually convince oneself that there is no need
> to postulate any divine or supernatural impulse to account for the religion. These crises and tests, which will
> occur with most scholars to some degree and at some stage in their endeavors, will test their faith and cast
> doubts in their minds concerning the sources of authority within their religion. To be well equipped to deal with
> such crises, the Bahá’í scholar should anticipate them and be prepared for them, should read about and meditate
> upon the subject, and should have access to others engaged in similar pursuits with whom to discuss the
> problems that arise. The Bahá’í Faith provides many weapons with which to fight such spiritual battles, and it is
> important that Bahá’í scholars use these weapons, or they risk losing their faith as a result of these crises.
> The process of research may involve the scholar in examining literature by those who are antagonistic to the
> Faith for one reason or another. Even if the author of such works is a Christian clergyman, it must be borne in
> mind that much of such material is based on or inspired by the writings of Covenant breakers. The result of
> much exposure to such material may have the effect of casting the seeds of doubt into the mind and weakening
> one’s faith.
> In short, a scholar must seriously consider before setting out on the path of research, whether he or she has
> the spiritual strength and depth to withstand these dangers. This must be considered at the outset as later may be
> too late. If the required spiritual strength and depth are not present, it would be vital first to deepen oneself in the
> Faith before embarking on Bahá’í studies. To neglect this would be to place one’s spiritual development in
> jeopardy.
> 
> Difficulties with the Bahá’í Community
> In dealing with the Bahá’í community, the scholar also faces severe tests. Individual Bahá’ís may not
> understand the nature of the scholar’s activities or may feel threatened by the result of his research. This can
> lead to tension arising between the scholar and the community. Occasionally, the scholar may be the victim of
> resentment or mistrust resulting from these misunderstandings. In such circumstances, it may be useful for the
> Bahá’í scholar to remember Bahá’u’lláh’s own experience. For it was not the harsh treatment meted out by his
> enemies that caused Bahá’u’lláh’s greatest sufferings. He states that it was the actions of those who called
> themselves Bahá’ís (Shoghi Effendi, God 190). Indeed, this is a general principle, true for all Bahá’ís: that the
> greatest tests come from other Bahá’ís, and this is one of the means whereby the Bahá’í community provides for
> the spiritual growth of the individual.
> One further area that represents a danger to Bahá’í scholars is their dealings with Bahá’í administration. This
> may occur particularly in the area of the review of proposed publications. Here, the Bahá’í scholar has different
> considerations from those of the Bahá’í administration, and these considerations may conflict. The scholar may
> feel that the reviewers appointed by the Bahá’í administration are not competent to assess his or her work. The
> scholar must also be prepared to face the possibility that the administrative machinery of the Faith, which exists
> to promote and protect the interests of the Faith as a whole and not for the sole purpose of advancing
> scholarship, may decide that it is not in the best interests of the Faith to publish part of the work at present. The
> scholar will, almost always, be at the forefront pushing for the change and development of the community, but it
> is the responsibility of the Bahá’í administrative order to judge whether the change is desirable, whether the
> community is ready for such a change and the rate at which change is introduced. Thus, the institutions of the
> Faith could act as a brake on the enthusiasm of the scholars. This situation may lead to a certain degree of
> tension and mutual dissatisfaction between the administration and the scholar and may be a severe crisis for the
> scholar, testing loyalty to the Covenant. In such a situation, the scholar’s pride may make it difficult to submit to
> administrative will without a sense of bitterness and resentment. Only those with the purest of motives and those
> who can succeed in the battle against pride and egotism will come out of this crisis well.
> In his or her relations with the Bahá’í administration, the Bahá’í scholar needs constantly to bear in mind
> that, according to Bahá’í teachings, the Administrative Order is not merely a mechanism for organizing the
> Bahá’í community. The Bahá’í community and the Bahá’í administration are the greatest vehicles for the
> spiritual growth of the individual. It is in overcoming the crises that arise in one’s dealings with the
> administration that one’s spiritual growth is nurtured.
> 
> Spiritual Prerequisites
> From the above description it is clear that potential Bahá’í scholars must strive to acquire a number of
> spiritual attributes as armor against the tests that will arise in the course of their work. The first of these spiritual
> prerequisites must be absolute purity of motive for entering the field of Bahá’í studies. If one is entering this
> field with intellectual pride, seeking to impress others and increase one’s importance either in the Bahá’í world
> or in the academic world, the most likely result is estrangement from the Bahá’í community, which has no place
> for those who seek self-aggrandizement. If, however, one’s motives for entering the field are a desire to be of
> service to the Faith and to assist in the development of the Bahá’í community, then one will overcome the tests
> and crises that arise on this path.
> Coupled with the first prerequisite, there must be a profound sense of personal humility. It is all too easy for
> scholars who are knowledgeable in the Faith to forget that precedence in the Cause, and indeed before God,
> goes to those whose spiritual development is the greatest and who serve the Cause the most and that mere
> knowledge is irrelevant. Our example in this must be Mirzá Abu’l Fadl Gulpaygání, who, despite the fact that he
> was considered in his own lifetime as one of the greatest Bahá’í scholars, demonstrated a profound and genuine
> humility in the presence of all. The late Hand of the Cause, Mr. Hasan Balyuzi, was another fine example of
> these qualities.
> The third prerequisite is loyalty to the Covenant, for those whose hearts and minds are focussed on the
> center of the Bahá’í Faith will not allow themselves to deviate from that direction whatever temporary storms
> and crises arise. In the course of any Bahá’í life, there will always be decisions made by Bahá’í institutions with
> which one does not personally agree and which one feels are wrong. Only a dogged determination to maintain
> loyalty to the Covenant will, at such times, overcome all doubts and uncertainties.
> The fourth condition for embarking on Bahá’í studies is a commitment to maintain the process of deepening
> oneself in the Faith in parallel to one’s scholarly studies. The scholar, in pursuing studies of the Bahá’í Faith,
> may be under the impression that he or she is also deepening in the Bahá’í Faith, but that is not necessarily so,
> since the analytical approach to the Bahá’í writings necessary for scholarly work is different from the meditative
> approach, which is part of the deepening process. Thus, a scholar who has studied a particular passage has not
> necessarily deepened himself in it. The Bahá’í scholar who has spent all day reading and studying the Bahá’í
> writings may find it difficult then to spend time deepening in the Bahá’í writings and saying prayers, but this is
> the only way of fulfilling one’s religious obligation and thus continuing to grow spiritually. Neglect of this
> obligation may lead to spiritual stagnation and decay.
> The fifth condition for embarking on Bahá’í studies consists of a commitment by the Bahá’í scholar to
> maintain a full and active role in the Bahá’í community including attendance at Nineteen-Day Feasts, serving on
> administrative bodies, and participating in teaching efforts. For it is partly through this active participation in the
> Bahá’í community that one’s spiritual progress is maintained. Any degree of estrangement from the community,
> no matter what the cause, could eventually lead to estrangement from the Faith itself. On 9 December 1979,
> shortly before his passing, the Hand of the Cause, Mr. Hasan Balyuzi, at the request of the Universal House of
> Justice, convened a meeting of a number of young Bahá’í scholars in Britain and Europe. His main message on
> that occasion was a plea to the young scholars to avoid anything that would separate them from the Bahá’í
> community.
> This list of spiritual prerequisites is only intended to highlight those of particular relevance to the Bahá’í
> scholar and is not exhaustive. It does not, of course, mean that the potential Bahá’í scholar should not seek to
> achieve all of the other spiritual and social attributes enjoined in the Bahá’í writings.
> 
> The Approach to Bahá’í Scholarship
> The approach that one makes to Bahá’í studies is of critical importance. There has been a great deal written
> on the subject of the scientific study of religion and the correct approach to this by the scholar.
> It is superficially very attractive to state that a scholar who is studying a religion must be a detached and
> impartial observer and must make no a priori judgments about the object of study. In practice, however, this
> proves impossible. Although in the nineteenth century, scholars used to consider that it was possible to observe
> and analyze all phenomena in a detached and impartial manner, this has been found to be illusory. It was found
> that as one went from the exact (“hard”) sciences such as physics, to the biological sciences, and finally to the
> (“soft”) social sciences, the interrelationship of the observer and the observed had an increasingly large effect
> upon the observations made. Not only was the observer causing changes in the observed but, in the social sci-
> ences, the individual and cultural biases of the observer were also found to be distorting the observations. When
> even in the field of physics, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle means that the phenomena observed depend
> on the methods used to observe them and thus, ultimately, on the observer, how much more in the less exact
> sciences does the observer influence the observation made.
> In studying religion, which must be considered at the extreme “soft” end of the range of “hard” and “soft”
> sciences in that it is an area of human activity guided by emotion and abstract thought rather than rational and
> verifiable processes, any claim of impartial observation is untenable. Indeed, the claims made by a religion are
> so far-reaching and so all-encompassing that one is forced, in one’s mind, to adopt an attitude of either
> acceptance or rejection of the claim. Having once made up one’s mind about the claims of a religion, one cannot
> then be said to be a detached and impartial observer. The more one researches and delves into the subject, the
> less detached and impartial one becomes. Impartiality is illusory under such circumstances, and the more any
> particular scholar claims impartiality, the more likely it is that he or she is either trying deliberately and
> dishonestly to conceal a bias or deluding himself. A writer who is thought of as impartial is often, in fact, only
> fashionable.
> The phenomenological approach is similarly filled with pitfalls. It is impossible to include in one’s work
> every fact relating to a topic, and the very process of selection of facts to be included introduces the biases
> within the selector’s mind.2 In the light of what the Bahá’í teachings tell us of man’s tendency towards prejudice
> and bias and how it is the lifelong struggle of a Bahá’í to try to eliminate these tendencies from his mind, it
> would be a very spiritually-proud and self-deluded Bahá’í scholar who would claim that his mind was free of
> bias.
> There is, indeed, a more fundamental reason for us to be suspicious of any scholar who claims to have
> achieved an impartial and penetrating view of the Bahá’í Faith. For the Bahá’í experience is, finally, a religious
> one, and as such, its full meaning can only be known by those who have lived it. The language of the scholar
> seeks to encapsulate the Faith in a series of concepts and doctrines, but the Faith is a religion that lives in the
> hearts of believers and, as such, can only be partially encapsulated by conceptual analysis. Concepts tell us
> nothing about the actual experience of being a Bahá’í.3 There are scholars who are not Bahá’ís and who have
> appreciated this dichotomy between concepts and experience, and it is perhaps their work that provides a
> suitable starting point for studies of the Bahá’í Faith.4
> Another dichotomy that must concern the Bahá’í scholar is that between religion and science or faith and
> reason. The key area in which this dichotomy becomes problematic for the Bahá’í scholar is in the use of
> methods of critical analysis that reduce all religious phenomena to the interaction of social and economic forces
> and all religious statements to cognitive meaninglessness. This reductionism, which is so prevalent in the
> academic world, is not, however, without its critics inside the academic community, those who recognize that
> reductionism can do little justice to the reality of the individual religious experience. In its statement on Bahá’í
> scholarship, the Research Department of the Bahá’í World Centre stated:
> It has become customary in the West to think of science and religion as occupying two distinct—and even
> opposed—areas of human thought and activity. This dichotomy can be characterized in the pairs of antitheses:
> faith and reason; value and fact. It is a dichotomy which is foreign to Bahá’í thought and should be regarded
> with suspicion by Bahá’í scholars in every field. The principle of the harmony of science and religion means not
> only that religious teachings should be studied in the light of reason and evidence as well as of faith and
> inspiration, but also that everything in creation, all aspects of human life and knowledge, should be studied in
> the light of revelation as well as in that of purely rational investigation. In other words, a Bahá’í scholar, when
> studying a subject, should not lock out of his mind any aspect of truth that is known to him.5
> Given then that a truly independent and impartial study of religion is impossible, it would be much better
> for scholars to try to analyze those biases that do exist in their minds (and which therefore color their approach)
> and to take these biases into account. For Bahá’í scholars this may mean that they must be careful not to be
> blinded by their commitment to the Bahá’í Faith. There are episodes in Bahá’í history, for example, where
> Bahá’ís did not act correctly and caused the Faith much harm. The scholar must not try to conceal or dishonestly
> present such a matter. For there are important lessons to be learned in this as in other aspects of Bahá’í history,
> and the scholar is not assisting the Faith by concealing them.
> The challenge for Bahá’í scholars is to produce material that will stand a triple test: first, it must satisfy the
> scholars themselves that they have been sincere and true to themselves in the data used, analyses presented, and
> conclusions drawn; second, it must satisfy other scholars that it conforms to the highest standards of scholarship
> and leads to useful academic insights into the subject matter; third, it must satisfy the Bahá’í community that it
> is a true representation and analysis of the community. Such exacting standards will not be easy to achieve, but
> the resulting work will be all that much more worthwhile and of permanent value.
> One of the most important tasks of the Bahá’í scholar should be to strive as hard as possible to oppose the
> natural tendency of religious groups to fall into two mutually-antagonistic groups: fundamentalists, who hold to
> the literal meaning of the Bahá’í sacred texts, and liberals, who question and doubt everything and probe the
> most extreme interpretations of scripture. Bahá’í scholars should strive to carry both groups with them since all
> mutual antagonisms and tensions weaken the Faith itself.
> There will also be questions in the field of Bahá’í doctrine that cannot at present be resolved or on which
> there is contradictory information. Again, rather than trying to impose an arbitrary resolution on such questions,
> it would be better to leave such matters open. In 1949, the following statement was written on behalf of Shoghi
> Effendi: “One may liken Bahá’u’lláh’s teachings to a sphere; there are points poles apart, and in between the
> thoughts and doctrines that unite them” (Bahá’í Studies Bulletin 46). In such matters, it is important to realize
> that there is no necessity to come to firm conclusions as even apparently contradictory conclusions can both be
> true. Just as in physics, most subatomic entities can equally correctly be observed as both particles and waves,
> depending on the way in which they are observed, so apparently contradictory statements can both be different
> aspects of the truth. The danger of trying to force conclusions is highlighted by the Universal House of Justice:
> 
> ...the believers must recognize the importance of intellectual honesty and humility. In past dispensations
> many errors arose because the believers in God’s Revelation were overanxious to encompass the Divine
> Message within the framework of their limited understanding, to define doctrines where definition was
> beyond their power, to explain mysteries which only the wisdom and experience of a later age would make
> comprehensible, to argue that something was true because it appeared desirable and necessary. Such com-
> promises with essential truth, such intellectual pride, we must scrupulously avoid. (Wellspring 87-88)
> 
> An important aspect of a Bahá’í approach to scholarship would be the exhibition of a spirit of kindliness,
> courtesy, and goodwill. This would include the avoidance of launching direct attacks upon the works and
> opinions of others, which is so often a feature of modem scholarship.
> 
> If ye be aware of a certain truth, if ye possess a jewel, of which others are deprived, share it with them in a
> language of utmost kindliness and goodwill. If it be accepted, if it fulfil its purpose, your object is attained.
> If any one should refuse it, leave him unto himself, and beseech God to guide him. (Bahá’u’lláh, Gleanings
> 289)
> 
> The Bahá’í scholar should put forward what he or she believes to be the truth with courtesy and
> consideration. It is almost unnecessary to add that the scholar must always treat the central figures of the Bahá’í
> Faith (and indeed of the other religions) with the utmost respect and reverence. In all this, it is not so much the
> content of what is produced by the scholar that is important but the tone and emphasis. The same set of facts can
> be set down in a manner that is courteous and constructive or in a manner that is disrespectful, discourteous, and
> hurtful. For example, it is seldom necessary to specify that one is refuting the opinions of another scholar. It is
> sufficient to expose the facts as they appear to one and leave it for others to make their own conclusions.
> 
> Mutual Obligations of the Bahá’í Scholar and the Bahá’í Community
> Bahá’í scholars have an important duty to take great care over what they produce. Scholars must be careful
> that what is presented to fellow believers is appropriate to their level of understanding and does not cause
> dismay and consternation. It is very tempting to present to the Bahá’í community startling facts and unexpected
> conclusions that one has arrived at as the result of one’s research. But this temptation must be resisted and such
> matters presented with the utmost tact and wisdom. Thus, one of the Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh states:
> Thou hast written that one of the friends hath composed a treatise. This was mentioned in the Holy
> Presence, and this is what was revealed in response: Great care should be exercised that whatever is written
> in these days doth not cause dissension, and invite the objection of the people. Whatever the friends of the
> One true God say in these days is listened to by the people of the world.
> It hath been revealed in the Lawh-i-Hikmat: “The unbelievers have inclined their ears towards us in
> order to hear that which might enable them to cavil against God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.”
> Whatever is written should not transgress the bounds of tact and wisdom, and in the words used there
> should lie hid the property of milk, so that the children of the world may be nurtured therewith, and attain
> maturity. We have said in the past that one word hath the influence of spring and causeth hearts to become
> fresh and verdant, while another is like unto blight which causeth the blossoms and flowers to wither. God
> grant that authors among the friends will write in such a way as would be acceptable to fairminded souls,
> and not lead to cavilling by the people.6
> 
> The Bahá’í community has, along with every other nonacademic group of people, a natural tendency to
> distrust and fear scholars and academics, particularly if the latter group feed this distrust by their arrogance. It is
> a continuing challenge to Bahá’í scholars to overcome this fear and convince the Bahá’í community of their
> sincerity and devotion to the Cause. However, the Bahá’í community has reciprocal obligations towards the
> Bahá’í scholar. First, the Bahá’í community must cultivate tolerance towards the opinions of others while
> maintaining the right of each individual to their own point of view. On this, the Universal House of Justice has
> stated: “... although individual insights can be illuminating and helpful, they can also be misleading. The friends
> must therefore learn to listen to the views of others without being overawed or allowing their faith to be shaken,
> and to express their own views without pressing them on their fellow Bahá’ís” (Letter, 27 May 66).
> Second, no individual Bahá’í, if he or she considers that the work of a Bahá’í scholar has led to erroneous
> conclusions, has the right to call into question that scholar’s loyalty to the Cause or firmness in the Covenant in
> public. The most that any individual can do is to report doubts on this matter to the institutions of the Faith.
> Only the institutions have any right to launch an investigation into such a matter.
> Third, the administrative institutions of the Bahá’í Faith have the obligation to provide encouragement and
> support to all endeavors that seek to promote and develop the Bahá’í Faith. They should not seek to impose a
> dogmatic orthodoxy and should intervene only if they are reasonably sure that a certain development threatens
> to damage the Faith. On the need for tolerance in the Bahá’í administration, the Universal House of Justice has
> stated:
> 
> The House of Justice agrees that it is most important for the believers, and especially those who hold
> positions of responsibility in the Administrative Order, to react calmly and with tolerant and enquiring
> minds to views which differ from their own, remembering that all Bahá’ís are but students of the Faith, ever
> striving to understand the Teachings more clearly and to apply them more faithfully, and none can claim to
> have a perfect understanding of this Revelation. (Letter, 18 July 79)
> 
> This broad tolerance should also be reflected in the review process, which is not intended to be a system of
> censorship or a mechanism for imposing upon the Bahá’ís a uniform interpretation of the Faith but is merely a
> temporary measure for the protection of the Faith in its early days when many of the believers are inadequately
> informed of the teachings of the Faith and there is a need for a check on the dignity and accuracy of the
> presentation of the Faith. Shoghi Effendi stated in 1930: “...the administration of the Cause...should guard
> against such rigidity as would clog and fetter the liberating forces released by His Revelation....The present
> restrictions imposed on the publication of Bahá’í literature will be definitely abolished ...” (World Order of 9).
> 
> Conclusions
> As the Bahá’í Faith emerges from obscurity, Bahá’í scholars will have an important role in three fields: the
> presentation of Bahá’í teachings to the world; the defence of the Faith from attacks; and the growth and
> development of the Bahá’í community. They will only be able to fulfil these functions effectively, however, if
> they maintain close links with the Bahá’í community. Any degree of estrangement from the community will
> both lead to tension between them and the community and negate the results of their efforts.
> There is, at present, a resurgence of interest in academic research into the Bahá’í Faith, both within the
> Bahá’í community and in the academic world. Bahá’í scholars should be at the forefront leading this renewal of
> interest. The administrative institutions of the Faith should take an active role in these developments, guiding
> and encouraging them. The Bahá’í community should welcome this activity as evidence of the increasing
> prominence of the Faith and should look forward to the positive results that will emerge from it.
> Notes
> 
> 1. Letter from the Department of the Secretariat, Universal House of Justice, 3 January 1979, to participants at
> the Bahá’í Studies Seminar, Cambridge, England, 30 September–1 October, 1978.
> 
> 2. Indeed, the phenomenological approach is severely limited because it fails to take into account the truth and
> meaning of the Bahá’í Faith for the individual. For a more detailed look at phenomenology in relation to Bahá’í
> scholarship, see “Phenomenology, Methodological Agnosticism and Apologetics” by Robert Parry, a paper
> prepared for the Second Cambridge Seminar on Methodology and Ethics, 15–16 September 1979.
> 
> 3. See Robert Parry, “Rational/Conceptual Performance—The Bahá’í Faith and Scholarship,” a discussion paper
> prepared for the Seminar on Methodology and Ethics held at North, England, 29-30 January 1983. Published in
> Bahá’í Studies Bulletin, 1:4 (1983):13-21.
> 
> 4. See, for example, Wilfred Cantwell Smith, ‘‘Comparative Religion: Whither—and Why?” in The History of
> Religion: Essays in Methodology 31–58.
> 
> 5. Comments by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice on the report of the Bahá’í Studies
> Seminar on Ethics and Methodology held in Cambridge, England, 30 Sept.–1 Oct. 1978. Also published in
> Bahá’í News, June 1979.
> 
> 6. Tablet of Bahá’u’lláh, quoted in a letter from the Department of the Secretariat of the Universal House of
> Justice, 18 July 1979, to an individual believer.
> 
> Works Cited
> Bahá’í Studies Bulletin, 1:1 (1982).
> 
> Bahá’u’lláh. Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1952.
> 
> ___ . Kitáb-i-Íqán. Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1950.
> 
> Gift of Teaching, The. Compilation issued by the Universal House of Justice. London: Bahá’í Publishing Trust,
> 1977.
> 
> Shoghi Effendi. Dawn of a New Day. New Delhi: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1970.
> 
> ___ . God Passes By. Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, ] 974.
> 
> ___ . Unfolding Destiny. London: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1981.
> 
> ___ . World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. 2d ed. Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1974.
> 
> Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. “Comparative Religion: Whither—and Why?” The History of Religion: Essays in
> Methodology. Ed. M. Eliade and J.M. Kitagawa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.
> 
> Universal House of Justice. Letter to an individual believer dated 27 May 1966.
> 
> ___ . Letter to a National Spiritual Assembly, 21 July 1968.
> 
> ___ . Letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, 18 July 1979.
> 
> Wellspring of Guidance. Wilmette: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1969.
>
> — *Scholarship and the Baha'i Community (Used by permission of the curator)*