Baha'u'llah calls Mirza Yahya a "son of adultery"

The Appointment of Mirza Yahya

Following the martyrdom of the Bab in 1850, the nascent Babi community was left leaderless and scattered. To comprehend the schism that would soon irrevocably tear the movement apart, one must first examine the initial, ostensibly cooperative relationship between the two most prominent figures to emerge from the chaos: the half-brothers Mirza Husayn-'Ali (later Baha'u'llah) and Mirza Yahya. In the immediate aftermath, it was to the younger Mirza Yahya that many Babis looked for guidance. He was installed as the nominal head of the community, bearing the august title Subh-i-Azal, or “Morn of Eternity.” Crucially, the historical record indicates that this very title was conferred upon him by the Bab not independently, but specifically at Baha'u'llah's suggestion—a fact that makes his subsequent campaign to systematically dismantle Yahya's authority all the more striking. This calculated act of deference by the elder, more influential Baha'u'llah positioned him as a magnanimous supporter while placing his younger, less capable half-brother in a role he was seemingly destined to fail. This initial arrangement, however, was less a gesture of fraternal loyalty than a strategic maneuver, establishing a façade of continuity that would soon crumble under the weight of Baha'u'llah's own burgeoning ambition and his rival's perceived inadequacies.

Baha'u'llah's Grief and Yahya's Jealousy

During their shared exile in Baghdad, this fragile fraternity began to fracture under the weight of personal rivalry and competing claims to authority. The writings from this period reveal that Baha'u'llah was consumed by a profound sadness, a state he attributed to two primary causes: the deteriorating moral condition of the Babi community and, more pointedly, "the clandestine but increasing opposition of His half-brother Mirza Yahya, 'Subh-i-Azal'."

A pivotal event that crystallized this animosity involved a Babi seeker named Haji Mirza Kamal al-Din Naraqi. Dissatisfied with a commentary provided by Mirza Yahya, Naraqi approached Baha'u'llah with the same query. In response, Baha'u'llah seized the opportunity to reveal the "Tablet of All Food," a work of such spiritual potency that Naraqi was instantly won over to his faction. This public display of intellectual and spiritual superiority served not only to impress the seeker but to "further inflame the jealousy of Mirza Yahya." The incident starkly contrasted the two half-brothers: while Mirza Yahya "hid from everyone in fear," producing "words and writings...devoid of any light," Baha'u'llah was actively demonstrating the spiritual authority necessary to command a following and undermine his brother's standing. The seeds of discord, sown in jealousy and perceived inadequacy, were beginning to bear the bitter fruit of outright condemnation.

Accusation and Rejection

The culmination of this animosity is laid bare in the visceral text of the "Tablet of All Food" itself. The finality of this break is rendered all the more severe when recalling that the target of this visceral condemnation was the very man Baha'u'llah himself had first proposed as the community's leader. In the tablet, Baha'u'llah moves from veiled allusions to a direct and shocking denunciation of his rival. The most severe accusation is a startling one:

"And You know that a son of adultery willfully desired to shed My blood."

This accusation, attacking not only his rival's actions but his very parentage, is followed by an unequivocal rejection of any allegiance to the man Baha'u'llah had once promoted. He declares with absolute finality:

"Nay, by the presence of Thy Might! I do not pledge allegiance unto him, either in secret or publicly."

With these words, the unraveling was complete. The relationship had devolved from a strategic, if disingenuous, alliance to open warfare. Mirza Yahya, once the installed "Morn of Eternity," was recast as a would-be murderer of illegitimate birth, a condemned enemy whose authority was utterly and publicly repudiated.

Questions for Reflection

This historical record of internecine conflict, culminating in accusations of attempted murder and illegitimate birth, sits uneasily with the hagiographic accounts of Baha'u'llah's divine station. The evidence demands a critical interrogation of the man's character and the nature of his claims:

• On Divine Character: How can the use of an insult like "son of adultery", a term attacking another's parentage, be reconciled with the station of a Divine Manifestation meant to embody perfect character and elevate humanity?
• On Leadership and Ambition: Given that Baha'u'llah himself suggested the title for Mirza Yahya, does his later campaign against him suggest a change of divine will, or does it point to a more human struggle for power and leadership within the Babi community?
• On Prophetic Fulfillment: If Baha'u'llah's claim as "Him Whom God shall make manifest" was self-evident, as he suggests in the Tablet, why was it necessary to engage in such personal and severe condemnation of a rival rather than allowing the power of his own revelation to suffice?

Video : A former Baha'i and survivor of a uniquely and intensely abusive father in Alaska.

What happened to Shoghi Effendi’s vast properties in Iran after his death?

Shoghi Effendi's Death and a Looming Crisis

The death of Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Baha'i Faith, in London in 1957 plunged his community into a crisis of unprecedented scale. His passing created two critical and intertwined problems that threatened the very structure of the faith. The first was a leadership vacuum; Effendi died without a will and, being childless, had appointed no successor as Guardian. The second was a financial emergency of immense proportions, centered on his vast personal property holdings in Iran, which were valued at an estimated $287 million USD at the time. This confluence of a succession crisis and a colossal fortune set the stage for a dramatic and ethically fraught chapter in Baha'i history. This essay will critically examine the controversial and legally dubious methods employed by the post-Shoghi Baha'i leadership to secure this fortune, a campaign of deception that culminated in the creation of the Umana Company.

The Heirs' Dilemma: Doctrinal Purity vs. Financial Reality

To understand the extraordinary measures taken by the Baha'i leadership, one must first grasp the strategic conflict between their religious doctrine and the unyielding realities of Iranian civil law. This clash presented a central dilemma that forced the leadership into a series of decisions that compromised their publicly stated principles and set a precedent for future clandestine actions.

The fundamental conflict arose immediately after Shoghi’s death. According to Baha'i belief, as established by his predecessor Abdu'l-Bahá, the property of the Guardian should pass directly to the next Guardian to be used in service of the faith. However, the legal reality in Iran was starkly different. Without a will or children, Shoghi’s legal heirs were his wife, Ruhiyyih Maxwell, and his surviving brothers and sisters.

This situation was steeped in a deep and well-documented hypocrisy. Years earlier, Shoghi Effendi had excommunicated all of his siblings for various reasons, including their demand for a share of Abdu'l-Bahá's inheritance, an act he condemned as a profound betrayal of the faith! Now, facing the total loss of the assets to these same relatives, the Baha'i leadership was forced into a humiliating reversal. They entered into negotiations with the very individuals they had long branded as heretics and outcasts. In a move that flagrantly contradicted Shoghi's own decrees, the leadership paid a "significant percentage" of his vast fortune to his siblings. This payment was a necessary bribe to secure their cooperation in obtaining the certificate of inheritance required by Iranian law.

This expedient betrayal of principle, however, did not go unnoticed within the community. For many "free-thinking Baha'is", the deal was an unacceptable moral compromise. It raised troubling questions: if the siblings were truly heretics, why was the leadership now enriching them in direct violation of the Guardian’s wishes? This act of realpolitik created a tangible crisis of faith, revealing that the leadership's hypocrisy was not just a theoretical contradiction but a tangible problem causing dissent among its followers in Iran. This short-term, compromising deal, however, merely secured the assets from immediate dispersal; it necessitated a more permanent and surreptitious solution to consolidate complete control.

The Umana Company: A Corporate Veil for an Illicit Takeover

The Umana Company (Shirkat-i Umana) was not a legitimate business enterprise; it was a deliberately crafted legal instrument designed to execute a fraudulent takeover of Shoghi Effendi's assets, circumvent Iranian tax authorities, and permanently disinherit the legal heirs. It was the centerpiece of a sophisticated conspiracy orchestrated by the most senior figures in the Iranian Baha'i community, the details of which were laid bare in a formal complaint filed on May 17, 1969 (27/2/1348), with the Prosecutor General of Iran's Supreme Court.

The complaint's author was Colonel Yadu'llah Thabet Rasekh, a figure whose background gave his accusations immense credibility. Rasekh was a retired military officer with a legal education, born into a Baha'i family and a devout follower for decades. Crucially, he was also an investor whose own personal funds were later seized by the Umana Company after he left the Baha'i faith. His detailed grievance was thus not an external attack, but an insider's meticulously documented exposé of a crime. According to Rasekh, the key individuals who masterminded this plan included:

• Dr. Ali-Muhammad Varqa
• Dhikru'llah Khadem
• Shua'ullah 'Ala'i
• 'Ali-Akbar Furutan
• Habib Thabet (Pasal)
• Hadi Rahmani Shirazi

The mechanics of their scheme, as outlined in Rasekh's legal filings, unfolded in a clear, step-by-step sequence of fraud:

1. Illegal Initial Transfer: Before any legal inheritance process was completed, the conspirators used fraudulent deeds of settlement, specifically numbers 47308, 47434, and 47948, all registered at the Tehran Notary Office 25, to illegally transfer all of Shoghi's assets to one of their own, Dr. Ali-Muhammad Varqa.
2. Creation of Shirkat-i Umana: The key individuals then formally established the Umana Company as a joint-stock corporation.
3. Second Fraudulent Transfer: Dr. Varqa, now the illicit holder of the entire estate, promptly transferred all the properties to the newly created Umana Company.
4. Massive Tax Evasion: The core of the financial fraud lay in a brazen act of misrepresentation. To obscure the true value of the assets being transferred and evade taxes, the company's capital was declared at a laughably minuscule fraction of its real worth.

The Umana Company was, in essence, a holding company. Its primary function was to manage, subdivide, and sell off the vast portfolio of real estate it now illegally controlled. This corporate structure was meticulously designed to systematically evade a staggering amount of taxes—including inheritance taxes, transfer taxes, income taxes, and registration fees—estimated to be as high as thirteen million USD. This operation was not merely a circumvention of religious protocol; it was a calculated, large-scale criminal enterprise, a fact that exposes the profound ethical and religious betrayals it represented.

A Betrayal of Faith and Public Trust

The actions of the Baha'i leadership in the Umana Company affair represent a direct and staggering violation of the principles of honesty, trustworthiness, and obedience to spiritual authority that they publicly espoused. The entire operation was a betrayal not only of Iranian law but, more significantly, of Shoghi Effendi's own stated intentions for the properties.

In his historical work Kitab-i-Qarn-i-Badi', v. 4, page 49, Shoghi Effendi had explicitly declared that these properties were "public endowments" belonging to the entire global Baha'i community. They were not the personal property of a select few leaders to be manipulated for financial or administrative convenience. The creation of the Umana Company privatized these communal assets, placing them under the absolute control of a small, self-appointed cabal.

This affair powerfully illustrates how the pursuit of financial control led the leadership to disregard the explicit instructions of both Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi. They negotiated with and enriched individuals they themselves had branded as covenant-breakers, and they engaged in a criminal conspiracy that shattered the faith's public image of integrity, according to Rasekh. The illegality of their actions was clear and multifaceted. As Colonel Rasekh’s complaint underscores, the property transfers were executed in direct violation of multiple laws, statutes and legal opinions.

By knowingly breaking these laws, the leadership demonstrated a profound contempt for the civic duty they preached to their followers. This affair shattered any pretense of moral or legal integrity among the Baha'i leadership of that era, exposing a deep chasm between their spiritual claims and their worldly actions.

The Báb's True Successor: An Analysis Based on the Research of A.-L.-M. Nicolas

Introduction: The Succession Crisis After the Báb

In the turbulent religious landscape of mid-19th century Persia, the execution of Sayyid ‘Ali Muhammad Shirazi, known to his followers as the Báb, in 1850 created a profound leadership vacuum. His nascent movement, was thrown into a crisis over the critical question of his legitimate successor. This essay explores that contentious succession crisis by analyzing the evidence presented by A.-L.-M. Nicolas, a French diplomat whose long posting in Tehran afforded him over twenty-five years of deep, immersive, and, as his writing reveals, deeply personal study of the Babi faith.

According to Nicolas's historical analysis and the pre-Baháʼí sources he champions, Mirza Yahya, known as Subh-i-Azal, was the Báb's explicitly designated successor. His analysis builds a compelling case that his elder half-brother, Mirza Husayn-'Ali, who would later adopt the title Baha'u'llah, systematically usurped this leadership, an act which required fundamentally altering the Babi faith to establish his own authority.

To substantiate this thesis, this analysis will examine the key lines of evidence presented by Nicolas: the official and widely recognized nomination of Subh-i-Azal; Baha'u'llah's own professed ignorance of the Báb's foundational texts; the strategic re-characterization of the Báb's mission by the Baháʼí movement; and a stark comparison of the two claimants' actions in the years following the Báb's death.

The Explicit and Notorious Nomination of Subh-i-Azal

For any nascent religious movement, particularly one facing existential threats from state and clerical authorities, the clear designation of a successor is paramount for survival and continuity. In the case of Babism, the evidence for Subh-i-Azal's legitimate claim is founded on just such a clear appointment by the Báb himself.

Nicolas's research heavily relies on the work of the renowned British orientalist E.G. Browne, whose findings he presents as decisive. According to Browne, the Báb officially nominated Mirza Yahya (Subh-i-Azal) as his successor in 1849, a full year before his martyrdom. This was not a subtle or ambiguous act. Browne, as cited by Nicolas, describes the nomination in the strongest possible terms, calling it:

"explicite et notoire" (explicit and notorious)

The significance of this appointment was immediately clear. It was accepted by the vast majority of the Báb's followers, who, upon the founder's death, looked to the young Subh-i-Azal for guidance. As Browne notes, he received the recognition and homage of almost the entire Babi community.

This historical record establishes a clear and unbroken line of succession. According to the evidence compiled by Browne and presented by Nicolas, Subh-i-Azal's initial leadership was an "indisputable and absolute power over the Babi Church." This fact solidifies his position as the Báb's intended heir and provides the essential context for understanding the subsequent challenge to his authority.

Baha'u'llah's Disavowal of the Báb's Core Teachings

A successor's legitimacy is intrinsically tied to their mastery of the founder's teachings and scriptures. To claim to fulfill a divine mission while being ignorant of its foundational text would be a profound contradiction. Yet, according to Nicolas, this is precisely the position Baha'u'llah adopted regarding the Báb's central work, the Bayán.

In his analysis, Nicolas quotes directly from Baha'u'llah's own "Epistle to the Son of the Wolf," where Baha'u'llah makes a startling admission:

"God is witness and knows that I have never read the Bayân and have not seen its propositions"

(Shoghi translates thus - "God testifieth and beareth Me witness that this Wronged One hath not perused the Bayán, nor been acquainted with its contents.")

For Nicolas, this was an irreconcilable contradiction. He questions how Baha'u'llah could, in the same breath, claim total ignorance of the Bayán while proceeding to cite the very work he claims to have never read. This contradiction is compounded by a significant factual error that reveals a fundamental lack of familiarity with the text's structure. In the epistle, Baha'u'llah refers to the the sixteenth Wahid of the Bayán. However, as Nicolas points out, this is an impossibility; the Persian Bayán contains only eight Wahid.

The implications of these statements are critical. By his own account, Baha'u'llah was unfamiliar with the scripture that formed the bedrock of the Babi faith. This professed ignorance critically undermines his claim to be the Báb's spiritual heir and designated fulfillment. For Nicolas, this disavowal is not an incidental detail but the very key to understanding how Baha'u'llah could so completely alter the course of the Babi religion—one cannot be bound by a revelation one claims not to know, making its transformation not only possible, but strategically necessary.

The Hijacking of a Prophetic Mission: Demoting the Báb to Herald

To supplant a religious founder, a strategic and compelling narrative shift is required. Nicolas views this doctrinal revision not as a clarification but as a dethronement. He argues with palpable frustration that Seyyd Ali Mohammed, whom he venerates as a complete prophet, was being deliberately demoted to make room for a usurper. The Báb was no longer presented as a prophet in his own right but was recast as a mere forerunner whose sole purpose was to prepare the way for a greater manifestation.

Nicolas points to the writings of Baha'i authors like Gabriel Sacy and Isabella Brittingham, who consistently characterized the Báb as an "announcer" and a "herald". Brittingham, for instance, writes that the Báb's entire purpose was "to prove to the people that he was only the messenger of a great one who was to come."

This portrayal stands in stark contrast to the Báb's own self-conception and the station he claimed. As Nicolas forcefully argues, the Báb was a "a complete prophet, a Lawgiver, like Jesus or Muhammad". His holy book, the Bayán, was not a temporary prelude but his own complete and independent revelation, intended to stand for centuries until the distant arrival of "He Whom God Shall Make Manifest."

By reducing the Báb's station from that of an independent Manifestation of God to that of a herald, Baha'u'llah effectively dethroned him. This radical transformation created the necessary theological space for Baha'u'llah's own claim to supreme authority. In Nicolas's view, this narrative transformation was the essential mechanism for hijacking the original Babi movement and legitimizing a new leadership.

A Tale of Two Brothers: Obedience versus Ambition

For Nicolas, the final proof lies in the character and conduct of the two men. By contrasting their documented actions after the Báb's martyrdom, he presents a stark dichotomy: one of fidelity to the Master's will, the other of an ambition that required weakening that same Master's prestige.

Nicolas constructs a clear, two-part analysis based on historical accounts and his own personal observations:

• Subh-i-Azal: The Faithful Successor His actions were characterized by what Nicolas calls obedience and respect for his [the Báb's] will. Rather than seeking public acclaim, he lived in quiet exile in Famagusta, Cyprus. Crucially, he dedicated himself to fulfilling the Báb's unfinished work by completing the Persian Bayán. Nicolas, who spent two years with him, adds a personal testimony: "I affirm that I never heard him speak ill of anyone," including his half-brother.
• Baha'u'llah: The Ambitious Usurper His actions, in contrast, contributed to the weakening of the prestige of the Báb. He leveled severe accusations against Subh-i-Azal, claiming his brother had ordered the martyrdom of followers. Furthermore, in the "Epistle to the Son of the Wolf," Baha'u'llah recounts how the Báb's collected writings were abandoned in Baghdad after he had tasked Subh-i-Azal with transporting them to Persia—an incident that reflects poorly on both, yet which Baha'u'llah uses to incriminate his brother.

This stark contrast in conduct—one man preserving the founder's text, the other denigrating the founder's chosen successor—leads Nicolas to pose a simple but powerful rhetorical question that encapsulates his entire analysis:

"Lequel des deux est dans la vérité ?" ("Which of the two is in the truth?")

Source book: https://archive.org/details/nicolas-qui-est-le-successeur-du-bab-1933

Why can’t we trust Baha'i texts in English? by Payam Aryan

Hi everyone, I'm Payam Aryan and this is 10 minutes with Payam Aryan. I intend to present a series of audio clips in English to you on various topics about the Bahá'í Faith so that we can get a more accurate understanding of Bahá'í Faith by explaining and getting to know about its study sources and the texts of this religion. Before I go any further, I should explain something.

We cannot trust so-called official translations when it comes to Bahá'í texts. English Bahá'í texts have been translated from Arabic or Persian. However, the Bahá'í-approved translators haven't been quite honest in their job, including Shoghi Effendi, the guardian of the Faith himself.

They haven't translated Bahá'í Text word by word nor by the literal meaning of the word wherever the whole subject or specific word is controversial. For instance, when the text is about the punishment for the crime of intentionally setting someone's house on fire, instead of translating the words burning the offender alive, the translators have used the word execute without explaining the method of execution. Of course, the execution method is very important.

No one can even imagine that today we execute someone by burning. And because these translators know that this is very brutal and inhumane, they translate differently and use another word. Bahá'í friends may offer different justifications such as Shoghi Effendi's authority to interpretation.

In response to these friends, it should be said that, first of all, interpretation is Shoghi Effendi's authority only, so other translators are not allowed to change anything. Secondly, it should be mentioned that even Shoghi Effendi is not allowed to abrogate the rules of the Bahá'í religion according to its text. He only has the right to explain Bahá'í texts, not to abrogate Bahá'u'lláh's words, the founder of the faith whose forbidden abrogation of his words by anyone.

Then no one in process of translating a text is allowed to express something completely different. So if an explanation is to be given, the translation should be done correctly and then the entire of the text should be explained. Another problem that exists is Shoghi Effendi's translation method, who's chosen to use Old English, a form of English that is not being used anymore.

It seems that Shoghi Effendi has used Old English so that English speakers would feel that these words are from God when they hear pronouns and words that are similar to the pronouns and sentences of Bible. Why was it necessary to use an Old English in the 20th century and not to use the everyday English that everyone understands? And the most important of all is that many Bahá'í texts have been kept in International Teaching Center at Bahá'í World Center in Haifa, Israel, till today and have never been published. This is very unusual and we don't know what these texts are really about.

Think about it. You believe in a religion but a series of texts were placed somewhere and you haven't seen them yet. And many of those that are available haven't been translated into English.

Forget about accepting an opinion or ideology based on evidence and reasoning. Even if you want to just believe, have faith, you still must have all the texts of a religion fully available. How can you accept an ideology even though a series of its study sources are not available and are hidden somewhere? Therefore, in my audio clips, whenever I want to use a code or read a text, I refer to the original text either Arabic or Farsi and translate it word by word into English with the exception of a small number of originally English texts written by Shoghi Effendi himself.

I must emphasize once again that my goal is only to clarify the truth about teachings and principles of Bahá'í Faith. I love and respect Bahá'ís around the world and I just criticize the Bahá'í religion. I ask simple and honest questions and if there are rational and convincing answers, we should not be deprived of such answers.

And if my criticism is valid and there is no answer to such questions, this issue should not upset anyone. Since all believers consider their own religions to be the absolute truth, my question may not be pleasant to them, but I assure you that my goal is only to educate myself, inform everyone and reach the truth. So instead of making false assumptions and slandering me of nonsense like spreading hatred, let's work together to reach decent conclusions so that our audience can find the truth.

I really don't mind what people believe as long as their beliefs do not harm other people. I just feel responsible that if I have any knowledge or information about an ideology, I should share it with people because I believe we should strive for public welfare and well-being of humankind. And of course, you as listeners must investigate independently that if I am telling the truth by checking the references.

Thanks for listening and have a wonderful time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHYHSgd2pyI

Baha'is converting Hindus in India, also pressurizing them to donate in the name of "test of faith"

Zia Mody is a third generation Baha'i, she gives all her money to the Baha'i faith. But not everyone in India is as rich as her.

I joined the Bahá'í Faith because I believed it was about truth, unity, and justice. But today, it feels more like a system built around endless fundraising. Every few months, new appeals arrive - for the National Fund, the Local Fund, the International Fund, and now again for the Shrine of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and the Bihar Sharif Temple. There are always pledge forms, emotional speeches, and reminders that giving to the Fund is a “test of faith.” What was once a spiritual gathering now feels more like a financial drive.

As an ordinary middle-class Indian, I find this very suffocating. Life is already expensive - with rent, education, food, and family responsibilities. Yet, Baha’i institutions keep pushing for more and more contributions. They tell us that money is a sign of devotion, but how much more can ordinary people give? Many of us are silently uncomfortable, but no one dares to say it aloud. The pressure is real, and the guilt for not contributing enough makes the whole experience unpleasant. It has reached a point where some of us hesitate to attend Feasts or gatherings just to avoid another fund appeal.

What makes it worse is that there are already wealthy Bahá'ís in India and abroad who give huge amounts of money. Zia Mody, one of the most powerful women in India, is a billionaire and a devoted Bahá'í. She donates crores of rupees to the Bahá’í Faith. With such massive contributions already coming in, it’s natural to ask: Where is all this money going? Why does the community still keep asking middle-class believers for more? Surely the funds given by just one or two wealthy individuals could sustain all Bahá’í activities in India for years.

The Bahá’í administration never gives a clear public account of how the money is spent. The Universal House of Justice receives Huququ’llah - 19% of people’s surplus wealth - but there’s no transparent report on where it goes. We are told not to question, only to trust. But this blind trust is difficult when we see continuous fundraising drives, increasing project costs, and no visible accountability. It begins to look less like a spiritual test and more like financial exploitation - using faith and guilt as tools to collect money.

Faith should lift people up, not weigh them down with pressure and financial burden. The Bahá'í administration must stop demanding constant contributions from ordinary Indians who are already struggling. Let the wealthy and the institutions handle the grand projects. Stop turning every Feast into a money-collection session. Spirituality cannot grow in an atmosphere of guilt and financial exhaustion. If this continues, many sincere believers will drift away - not because they lost faith in Bahá’u’lláh, but because the system made them feel like their worth depended on their wallet.

About Zia Mody, please check - https://www.livemint.com/Specials/ncVyyo9guGGrQX5qy2YLoO/My-giving-is-determined-by-my-religion--Zia-Mody.html

Shared via email by Mr. Rohit (surname removed for obvious reasons), Lucknow, India.

The impact of Ruhiyyih Khanum's marriage to Shoghi Effendi's on his family and the Baha'i Faith.

From Prisoners to Land Barons: A Critical Look at the Baha'i Rise in Palestine

1. The Paradox of the Prisoner-Landlords

To understand the Baha'i presence in modern-day Israel, one must begin with its paradoxical origins in Ottoman Palestine. The official history starts with Baha’u’llah’s arrival in Acre in August 1868, not as a spiritual leader on a mission, but as a political prisoner of the Ottoman Empire. This image of religious persecution, however, is immediately complicated by the group's subsequent actions, which reveal a sharp and immediate focus on economic integration and strategic real estate acquisition.

In 1870, Baha’u’llah and his followers were released from the Acre Citadel, not as a gesture of clemency, but because the Turkish army needed more space. They remained prisoners, explicitly "forbidden to leave the city." Yet within this confinement, the sect’s administrative director and Baha’u’llah’s son, Abbas Effendi, immediately began forming connections with the local "upper class" and renting homes from local Muslims. This swift pivot from political confinement to calculated economic engagement raises a fundamental question. For a sect whose leader was still a state prisoner, this rapid integration into the local property market suggests that from the very outset, securing a physical and economic foothold was as important, if not more so, than any purely spiritual mission.

These initial forays into the Acre rental market were merely a prelude to the far more ambitious and large-scale land purchases that would soon define the Baha'i presence in Palestine.

2. Building a Real Estate Empire on Holy Ground

The period under Baha’u’llah’s leadership marked a strategic shift from renting properties within city walls to the aggressive acquisition of vast rural estates. This era represented the most intensive phase of land purchasing in the faith's history in Palestine, indicating a clear goal of establishing not just a spiritual presence, but a formidable physical and economic one. Moving far from the eyes of the authorities in Acre, the sect’s leaders began assembling a significant property portfolio through a savvy, multi-pronged strategy.

Their approach was multifaceted and cautious. For three estates east of Acre, including the significant Ridvan Park, they began by renting in 1875, only committing to a full purchase in 1881 after establishing a firm presence. In other areas like Junaynih, individual sect members made private purchases of 120 dunams, which were later transferred to the faith, obscuring the full scale of the sect's acquisitions. These holdings in the Zebulun Valley, which included approximately 550 dunams at Jidru, formed the initial core of their landed assets. But their ambition soon turned to a far larger prize in the Jordan Valley.

• Jordan Valley Holdings: A total of approximately 32,200 dunams were purchased across four sites:
  • Nuqaib: ~13,000 dunams
  • Samara: ~12,500 dunams
  • Umm Juni: ~5,600 dunams
  • Adassiya: ~1,100 dunams

The acquisition of such massive, undeveloped, and often dangerous tracts of land was not a simple act of settlement but a calculated political and economic maneuver. The Jordan Valley lands were neglected, subject to Bedouin raids, and likely acquired for an "attractively low" price. While Baha’u’llah’s personal longing for rural life is noted, the primary driver appears to have been strategic: he was "probably seeking to ensure the status and position of the sect." This was a move to secure tangible assets and build a foundation of power far from Ottoman oversight.

As the family accumulated these valuable assets, however, the land became not only a source of security but also the catalyst for the intense internal conflicts that would shape the faith's future.

3. Power, Property, and Family Feuds

The succession of leadership within the Baha'i faith was not a matter of seamless divine appointment but of intense power struggles, with control over the family's burgeoning property empire lying at the heart of the disputes. This was the inevitable outcome of a strategy that prioritized tangible assets over communal cohesion from the very beginning. When Baha’u’llah died in 1892, a struggle for leadership erupted between his sons, Abbas Effendi and Muhammad Ali Effendi, with Abbas ultimately emerging victorious. Decades later, a similar conflict would arise, this time with even higher stakes.

Following the death of Abbas Effendi, his appointed successor and grandson, Shoghi Effendi, faced a significant challenge to his authority from his own relatives over the ownership of the valuable Bahji estate—where Baha’u’llah himself was buried. The dispute escalated to a point where it required outside intervention.

The outcome of this family feud was decisive and revealing:

1. The matter was brought before a British court, which ruled in favor of Shoghi Effendi, cementing his legal control over the contested property.
2. Following this legal victory, Shoghi Effendi consolidated his power by having many of his opponents—whom he branded covenant-breakers—deported from Palestine.

Having secured absolute control over both the spiritual leadership and the physical properties of the faith, Shoghi Effendi would accelerate a major strategic shift in how the Baha'i leadership managed its vast land holdings.

4. From Acquisition to Liquidation

The early twentieth century saw a dramatic reversal in Baha'i land strategy. The era of aggressive acquisition gave way to a new policy of systematically selling off large portions of their holdings, particularly the undeveloped agricultural estates in the Jordan Valley, primarily to Jewish organizations.

This strategic pivot did not begin with Shoghi Effendi, but under his predecessor, Abbas Effendi. Facing persistent security threats from Bedouin raids and the economic reality of unimproved land worked by tenant farmers, the leadership began to liquidate these assets. Umm Juni and Samara were sold during the first decade of the twentieth century when Jewish organizations made "attractive offers." Shoghi Effendi later accelerated this process, selling off most of the remaining Jordan Valley lands. The very factors that made these lands an "attractively low" purchase for a marginalized sect—their undeveloped state and persistent insecurity—also made them a pragmatic and easily justifiable asset to liquidate when a more lucrative opportunity arose.

Amid this trend of selling land, one decision stands out as the exception that proves the rule. The settlement of Adassiya was the "first and only attempt by the Bahais to found a village of their own." This isolated effort underscores that the broader mission had fundamentally changed. The leadership was signaling a pivot away from agricultural settlement and toward a new, more centralized vision for its presence in Palestine. The capital generated from these land sales would be redirected toward a monumental new project: the construction of a global headquarters on Mount Carmel.

5. A World Center Without a Community?

The history of the Baha'i faith in Palestine culminates in a central, lingering question: After decades spent acquiring land, fighting over its control, and eventually selling it for development funds, why did the local Baha'i community itself fail to grow? Idit Luzia (author of the article related to the Baha'i faith in the book The Land that became Israel : studies in historical geography) is explicit that the community's size "never exceeded several hundred members." This demographic stagnation stands in stark contrast to the grandeur of the physical structures the leadership erected.

The reasons provided for this lack of growth are a mixture of external pressures and, most notably, internal policy:

• External historical events not directly related to the sect
• A hostile administration, particularly under the Ottomans
• Internal struggles and power feuds within the sect
• A leadership that "consciously limited demographic development"

This final point is the most revealing. Why would a religious leadership, in its own holy land, deliberately limit the growth of its own community? This policy confirms that the ultimate goal was never to cultivate a thriving, populous local spiritual community. Instead, the entire strategy—from the initial land grab in Acre to the liquidation of the Jordan Valley estates—was aimed at the creation of a global, corporate-style headquarters. The Baha'i World Center was built for a worldwide following, funded by international donations and the strategic sale of its Palestinian land assets, leaving a legacy of magnificent buildings without a significant local community to inhabit them.

(Much of the material presented here is derived from the book The Land that became Israel : studies in historical geography by Ruth Kark - 1990)

https://archive.org/details/landthatbecameis0000unse

Paul Desailly (a Baha'i from Australia) identifies a primary challenge facing the Bahá'í Faith

Paul Desailly identifies a primary challenge facing the Bahá'í Faith as the stagnation in enrollments, noting that growth has failed to keep pace with the world population for forty years. He acknowledges that although no one knows the exact time, the current world order will soon be replaced by a new one. Desailly links the lack of successful propagation to a failure by the community to fully realize and promote the fundamental Baha'i principles. He points to core Baha'i texts, such as the Tablet To The Hague and The Promise of World Peace, as containing the essential cures for humanity's current problems, which should logically lead to an increase in enrollment, particularly among young people.

A specific principle Desailly repeatedly highlights as being neglected is the necessity of a universal auxiliary language. He calls this principle the "primary principle for realizing the oneness of humanity" and "the very first service to the world of man". He cites 'Abdu'l-Bahá, who stated that a common language is the "greatest means of progress towards the union of East and West" and will "upraise the standard of the oneness of humanity". Desailly suggests that certain Baha’i leaders have let this vital, foundational principle "slide" for decades, contributing directly to the faith's statistical stagnation. He further asserts that ignoring principles we find unpalatable prevents the realization of how all the Bahá'í principles are interconnected.

Desailly addresses issues of leadership and community action, stating that poor enrollment growth rests partly with the wider public for marginalizing religion, which he says leads to chaos and war. However, he also addresses internal challenges, suggesting that individual Baha'i functionaries or counselors can sometimes influence or mislead decision-making collectives, which harms enrollment. While urging obedience to institutional guidance, Desailly argues that criticizing Baha'i individuals in leadership roles when propagation is at stake is not ruled out and does not threaten the Faith’s institutions. To rectify the situation, he suggests the radical idea of electing younger members who are willing to consult fairly on the auxiliary language principle. He stresses the need for Baha'is to be seen obeying Baha'u'llah's instructions, noting that consultation and compassion are the two "luminaries of divine wisdom," but consultation (guidance) takes precedence over compassion in the pursuit of wisdom.

https://bahaiforums.com/t/why-did-the-bahai-faith-stop-growing.26154/

Baha'i Sect Pledges Loyalty to Israel

www.google.com/books/edition/Inside_Palestine/6arLLFlFyqQC

Jaffa (ZOA) According to an item in the Jaffa Arabic daily, "El Yom," the Bahai Sect in Israel has pledged its allegiance to the Government.

In a letter to Prime Minister Ben Gurion, the leader of the Bahais, Shogy Rabani, stated that the establishment of the Jewish State was foretold in the Bahai scriptures.

(Inside Palestine, Volumes 7-8, p. 16 (1947) by Zionist Organization of America)

In fact, on the day before the relocation of Haifa’s Muslim and Christian Arab population, Shoghi Rabbani wrote directly to Prime Minister Ben Gurion praising the reestablishment of the Jewish state and the ingathering of the Jewish exiles.

(The Baha’i minority in the State of Israel, 1948–1957 by Randall S. Geller, 2018)

https://doi.org/10.1080/00263206.2018.1520100