'Abdu’l Baha Wouldn’t Bathe for Months at a Time and How Baha’is Suppressed this Fact !

'Abdu'l Baha laughing at those taking bath in Turkish Hammam. Picture only for representation purpose.

Baha’u’llah has enjoined upon his followers to bathe once a week:

“It hath been enjoined upon you to pare your nails, to bathe yourselves each week in water that covereth your bodies, and to clean yourselves with whatsoever ye have formerly employed. Take heed lest through negligence ye fail to observe that which hath been prescribed unto you by Him Who is the Incomparable, the Gracious.”

According to Baha’i scripture, Abdu’l-Baha wouldn’t bathe for months at a time. This act going against his father’s orders, has been censored and supressed in published works of Baha’is or simply distorted in the translation of Baha’i works into English. We will present here two such documents.
The first document is a distorted translation in the book Mahmud’s Diary:

“One of the servants asked why man is not thankful when in comfort. `Abdu'l-Bahá replied, `It is due to negligence. Otherwise one must be aware and thankful when immersed in the sea of bounties.' Then He said, `I have not had a good bath for several months.' The ship's attendant was then asked to prepare a warm fresh water bath for Him. Afterwards, He said, `I am much better now. For a long time I have not had leisure to take a real bath.'” (Mahmud Zaraqani, translated by Mohi Sobhani, Mahmúd's Diary: The Diary of Mírzá Mahmúd-i-Zarqání Chronicling `Abdu'l-Bahá's Journey to America, p. 15, http://bahai-library.com/books/mahmud/)

Pay attention to the two words “good” and “real”. These adjectives do not exist in the original Persian text of Mahmud’s diary. Abdu’l-Baha clearly states that he has not had a bath for several months and that he has not had leisure to take a bath for a long time. Two seemingly innocent words (‘good’ and ‘real’) have been added to this statement to hide the fact that Abdu’l-Baha had not taken a bath for a long time. This is the original Persian text for comparison:

«چند ماه است حمام نرفته ام. لهذا بملازم جهاز سپرده شد که حمام حاضر نموده قدری آب گرم شیرین نیز مهیا کرد. پس از حمام فرمودند خیلی راحت شدم. مدتی بود فرصت حمام نمی نمودم (محمود زرقانی، بدایع الآثار، ج1، ص 10)

The second suppressed document is in Persian and has not been translated to English but is available on the official Baha’i library here: http://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/ab/MAS2/mas2-84.html#pg83 The prominent Baha’i scholar, Ishraq Khavari, mentions the following statement from Abdu’l-Baha at the bottom of the page:

«ای دو یار عزیز هیچ می دانید که عبدالبهاء غرق چه دریایی است .. حال مصمم حرکت به فرنگستانم که شاید خدمتی بآستان نمایم.» (اشراق خاوری، مائده آسمانی، ج2، ص 83)

“Oh two dear friends, do you know in what sea Abdu’l-Baha is sinking .. now I am determined on journeying to the West so that I may perform service to [Baha’u’llah’s] court.” (Ishraq Khawari, Maidiyih Asimani, vol 2, p. 83)

As you can see in the image, a section from this tablet has been replaced with “..” After some serious digging, we finally found the original tablet in its uncensored form on page 162 of the 17th volume of the Iranian National Baha’i Archives ( http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/index/diglib/INBA.htm ). An image from this tablet is provided below with the censored section marked in red:

This is what the original version reads:

«ای دو یار عزیز هیچ می دانید که عبدالبهاء غرق چه دریایی است قسم به اسم اعظم روحی لعتبه الفداء که یکسال است یکدفعه فرصت یافتم که به حمام بروم دیگر ملاحظه نمایید که چه اوضاعیست حال مصمم حرکت به فرنگستانم که شاید خدمتی بآستان نمایم.»

Oh two dear friends, do you know in what sea Abdu’l-Baha is sinking. I swear by the greatest name, may my soul be sacrificed for his shrine, that it is [now] one year that I have only had time to bathe once. See what a situation we have. Now I am determined on journeying to the West so that I may perform service to [Baha’u’llah’s] court. (Abdu’l-Baha, Iranian National Baha’i Archives [INBA], vol. 17, p. 162)

Abdu’l-Baha confesses that he hadn’t bathed for one year! It is totally understandable why the UHJ would want to censor this statement.

Video : Why i am not a Baha'i ?

Indian Baha'is of Persian origin are involved in full scale moral corruption.

It seems that every Baha’i official, in the Baha’i Administration, is involved in immoral activities whether he is a NSA member, Counsellor, ABM, Children Class teacher, or simply, a card carrying Baha’i!

A new immoral activity has come into picture by a member of LSA of Nashik, Principal of Motiwala Medical College and the husband of ABM, Mrs. Afsaneh Motiwala.

The secret love of Mr. Farooq Motiwala with an employee of Motiwala Medical College has become a talk of the town, and it is no longer a secret. The love affair bloomed for more than a decade. Mrs. Afsaneh Motiwala was fully aware about the secret love, but she kept a nelson eye on the episode, as if her interest was more towards Motiwala College, as her property, than the principal of the college! The College staff, the Baha’i community of Nashik and the students of the college are all talking about this immoral relation, and one wonders what impact it will have on these young innocent minds.

Nashik LSA member, Mr. Farooq Motiwala enjoying life. (Right - in Red Kurta)

Dr. Farooq Motiwala openly declared that Baha’i Faith and Aqdas permit having two wives. Even Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha were polygamous. He also gave the name of another Baha’i from Nashik who lived with two wives, and neither the National Spiritual Assembly of India, nor the Continental Board of counsellors had any objection to it. He said that Baha’i Administration encourages these things provided you keep on giving huge funds and a list of potential converts. He quoted an incidence from the late Universal House of Justice member, Mr. Hushmand Fatheazam, saying that once a wife complained to Abdul-Baha about the extra marital affair which her husband had with another lady. Abdul-Baha reprimanded her of her complain, and said “just mind your own business and not to bother about other's.”

The Local community of Nashik had strong objection about Motiwala’s behavior and they wrote letters to the Counsellor, Mr. Seiosansian, the NSA, and the LSA, to cause Mr. Farooq Motiwala to resign from the Assembly. But they did not bothered, as Motiwala is giving huge sum as donations, and Farooq has made compulsory for all the students of the college to do Ruhi curriculum.

The Baha'i Administration clearly ignored the directives of UHJ letter dated 23 April 2013, that said Administrative Sanction is must for such individuals, and not just their resignation:

“Should the conduct of a believer become so blatant as to attract the attention of the Assembly, it would want, after gaining a relatively clear picture of the issues, to offer loving, but firm advice to the friend involved. In most cases it is necessary, in the first instance, to determine to what extent the believer understands the Faith and its standards. Dispassionate counselling, not infrequently over an extended period, to assist the individual concerned in gaining an appreciation of the requirements of Bahá’í law is generally required. So, too, is patience needed, and he or she should be given sufficient time to bring about a change. The Assembly, often aided by the Counsellors or the members of the Auxiliary Boards, may have to help the individual, reflect on his or her particular circumstances, apply relevant principles, and explore available options. In deciding on what approach to take, the Assembly should be guided by the understanding that its objective is to assist the friends to draw closer to the Faith while taking care to protect the Bahá’í community from the negative influence of those who have no intention of adhering to its standards. When a believer demonstrates allegiance to the Cause and a willingness to rectify the situation, continued patience and loving guidance are in order. All throughout, of course, care is taken to ensure that an individual’s struggles do not become a source of backbiting or disunity in the community. In this the members of the community need to remember that they should focus their energies on their own spiritual development, and on overcoming their personal shortcomings.

Only in circumstances where a believer, ignoring all admonishments, persists in misconduct and knowingly and consistently violates the law, would it be necessary for the Assembly to consider applying administrative sanctions—this, after warning the individual of the consequences of his or her continued disregard for the teachings. ”

It looks like that the Universal House of Justice felt the danger of Mr. Farooq Motiwala continuing as the member of the Nashik Assembly and forced him to resign.

Source : http://bahai-scandals.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/indian-bahais-witness-another-case-of.html

Baha'is stabbed Rafsanjani’s daughter in the back

Baha'i Faith and Hypocrisy are two faces of the same coin. If benefits are due, the Baha'is will deceive the friends and foes alike.

Recently the betrayal by the Baha'is was done to Ms. Faezeh Hashemi, the daughter of Ex-president of Iran Mr. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. Who made a courtesy visit to temporarily paroled Baha'i leader Fariba Kamalabadi, with whom she apparently shared a prison cell in 2009. Fariba Kamalabadi, along with six other Baha'i colleagues of the seven-men ad-hoc Iranian Baha'i administration known as the Yaran, was tried on charges of espionage and spying for Israel, found guilty and sentenced to ten years imprisonment.

The whole episode was stage managed by Universal House of Justice. Faezah Hashemi was made to seat with a group of Baha'i women all unveiled with a picture of Abbas Effendi Abdu’l-Baha prominently displayed on the wall to the left of the assembled party. Although the visit of Ms. Hashemi was on humanitarian ground, the Baha'i Administration showed as if she being nearer to the Faith and due to this Iran is Losing Battle against the Baha'is. This is nothing but betrayal by deception.

The Baha'i Administration blew this incidence out of proportion through their international contacts. The UHJ sent Messages to National Assemblies to publicize the incidence. This forced the Ex-President to denounce her visit and reprimand saying ‘she had made a big mistake that had to be rectified.’ The Ex-President described the Baha'i faith as "a deviant sect", which "he disavows and have always done".

Baha'is are master of betrayal. By this way they created a rift between a father and daughter and tarnished her image amongst her own countrymen. At the same time they put the position of Mrs. Kamalabadi under severe pressure restricting the possibility of her any further release in future.

Iran Human Rights watch reported thus :

Inmates at the Women’s Ward in Evin Prison have been told that their furloughs (temporary leave) have been canceled and that they will no longer be able to send letters to relatives, a source told the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran.

The measures appear to be collective punishment in retaliation against prisoner and Baha'i leader Fariba Kamalabadi’s high-profile meeting on May 13, 2016 with former Tehran MP Faezeh Hashemi during Kamalabadi’s furlough.

“When Fariba Kamalabadi’s five-day furlough ended, the family asked the Tehran prosecutor for an extension, but his representative refused and said the reason was the meeting between Fariba and her former cellmate [Faezeh Hashemi],” the source told the Campaign.

  • This also gave Iran's religious establishment to denounce the Baha'i Faith as a heretical sect. This opportunity was gifted by UHJ to the Iranian authorities.
  • In the Message of UHJ dated 24 May 2016 , the Baha'is worldwide are ordered to propagate the matter against Iran and keep informing the UHJ based in Haifa Israel about the development. The Message undoubtedly confirms that the Baha'is are working under the supervision of Israel.
  • The Baha'i administration also created a fake Ayatollah Masumi Tehrani to create problems for Iranian Baha'is. The UHJ is only interested in filling their own pockets irrespective of what situation the Persian Baha'is are going to face in their country.
  • Sometimes back they betrayed a Pakistani International journalist Ms. Asma Jehangir using her name in denouncing the Government of Iran for persecuting the Baha'is. Very soon she realized the treachery of Baha'is and she dissociated herself from Baha'is.
  • The Baha'is do not spare sincere and devoted Baha'is by writing to them threatening letter and making Blogs in their name for sowing seeds of discord amongst the Baha'is.
  • There is deception in their every action and saying. They say JYSEPs are for imparting spiritual / moral knowledge to Baha'i youths but the fact is that these programs are a cause of immorality, envelopment and extramarital affairs amongst the Baha'is.
  • The list of deception goes on and on. It seems this has become the part of their faith to deceive people and make sure they trap other “useful ones” into their cult.
  • The Baha'is worldwide are getting aware of this plot of UHJ and have started distancing themselves from such administration. A Baha'i teacher Ms. Ruth white has observed the same attitude which she penned in her book ‘Is Baha'i administration enemy of Baha'i Faith.’
Alongside your own efforts, the Bahá’í International Community United Nations and Brussels Offices will be undertaking complementary initiatives at the international level. - Haifan Universal House of Justice

The Message of UHJ dated 24 May 2016

You are asked, through your Offices of External Affairs, to meet with your government contacts, appropriate non-governmental organizations, and individuals of influence and bring to their attention the recent action taken by the authorities in Iran against the largest non-Muslim religious minority in the country. They should become fully aware of the extent to which a widespread, coordinated, and systematic attack has been orchestrated by the Iranian authorities against a segment of its own citizens. They can be asked to consider whatever action they deem appropriate—from making a public statement to privately contacting the government of Iran, or any other action that they might consider would ameliorate the situation. While the media will not be the focus of your endeavours, those whose support you seek will naturally be free to make approaches as they wish. This campaign to incite religious hatred against the Bahá’ís has originated from the highest offices in that land. It is of added concern that the month of the Muslim fast will begin soon, a time in which religious fervour can be more easily aroused in Iran. Background materials that may be of use in its work will soon be supplied directly to your Office of External Affairs.

Alongside your own efforts, the Bahá’í International Community United Nations and Brussels Offices will be undertaking complementary initiatives at the international level.

Kindly keep the Universal House of Justice and the Bahá’í International Community United Nations Offices apprised of the outcome of your efforts in this matter. The House of Justice will offer prayers in the Holy Shrines on your behalf for bountiful confirmations from Bahá’u’lláh on all your endeavours.

With loving Bahá’í greetings,

Department of the Secretariat

cc: International Teaching Centre Bahá’í International Community,
United Nations Office, New York and Geneva
Bahá’í International Community, Brussels Office
Offices of External Affairs of the National Assemblies of Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada (Ottawa and Toronto), France, Germany, India, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States

Source : https://bahaicult.quora.com/Bahais-stabbed-Rafsanjani%E2%80%99s-daughter-in-the-back-1

Iranian Baha'i writes an open letter to The Universal House of Justice

To the Universal House of Justice,

Having carefully studied the message of the beloved House about the Baha’i teachings, issued to the attention of one of the Friends of Iran by the Secretariat on Jan 19, 2015: I would like to respectfully acknowledge the House with the following:

Though I was not the addressee of that message, I found the answers to some of my concerns. Yet some of the Friends' questions still remain. I write this letter with the hope that those Divine Trustees, through their kindness and patience, may respond with a clear and simple message, one without any ambiguity nor any references to any previous messages. The questions are as following:

As far as I am aware, before the difficulties began for the Friends of Iran, including the imprisonments, that exalted House acknowledged it has personally undertaken the responsibility of conducting and leading all teaching activities in Iran; and with the assistance of the Appointed Boards, tried to develop and establish Devotional meetings, study circles, and other core activities, according to the goals of the 5-year plan, so as to accelerate the process of the “Entry by Troops”.

Sending qualified youth to Turkey, Malaysia, the Emirates and India to receive training regarding Teaching Techniques, and getting experiences about the SED activities has been one of the most important activities of the Auxiliary Boards in Iran, an activity that still continues today.

Therefore, the claim that currently teaching the Faith in Iran is not “organized”, and is being carried out according to an individual’s personal initiative, is far from the truth. Even such personal initiatives, because they are wrought with inexperience, are characteristically excessive and without requisite wisdom. Thus the Iranian authorities assume it is directed by the Baha’i administration itself. This will, in turn, put more pressure on and increase the persecution against the defenseless Friends of Iran.

As you are well aware, religious states are particularly sensitive to the teaching activities of minority groups. But since obedience to the state is a clear and unalterable principle of the Baha’i Cause, teaching the Faith in Iran, individually or through organized programs, if done without the consent and permission of the ruling government, flies in the face of those Baha’i principles. As such, these activities, cannot be confirmed by the House.

The recommendations of the Guardian of the Cause, for freedom of belief, personal conscience, keeping the faith, and resisting efforts to change the Faith , are clear. Our religion cannot be taught in such a way that would be opposed and prohibited by the government, and that would disregard the relevant social context. This is done at the risk of increased conflict with the authorities and governments.

We should note that the teaching of the Faith, while important, is less of a priority than preserving the Holy Cause itself. If teaching endangers the foundations of the Faith, or becomes a reason for the persecution of the Friends, it should, at least temporarily, be suspended.

The highly respected House, due to its absence from Iran, and a lack of direct connection with the community, does not possess enough information about the Baha’i community of Iran (while some even incorrectly claiming that it does not actually care that the foundations and principles of the Baha’i Cause are endangered in Iran). So certain vitally important decisions must be made, accounting for the general conditions the community faces in Iran, and the attitudes of both the state and the people of this country.

In “9 Years in Akko” the Master is asked about teaching in such conditions:
Is it not true that the Exalted Beauty—may I be sacrificed for His Friends—had ordered that the Faith be practiced wisely? It means that we should act having considered the requirements of the day. Each day, presents a certain requirement. For example, once teaching was confirmed, it was seriously insisted on. But today, teaching is not confirmed, whereas the stability of the souls is necessary. Then he pointed to a building and said “the Covenant-Breakers destroyed the foundations of this building. It is not wise to make another flow on it. Wisdom requires us to prevent others from destroying this building. Very soon, we will witness the fortification of this building. Then I will order teaching to resume. For the time being the deepening of souls is a priority…”

Currently the very existence of the Baha’i Faith is in danger in Iran. Most of the Baha’is have left the country, and others are planning to leave. The Yaran and many other Friends have received relatively long prison sentences. Some international steps taken by the UHJ against the Iranian government, and some very unwise public statements and interviews by some of our wealthy yet careless Friends, all of whom, it must be stated, reside abroad, have given the necessary pretense to the enemies of the Cause. These enemies of the Cause introduce Baha’is as treacherous and insufficiently Iranian (indeed anti-Iranian), and present us as having enmity towards Islam. This has caused many to perceive Baha’is within Iran as a fifth column that solely serves certain foreign interests, who cause tension and upheaval, and cannot bear the peace and progress of the Iranian nation. Under such tragic conditions, what would it even mean to mobilize the Friends to teach, to speak out against the Iranian government, and the beliefs of the majority of the Iranian people?

If the teaching of the Baha’i Faith is an essential duty of each and every Baha’i faithful, then why did the Blessed Beauty instruct Abdul-Baha’ to fast for an entire month in Akko prison just like the Muslims? Abdul-Baha and his friends followed this order in the prison of the tyrannical Ottoman Empire until 1909. He fasted—without eating at dawn or sunset for so long that his holy body had become frail and weak.

Why did Baha'u'llah give such an order? Was the behavior of Abdul-Baha simply a propaganda tool, or was it somehow an attempt at teaching of the Faith? Or rather was it a means for protecting the community itself? From this incident, one of many, we can conclude that at times, it is more important to protect the foundation of the Cause of God and the Friends than to practice the prayers, to teach, or any other such activities.

The Trustees of Baha'u'llah in the Holy Land have the right to be angry, and object to the acts of the Iranian government, and consider it entirely cruel, biased, despotic, and unjustifiable, and to consider it an enemy of the Baha’i Cause. But, as far as I know, Baha’is within Iran are not allowed to oppose such a government and give statements against it. On the contrary, the Friends are instructed to obey these very governments, without any protest or anger, even if they are despotic, unaccountable, and unlawful. Obedience to only those just and lawful governments is an incontrovertible and uncontroversial. It wouldn’t require any special decree nor increased efforts, like the obedience to unjust governments do.

Here I will enumerate some relevant passages from the scriptures:

Baha'u'llah has stated:
“No one is permitted to commit any action that is contrary to the view and policy of the Heads of the country.”

Abdul-Baha has also stated: “Anyway, according to the clear wording of the Blessed Beauty, may I be sacrificed for His friends, none may do, a single or general action, without the acceptance and permission of the government. And if anyone commits slightest action without the consent and permission of the state, has actually opposed the Blessed Cause, and no pretense will be accepted from him. This is the Divine instruction, and not the play of the children. So no one is authorized to evaluate the case with his own reason, and act upon it.”

The Beloved Guardian stated:
“The essential and main principle that should be attended is the obedience to the governing state, in the country that we reside. When an authoritarian government comes to power, we should not oppose it, on the grounds that we do not like it…

We should be obedient in all respects, unless a breach of a spiritual principle – like the neglect of the Divine Cause- is at issue.”

The above 3 examples, from the holy words themselves, indicate clearly the principle of non-involvement in politics and obedience to the ruling government. Unless, of course, that infallible Center issues a new directive, and declares the previous holy words and scriptures null and void.

When the Iranian government does not tolerate the teaching of the Cause, and in fact opposes it, as it tries to stop all such activities through various political and social pressures, why should we insist on these activities? Why should we invite non-Baha’is to our devotional meetings and study circles, considering how much it provokes the anger of the authorities and the fanatics from among the larger Iranian population, all of which primarily results in more difficulties for the members of the Baha’i Community?

The message dated January 15, 2015, states that, if ordered by government officials to legally bind themselves to stop their teaching activities, you permit the Friends to acquiesce and sign any papers in this regard.

If by this message you mean that the Friends should give a commitment and honor that commitment, then this results in a necessary contradiction. Because in another part of that same message, you have warned the Friends to not abandon any religious rule that will cause the Baha’i Faith to be uprooted. Now, if by this permission you really intend for the Friends to render empty promises in order to avoid, temporarily, the authorities and to later continue in their teaching activities, this would be a direct condoning of deceit and dishonesty, and would be contrary to the holy scriptures and the sacred Baha’i teachings.

If this permission is given in order to reduce the restrictions on the Friends, and allow them the possibility of studying in Iranian high schools and universities, then why do you not try to solve the problems at a more fundamental level, and help to put an end to any and all future arrests, imprisonment, or prosecution? Moreover, we must be aware that such agreements don’t just involve the signing of a document; rather they necessarily result in further undesired consequences, including certain duties and responsibilities that must be promised and fulfilled.

I remember a few years ago the respected governing body let Baha’is present themselves as Muslims when applying to Iranian universities. This was in order to allow Baha’i youth to receive higher education in Iran. Yet, at the time of this permission, some of the Friends opposed it, seeing it as a denial of their faith. There is an essential question here which must be asked: Which of the two choices, denying the Baha’i youth of their religious identity or ceasing public teaching of the Faith, is more destructive and harmful?

In the next part of the message, the prohibition of teaching in the holy land is repeated, a prohibition decreed by the statement of Baha'u'llah, who said: “The Baha’is residing in the Holy Land should abstain from any teaching in Israel.”

The prohibition of teaching the Baha’i Faith in Israel is not only compulsory for the Baha’i residents of Israel, but also according to the message of the House, DD 23.6.1995, no teaching is permitted to any of the citizens of Israel – whether or not they reside in Israel. In a part of this message we read:
The House of Justice has not asked the friends to avoid contact with Israelis. When you discover that a person you are in contact with via IRC is an Israeli, you should feel free to maintain friendly contact, but you should not teach the Faith to him…in keeping with a policy that has been strictly followed since the days of Bahá’u’lláh, Bahá’ís do not teach the Faith in Israel. Likewise, the Faith is not taught to Israelis abroad if they intend to return to Israel.”

Here, the issue isn’t the prohibition of teaching the Faith in Israel or to an Israeli. Yet we see that there is such a prohibition for the Friends in Israel, who suffer no pressures nor persecution. Why do we disregard this wisdom in the lands of Iran, which is the epicenter of such persecution?

Now, if teaching the Faith began in Israel, despite the state’s lack of willingness or consent, in so far as it is run according to the religious laws and sensibilities of its citizens (just as it is in Iran) it seems to me that the respected members of the House would be subject to similar pressures and persecution as the friends in Iran are, or would even be obliged to leave that country.

As a humble member of the Baha’i Community, I propose that all teaching be stopped for 2 to 3 years in Iran. Since the administration here is not active — with the Yaran actually being imprisoned and absent from the community, there is a current state of hostility towards the faith, we must commit to this suspension so as to rescue the Friends from these various pressures and to put an end to the claims of the authorities. If that hiatus was successful in decreasing the persecution against Baha’is, then it should be continued in a more systematic manner and for a longer period. But if we witness no changes in the behavior of the Iranian authorities, then we can revert to the force of public opinion once again.

One final point I would like to humbly make is a reminder about the special status and significance of Iran, the sacred cradle of the Cause of God. The Universal House of Justice, as the highest governing Body of the great Baha’i Community, is responsible for solving the problems of the Friends in Iran, consolidating their civil rights, re-organizing the national Baha’i administration, and taking the necessary steps to free Baha’is from prison and secure their trampled rights. I believe the only way to achieve the above goals in the short term, is to have sincere dialogue with the Iranian authorities, and to cultivate good diplomatic relations with them. No progress will be made, nor any goals achieved if we are in constant contention with a strong state like Iran. Eventually, even these current pressures and prosecutions could become more severe and systematic, if the current intransigence is kept.

On the other hand, having hope solely in the words and actions of foreign political actors and international bodies is decidedly not sufficient. Even if we attain any measure of success in the short-term, any such progress may be reversed and even serve to harm us in the long term, such as through further “legal” restrictions placed on the community.

It is very clear that in the beginning, any negotiation and discussion with the Iranian government will be very difficult, or even seem impossible. But the valuable experiences of the House, who could utilize either qualified Iranian or non-Iranian advisers, and a sincere good-will may help the success of these discussions. However, if the UHJ does not begin this initiative today, and waits for some more desirable time in the future, it may see that it has waited too long for any of its desired results to be attained.

I sincerely hope that the respected House finds these comments and suggestions useful and applicable. If, for any reason, they were deemed inappropriate, I request your abounding forgiveness, and pray for your guidance.

I apologize for the length of this message, and humbly request your prayers when visiting the holy shrines.

With the Warmest Baha’i Greetings,
Kaveh Kholousi

Source : https://kamandedoust.wordpress.com/

Behind the Politics of a Current Brouhaha in Iran: An ex-President Ayatollah’s Daughter and the Baha’is

By N. WahidAzal © 2016

…By the time that Iranians were getting ready to tear down the very foundation of Qajar monarchy in the course of the Constitutional Revolution…[during 1905-09; the son of the founder of Baha’ism, ʿAbdu’l-Baha] officially sided with Muhammad Ali Shah…and went even further and was knighted by George V, and under the British mandate established the center of his vanity in Haifa…

-- Hamid Dabashi, Islamic Liberation Theology, 2008, 83.

…I fully support a first strike on Iran's nuclear facilities wherever they may be hidden and by whatever means are needed to destroy them. If the Iranians deny us their oil, destroy their oil facilities - if we can’t have their oil, neither will they... Regime change (one way or another) is coming in the relatively near future and Baha’is must be there when a new regime is established to make their mark on the new government and help move it in genuinely new directions…

-- Ian Kluge, Canadian Baha’i scholar, public list: talisman9@yahoogroups.com, April 15, 2006.

The Nature of the Controversy

For the past two weeks a scandal has been raging inside Iran centring on Faezah Hashemi, 54, former parliamentarian and daughter of former president, billionaire power broker and Assembly of Experts member Ayatollah ʿAli Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani. Appearing to be part of an escalating power struggle developing between the two blocs of so-called moderate-reformists (who recently took the majlis and Assembly of Experts elections) and their ‘principalist’ (i.e. hardliner) opponents; assorted principalist publications as well as leading figures in the Islamic Republic of Iran have gone on the attack denouncing her and her father alike for being traitors to Islam and the Revolution. Not losing a moment’s opportunity to exploit the situation, and with all the typical warped exaggeration and blatant misinformation of neo-colonialist perception management regarding Iran’s apparently ‘abysmal’ human rights record in relation to the Baha’i minority; the Western corporate media (and particularly the Persian language sections of the BBC and the VOA) have launched a veritable blitz campaign around the story not too dissimilar to what we have seen before. 
The controversy surrounds Faezah Hashemi’s publicized house visit to temporarily paroled Baha’i leader Fariba Kamalabadi, 52, with whom she apparently shared a prison cell in 2009 when Hashemi herself was briefly imprisoned following the post-election fracas of the Green uprising. One year before those events, in 2008 Fariba Kamalabadi, along with six other Baha’i colleagues of the seven-man ad hoc Iranian Baha’i administration known as the hayat-i-Yaran (‘the Council of Friends’, henceforth ‘Yaran’), was tried on charges of espionage and spying for Israel, found guilty and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. What has particularly raised the ire of some principalists in Iran is the group photograph of the house visit published in social media afterwards by the Baha’is which shows Faezah Hashemi with Fariba Kamalabadi seated among a group of other middle-class Baha’is somewhere in Tehran –- with the women all notably unveiled -- with a picture of the Baha’i patriarch ʿAbbas Effendi ʿAbdu’l-Baha (d. 1921) prominently displayed on the wall to the left of the assembled party. The story with its photo(s) immediately went viral on social media, precipitating a huge uproar throughout the Iranian establishment.
While a seemingly innocuous gesture to most foreign observers not informed of bigger pictures, such an act under the Islamic Republic of Iran, and especially one undertaken by a daughter of such a prominent, high profile figure as Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, albeit symbolic, yet for all the wrong reasons, constitutes an unambiguously subversive act of outright sedition against the entire ideological edifice of the present system in Iran. Given its nature, and especially since the Baha’i question has consistently been a successful disinfo propaganda talking point for Western establishments to exploit and bludgeon Iran with for thirty-seven years; this act by Faezah Hashemi can also be interpreted as playing by design right into the hands of Iran’s enemies in the West, and particularly the ‘regime changers’ and their agendas. More alarmingly, it may also be signalling that some sort of alignment is possibly forming between the moderate-reformist bloc, the Baha’is and the ‘regime changers’ abroad.
Publicly in word, at least, Ayatollah Hashemi-Rafsanjani distanced himself from his daughter’s actions while simultaneously denouncing Baha’ism itself as well. Yet, arguably, such a high profile and politically charged undertaking by Faezah Hashemi would not have been possible without either some kind of foreknowledge or complaisance, whether by her father personally and/or the power bloc behind him, because the entire gesture reeks of wider political manoeuvrings, and not just in Iran. As such characterizing the situation as merely a “debate about religion,” as the New York Times has put it,[1] is not only simplistic but grossly inaccurate, not to mention being the usual smokescreens and sleights of hand well known as being choice discursive gimmicks of false narrative building and disinfo propaganda engaged in by the Western corporate media, its agenda setters and the Western imperial human rights industry. 
There is a complicated and tumultuous history behind all of this that, while located in Iran’s religious history during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, also holds explicit geopolitical dimensions which involves Iran’s bitter encounter with the forces of Western imperialism, colonialism and Zionism in the region, and, above all, with all of those trojan horse, native informers inside Iran as well as abroad who have consistently undermined the Islamic Republic of Iran since 1979 –- and even well before. The Baha’is are indeed one of the more prominent among such groups of native informers. But let us be precise here as to who it is we are actually talking about.

Haifan Bahaism

At issue is the Haifan Baha’i organization:[2] the uber-wealthy, well organized and corporate-driven majoritarian Baha’i sect loyal to the Baha’i ‘Universal House of Justice’ headquartered on Mt Carmel, Haifa, Israel, since there also exist other schismatic Baha’i groups who are not loyal to Haifa but stand in opposition to it (and who themselves have faced persecution by the majoritarian Haifan Baha’is, viz. the so-called ‘Covenant Breaker’ Baha’is) -- groups which the Islamic Republic of Iran has little to no interest in.[3] This last point alone complicates –- even outright negates -- the whole Western human rights narrative surrounding the apparent persecution of the Baha’is in Iran and shifts all of its discursive registers into other, more sinister contexts entirely. As an example of what is being pointed out here, the quote above by prominent Canadian Baha’i scholar Ian Kluge should give pause to any neutral observer as to the underlying political motivations of the Haifan Baha’i establishment towards Iran.
Now, contextualized by a few Western social scientists under the rubric of an NRM (New Religious Movement, which is to say, a ‘cult’) rather than, technically speaking, a ‘world religion’;[4] the origins of Bahaism are to be found during the mid nineteenth century within a violent schism of the Babi movement that occurred in the territories of the Ottoman empire.[5] During that period, and while in exile after earlier being expelled from Iran during the early 1850s; the founder of Baha’ism, Mirza Husayn ʿAli Nuri Baha’u’llah (the Glory of God) (d. 1892), broke with his younger step-brother, the appointed supreme pontiff of the Babi movement, Mirza Yahya Nuri Subh-i-Azal (the Dawn of Pre-Eternity) (d. 1912), and proclaimed himself to be the universal messiah and penultimate divine messenger (or ‘manifestation of God’ in Baha’i technical language) come to establish a new global religious order that is to eventually succeed and supplant all religions and belief systems throughout the world. As a consequence of this violent schism, which included murders and assassinations by the Baha’is against their rival detractors among the Azali Babis, the Ottomans banished Baha’u’llah and his partisans to Acre in Palestine while Subh-i-Azal and a handful of his followers were sent over to Cyprus. Later on, the Azali Babis and Baha’is would stand at opposite poles of the Iranian Constitutional Revolution of 1905-09, with the Azali Babis not only supporting but at the forefront driving the people’s revolution while the Baha’is instead stood with the forces of the royalist reaction and the revolution’s Tsarist Russian-sponsored violent suppression by Muhammad ʿAli Shah Qajar (d. 1925).[6]
During the ministry of Baha’u’llah’s son and successor, ʿAbbas Effendi ʿAbdu’l-Baha (the Servant of Glory) (1892-1921), further schisms took shape inside Baha’u’llah’s own household with additional schisms developing after the deaths of ʿAbdu’l-Baha in 1921 and that of his grandson and successor Shoghi Effendi (d. 1957), who appointed no formal successor. Since 1963 the dominant Haifan sect has been ruled by the all male, nine-man body oligarchy (no women are allowed), viz. the Universal House of Justice. While some recent scholarship in Iran demonstrates that as early as the mid 1850s close contacts and linkages were already being actively forged between Baha’u’llah and agents of Western imperialism in the region, such as Manekji Limji Hataria (d. 1890) and Mirza Malkum Khan (d. 1908); it was under ʿAbdu’l-Baha specifically that these relationships and contacts were openly formalized and strategically solidified, particularly with the British and then the Americans. Close contacts with Tsarist Russia had likewise existed since the early 1850s, only to be interrupted by the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Notably in 1891, and only one year before his death, Baha’u’llah was actively corresponding with Baron Nathan de Rothschild (d. 1942), and in so doing openly forming an alliance with the European proto-Zionist movement that was to be officially launched only a few years later in 1897 in Basle, Switzerland.[7]
ʿAbdu’l-Baha himself became a key figure in the British war effort against the Ottomans in Palestine during World War I, and in 1919 he was officially knighted by the recently established British Mandate for Palestine for his “…valuable services rendered to the British government in the early days of the occupation.”[8] Concurrently during the time when ʿAbdu’l-Baha was cooperating with the British war effort and then soon thereafter being knighted by them, in Iran itself the British had engineered a genocidal famine which, according to historian Mohammad Gholi Majd,[9] had wiped out between eight to eleven million Iranians in only two years. Some recent sources even suggest an instrumental Baha’i hand in the rise of Reza Shah (d. 1944) and the establishment of the Pahlavi monarchy.  The role of the British in bringing Reza Shah to power in 1921 is already widely known, with the Baha’is here being one of the British empire’s trusted agents locally facilitating his rise through the devices of the Indian Parsi agent and head of British secret intelligence in Iran, Sir Ardeshir Reporter (d. 1933), who would have acted as the go between.
Under the Pahlavis the Haifan Baha’is thrived economically as well as politically in Iran, enjoying enormous perks and privileges with the elite of that regime. Following the August 1953 coup d’etat against Mossadegh, for example, industrialist and business tycoon Habib Sabet (d. 1990) –- a lifelong member of the Iranian Baha’i leadership until the eve of the Islamic Revolution in 1979 –- was awarded the Pepsi Cola and Iranian Radio & Television franchises by Muhammad-Reza Shah Pahlavi (d. 1980) for his role in supporting the Shah during that crisis. Additionally, the father of Prime Minister Amir Abbas Hoveyda (d. 1979) had been a lifelong Baha’i who had even acted for some time in the official capacity of a personal secretary to ʿAbdul-Baha in Palestine -- Amir Abbas Hoveyda himself being a Freemason. The Shah’s personal physician, General ʿAbdu’l-Karim Ayadi (d. 1978), a long time royal court insider and crony to his twin sister Ashraf Pahlavi (d. 2016), was a Baha’i. The notorious Sangsari criminal warlord and underworld figure, Hozhabr Yazdani (d. 2010), was a Baha’i. Parviz Sabeti, the deputy-head of SAVAK –- being the man credited for much of the violent excesses committed by that state security organization against the Shah’s opposition throughout the 1960s and 1970s -– was a Baha’i (albeit the Baha’i establishment vehemently denies the fact at present). Countless other examples such as this could be furnished from that era. So given this, the Haifan Baha’is obviously occupied a privileged place as a pillar of the Pahlavi ancien régime as they arguably remain to the Empire’s anti-Iran initiatives presently.
Be that as it may, technically speaking, the Islamic Republic of Iran, while it does not constitutionally recognize or accord legitimacy to Bahaism as a creed, has no state sponsored policy of persecuting Bahaism either. Baha’is as Iranian citizens are legally accorded full citizenship rights under the law in Iran. It is their creed (together with its organization and activities) which is not recognized, or granted legal privileges, and not their rights as citizens per se. This fact is consistently misrepresented, confused or totally glossed over in silence in the West. Nevertheless, besides the fact that at all stages of its history Bahaism has been consistently sponsored and supported by the forces of Anglo-European imperialism and colonialism against the interests and security of Iran; the issues the Islamic Republic of Iran currently has with the activities of Bahaism have to do primarily with the reality that the Haifan Baha’i organization and its leadership have consistently enjoyed a tightly knit relationship with the state of Israel, its establishment and state apparatus. The Israeli establishment, quite literally, has gone out of its way to protect the Baha’is since 1948 and in turn the Baha'is themselves have been one of the biggest beneficiaries of the Zionist state. The reader is invited to Google pictures of their Baha’i World Centre in Haifa to see for themselves the kind of allowances the Israeli state has made to this organization in the construction of their megalomaniacal Hanging Gardens of Babylon on Mt Carmel. Independent Israeli filmmaker Naama Pyritz even confessed during her 2004 interview of Frederick Glaysher what she believed to be the Haifan Baha’i organization’s inordinately ‘special relationship’ with the Israeli state (as well as with the United States and Great Britain): a special relationship which no other community or organization in Israel presently enjoys.[10]
As such, given the history here, together with the central, overriding fact that its very world headquarters is located in Israel, the activities of the Haifan Baha’i organization demonstrably pose a serious national security threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran in a similar fashion as various radical Islamist terrorist groups or violent irredentists (such as the Basque separatists and similar) would theoretically pose national security threats to Western governments and their internal national security interests. It should be noted as well that France banned Scientology and proscribes its activities by law, and to some extent Germany as well; and so, the situation of the Haifan Baha’i organization in Iran is legally similar to the situation of Scientology or, say, the Jehovah’s Witnesses in France and Germany. In Germany, for instance, they are not even registered as a religious organization but as an NGO. 
The Western media often likes to blow the Baha’i issue in Iran beyond all reasonable proportions while conveniently remaining silent or otherwise downplaying similar parallels existing in Western countries. Almost nothing is mentioned by them about Baha’isms sordid history or eyebrow raising linkages and connections presently. This is precisely because these Western establishments are engaging in carefully orchestrated neo-colonial perception management, consensus building and so information war against Iran due to the fact that the Haifan Baha’is have in fact been their dependable comprador lackeys and trojan horse in the region – and so, native informers -- for the good part of one-hundred and sixty-six years.

The Yaran, Faezah Hashemi and the Converging Forces of Destabilization in Iran

Now, the Yaran referred to above had initially been allowed to operate in Iran by the government of Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005). But a series of incidents during the period of his presidency involving corruption, profiteering, the establishment of illegal front companies, hawala networks and illicit property speculation as well as overall activities deemed to be threats to Iran’s national security committed by Baha’is; where ostensibly the openness of the Khatami years was being systematically abused by the Yaran and its cronies; convinced the succeeding Ahmadinejad administration (2005-13) to instead shut it down altogether, arrest and charge its seven-man membership, initiate proceedings against it in the judiciary which finally culminated in the 2008 sentence against the body.  One sticking point of the case was the active Baha’i missionary and mass conversion efforts underway during the Yaran’s tenure (which the Yaran had earlier made written guarantees and explicit undertakings to the Iranian government not to do), especially on Iranian university campuses, which the Iranian judiciary determined in its 2008 verdict to be a subversive recruitment effort in collusion with foreign powers, notably Israel and the United States. 
With that said, Faezah Hashemi’s key involvement with the Iranian Green movement during 2009; that this movement was a linchpin for a specifically Western coordinated regime change operation in Iran; together with the persistent allegations that the Baha’is themselves were heavily involved in it; transforms the nature, configuration and registries of the entire discussion and locates it elsewhere besides questions revolving around religious freedoms or minority rights in Iran. That quote above from Canadian Baha’i scholar Ian Kluge says it all, so for Faezah Hashemi to be openly cavorting this closely in public with a temporarily paroled leader and representative of the Haifan Baha’i organization in Iran says that the concerns of her principalist rivals are not entirely off the wall or misplaced, nor are they remotely predicated by merely base sentiments of religious bigotry either. 
Be that as it may, the Iranian judiciary has called for Hashemi’s appearance over the incident. But given who her father is, and the muscle he wields within the system (after all, in 1989 following the death of the Ayatollah Khomeini, Hashemi-Rafsanjani was the proverbial king-maker), it is unlikely that much, if anything, will be done to muzzle her. Nevertheless that certain forces may be in the process of converging that include the Haifan Baha’is, foreign based regime-changers, the Rafsanjani family and the moderate-reformist bloc should give serious concern to any genuine well wisher of Iran because it signals that even though we have a nuclear accord and sanctions have theoretically been lifted on Iran as of February 2016, something dastardly may be afoot and of potentially far more menacing proportions than 2009. This, together with the Obama administration’s duplicitous behaviour in dragging its foot on the unfreezing of nearly 2 billion dollars worth of Iranian assets while also strong arming both American and European business and finance from dealing with Iran, suggests it strongly. These developments are indeed connected, and the Baha’i issue is being strategically used by the West and its internal Iranian allies as not only leverage against the Islamic Republic of Iran but as an outright weapon.

[2] Originally http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Baha'i_Faith; now https://www.scribd.com/doc/235458694/Baha-i-Faith-SourceWatch (retrieved 20 May 2016); see as well, William M. Miller The Baha’i Faith: Its History and Teachings, Pasadena, 1974, and Francesco Ficicchia Baha’i: Einheitsreligion und globale Theokratie. Ein kritischer Einblick in die Universalreligion, Münster, 2009.
[3]  http://www.thesectsofbahais.com/ (retrieved 20 May 2016); see also http://www.orthodoxbahai.com/ and http://www.bupc.org/ as well as Frederick Glaysher’s two websites https://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/ and http://www.reformbahai.org/ (retrieved 21 May 2016); also more recently, Shua Ullah Behai and (ed.) Eric Stetson A Lost History of the Baha’i Faith: The Progressive Tradition of Baha’u’llah’s Forgotten Family, Newark, 2014, and the two blogs and website associated with this specific faction http://www.unitarianbahai.org/http://www.abdulbahasfamily.org/ and https://historyofbahaifaith.wordpress.com/ (retrieved 21 May 2016).
[4] See Denis MacEoin’s entry “Baha’ism” in A Handbook of Living Religions, (ed.) John R. Hinnells, London, 1984, and (writing under the alias Daniel Easterman) New Jerusalems: Reflections on Islam, Fundamentalism and the Rushdie Affair, London, 1993; see as well Juan R.I. Cole “The Baha’i Faith in America as Panopticon,” originally published in The Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 37, no. 2 (June 1998): 234-248; digitally republished on his website http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm (retrieved 21 May 2016).
[5] See my “Invoking the Seven Worlds: An acrostic prayer by Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī Ṣubḥ-i-Azal,” in LUVAH: Journal of the Creative Imagination, Summer 2013, 1-37 (defunct), now here https://www.scribd.com/doc/269786896/Invoking-the-Seven-Worlds-An-acrostic-prayer-by-M%C4%ABrz%C4%81-Ya%E1%B8%A5y%C4%81-N%C5%ABr%C4%AB-%E1%B9%A2ub%E1%B8%A5-i-Azal and here https://www.academia.edu/3588368/Invoking_the_Seven_Worlds_An_acrostic_prayer_by_M%C4%ABrz%C4%81_Ya%E1%B8%A5y%C4%81_N%C5%ABr%C4%AB_%E1%B9%A2ub%E1%B8%A5-i-Azal (retrieved 21 May 2016);  see also the website http://www.bayanic.com (retrieved 21 May 2016); and especially, the works of British orientalist E.G. Browne and the French diplomat A.-L.-M. Nicolas.
[6] See Siyyid Miqdad Nabavi Razavi’s seminally important Tārīkh-i-Maktūm: nigāhī bi-talāsh-hā’i sīyāsī-i-faʿʿālān azalī dar mukhālifat bā ḥukūmat-i-qājār va tadāruk-i-inqilāb-i-mashrūtih (Concealed History: An investigation into the role of Azalī activists in opposition to the Qājār regime and the genesis of the Constitutional Revolution), Tehran, 2014.
[7] Cited in Moshe Sharon (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem), “Jewish Conversions to the Baha’i Faith,” online http://www.hum.huji.ac.il/english/units.php?cat=3666&incat=3479 and http://bahai-library.com/sharon_jewish_conversion_bahai and http://bahai-library.com/sharon_jewish_conversion_bahai (retrieved 22 May 2016).
[8] The Handbook of Palestine, (ed.) Harry Charles Luke, et al., London, 1922, 59; online at https://archive.org/details/handbookofpalest00lukeuoft and https://www.scribd.com/doc/283090248/Handbook-of-Palestine-1922 (retrieved 21 May 2016).
[9] See Mohammad Gholi Majd The Great Famine and Genocide in Iran: 1917-19, Second Edition, Lanham, 2013.

جنجال حقوق شهروندي بهاييان بر سر چيست؟

ويسنده : نفيسه رحماني

استاد عبدالله شهبازي مورخ و پژوهشگر ايراني است که سالهاست در عرصه تاريخ سياسي و تحليلي فعاليت‎‎هاي مهمي دارد. تاليفات متعددي از او طي سال‎‎هاي پژوهش ايشان به چاپ رسيده که بسياري از آنان تلاش‎‎هاي گرانسنگي در حوزه شناسايي کارتل‎‎هاي اقتصادي و سياسي مخفي در عرصه بينالمللي بوده است. يکي از مهمترين اين منشورات، کتاب «زرسالاران يهودي و پارسي، استعمار بريتانيا و ايران» است که در پنج مجلد به چاپ رسيده و البته دو جلد از آن هنوز اجازه انتشار نيافته است.

به بهانه ديدار اخير فائزه هاشمي و فريبا کمالآبادي و طرح مباحث انتقادي بهائيت، به گفتوگو با او  درباره ريشه‎‎هاي اين جريان و سمت و سوي فعاليت آنان در ايران پرداختهايم. آنچه پيش روي شماست ماحصل اين گفتوگوست.

اخيرا در تبليغاتي که از سوي کانون‎‎هاي نزديک به جريان بهائيت صورت داده ميشود، شاهد برجستهسازي موضوع حقوق شهروندي هستيم. ادعاي افراد منتسب به اين کانونها، ناديده گرفته شدن حقوق بهائيان از سوي نظام جمهوري اسلامي است. اين در حالي است که فعاليت‎‎هاي پنهان اين جريان از نظرها دور مانده است. شما اين مسئله را چطور ارزيابي ميکنيد؟

در بحث اخير، مسئله بهائيت را صرفا از منظر حق شهروندي بهائيان مطرح کردم زيرا بحث بهائيت ناگهان با حجم تبليغات داخلي و خارجي سنگين، بهنحوي که کاملا سازمانيافته مينمايد، از اين منظر مطرح شد. وقتي بحث حقوق شهروندي بهائيان ايران بهعنوان اتباع ايران مطرح ميشود، وارد شدن به مباحث ديني و تاريخي، منحرف کردن بحث و نادرست است چون مورد سوء استفاده قرار ميگيرد. بايد موضوع بهطور تخصصي و از همان زاويه مطرح شود.

مسئله اين است که آيا بهائيان ايراني بهعنوان کساني که در ايران زندگي ميکنند و تبعه جمهوري اسلامي ايران هستند، از حقوق شهروندي در چهارچوب قانون اساسي برخوردارند يا چون به فرقهاي خاص تعلق دارند که به رسميت شناخته نميشود اين حقوق از آنان سلب ميشود؟ بهعبارت ديگر آيا معضل بهائيت در ايران بهدليل دگرانديشي و تعلقات ديني مغاير با عقايد اکثريت مردم و دين اسلام و مذهب تشيع است يا چيز ديگري است؟

طبق اصول بديهي انساني و حقوق بينالملل، همه شهروندان تابع يک دولت بايد از حقوق شهروندي آن دولت در چهارچوب قانون برخوردار باشند.

تصور ميکنم برخلاف تبليغات سنگيني که اخيرا به اوج رسيده، بهائيان بهعنوان شهروندان ايران از اين حقوق برخوردارند و به زندگي و کسبوکار  خود اشتغال دارند و کسي مزاحم آنان نيست. صرف نظر از برخي حقوق صنفي مانند داشتن قبرستان و دفن مردگان طبق شعائر خويش، تصور نميکنم بهدليل بهائي بودن حقوق بهائيان نقض شود. يعني اگر دزدي خانه يک بهائي را مورد دستبرد قرار داد يا به زني بهائي تجاوز شد، قانون از حق وي بهعنوان شهروند دفاع ميکند.

مواردي که بهعنوان نقض حق شهروندي بهائيان عنوان ميشود، به حق شهروندي فردي مربوط نيست بلکه ناشي از تلاش بخشي از بهائيان است که بهدنبال تثبيت فرقه خود بهعنوان نهادي قانوني و رسمي هستند. يعني تلاشي است سياسي طبق دستور بيتالعدل، سازمان مرکزي بهائيان مستقر در حيفا، تا حضور و فعاليت علني اين فرقه را به جمهوري اسلامي تحميل کنند. بايد تاکيد کنم که اين تکاپو از جانب همه بهائيان نيست و ما با پديدهاي به نام «بهائيت مخفي» نيز سر و کار داريم. يعني بهائياني که در ظاهر خود را مسلمان معرفي ميکنند. اين سياست بيتالعدل، که آن را «دوران انکشاف» ناميده، جديد است. يعني در دوران قاجاريه و پهلوي، دستور اکيد بيتالعدل پنهانکاري و عدم معرفي اعضا بهعنوان بهائي در ايران بود، بهرغم اقتداري که در ساختار سياسي و اقتصادي ايران داشتند. روشن است که اين پديده به مسئله حق شهروندي بهائيان بهعنوان فرد مربوط نيست بلکه فعاليتي سياسي است براي قانوني کردن يک فرقه و تحميل آن بر يک دولت از طريق جنجال‎‎هاي سياسي و حقوق بشري، بهرغم قوانين آن کشور. در واقع حق شهروندي بهائيان دستاويزي است براي اين مبارزه سياسي عليه جمهوري اسلامي ايران با اهداف معين که مهمترين آن، پيوند نزديک سران فرقه بهائي با کانون‎‎هايي سياسي معين در غرب و منافع مشترک آنان در بحران کنوني خاورميانه است. فرقه بهائي بهعنوان شاخه ايراني لابي نئوکان در آمريکا عمل ميکند. طبيعي است مقابلهاي که با اين فعاليت تشکيلاتي سياسي ميشود، ربطي به حق شهروندي بهائيان ندارد. مانور تبليغاتي اخير روي دستگيري مرکزيت تشکيلات بهائي ايران به نام «ياران ايران» در 25 ارديبهشت 1387 (14 مي 2008) که امسال هشتمين سالگرد آن است، با پيام 23 ارديبهشت 1395 بيتالعدل حيفا به شکلي کاملا سازمانيافته آغاز شد.

بهائيان در سال‎‎هاي اخير وارد فاز علنيسازي هويت خود شدهاند. اين درست مغاير استراتژي آنان در دوران پيش از انقلاب بوده است. در ساليان اخير ديده شده که حتي داوطلبان آزمون سراسري از پاسخ دادن به سوالات مربوط به دين و مذهب در پرسشنامهها امتناع ورزيدهاند و به اين بهانه از شرکت در آزمون بازماندهاند. پس از آن نيز با انتشار تصاوير اين پرسشنامهها مانور رسانهاي وسيعي بهنفع جريان بهائيت و احقاق حقوق شهرونديشان ترتيب دادهاند.

مواردي که بهعنوان نقض حقوق شهروندي بهائيان مطرح ميشود، مانند ممانعت از تحصيل يا بازداشت گروه‎‎هاي تبليغي بهائيان، مرتبط است با اين تهاجم سياسي سازمانيافته فرقه بهائي. براي مثال چون در قانون اساسي ايران بهائيت بهعنوان «دين» به رسميت شناخته نميشود و در دوران پهلوي نيز بهرغم اقتدار فراوان فرقه بهائي در ايران به رسميت شناخته نميشد، طبيعي است که بايد مانند گذشته و طبق همان سياست بيتالعدل عمل کنند. زماني که فرد بهائي اصرار دارد در فرم‎‎هاي مربوطه خود را بهعنوان بهائي معرفي کند، ما با پديدهاي سياسي مواجهيم؛ يعني همان تحرک تشکيلاتي براي تحميل يک سازمان غيرقانوني که طبعا با مقابله مواجه ميشود.

اين امر نقض حقوق شهروندي فرد فوق نيست بلکه پيامد کنش سياسي است که طبعا فرد بهائي پيامد آن را ميداند و داوطلبانه اين کار را ميکند. فرقه بهائي تلاش ميکند اين موارد را براي تشکيل پرونده‎‎هاي نقض حقوق بشر عليه ايران بهشکل مستند گردآوري کند و با ارائه مدارک مربوطه به برخي سفارتخانه‎‎هاي خارجي از امکانات تحصيلي در خارج از ايران برخوردار ميشود که ساير جوانان ايراني از آن برخوردار نيستند.

بنابراين بايد مسئله حقوق شهروندي بهائيان بهعنوان فرد را بهکلي از مسئله تلاش سياسي يک تشکيلات (بيتالعدل) براي تحميل خود بهعنوان نهاد رسمي در ايران تفکيک کرد.

البته بهنظر من بايد در فرم‎‎هاي تحصيلي علاوه بر اديان به رسميت شناخته شده در قانون اساسي، گزينه «ساير» نيز وجود داشته باشد. اين امر ميتواند بدون اينکه فرقه بهائي به رسميت شناخته شود، اين دستاويز را از بهائيان بگيرد. مضاف بر اينکه ما در ايران اقليت‎‎هايي داريم مانند صبي‎‎ها (صابئين يا منداييها)، که خود را پيرو يحيي تعميددهنده ميدانند و همگي موحد و از اديان ابراهيمي هستند ولي نام آنان در قانون اساسي ذکر نشده است. بحث حقوق مندايي‎‎ها در خبرگان قانون اساسي مطرح شد ولي درج نامشان به تصويب نرسيد و حتي آقاي ناصر مکارم شيرازي در همان جلسه خبرگان قانون اساسي مطرح کردند که صابئين خود را ذيل يهوديت معرفي کنند که درست نيست. گزينه «ساير» ميتواند معضلاتي از اين دست را برطرف کند و راه را بر سوء استفاده‎‎هاي سياسي ببندد.

در مطالب منتشر شده اخير از سوي شما شاهد هستيم که بهائيت را بيشتر بهعنوان يک کالت مورد بررسي قرار دادهايد تا بهعنوان يک دين. گزينه سومي که در تعريف بهائيت ميتوان به آن اشاره کرد، بهائيت بهمثابه يک کارتل اقتصادي بينالمللي است. ارتباط اين سه گزاره در نسبت با حقوق شهروندي چيست؟ آيا بهائيت بهمثابه کالت، کارتل اقتصادي يا سياسي، ميتواند براي خود آن حقوق شهروندي را که يک جامعه ديني براي خود دارد مدعي شود؟!

نکته مهم در مسئله حق شهروندي بهائيان بهعنوان سازمان، نه فرد که تعارض آن با حق حاکميت ملي است. تکرار ميکنم که بهائيت «کالت» است. عنوان کالت را به کار ميبرم چون از نظر سياسي و حقوقي در جهان واژه جاافتاده و روشني است. کالت به فرقهاي اطلاق ميشود با دعاوي ديني يا شبهديني، مانند فرقه جديد «ساينتولوژي» که خاستگاه آن آمريکاست و داراي تشکيلات متمرکز در حول مرکزيت است. در غرب به کالت‎‎ها با سوء ظن نگريسته ميشود. در برخي کشورها مانند آلمان فعاليت آن‎‎ها بهشدت محدود است و در کشورهايي چون آمريکا تحت نظارت شديد امنيتي هستند بهدليل مخاطراتي که ميتوانند در پي شستوشوي مغزي اعضا و تبعيت اکيد آنان از کالت و رهبري آن، ايجاد کنند. کالتهاميتوانند بهسرعت به مافياهاي قدرتمند سياسي و مالي يا حتي تروريستي، مانند فرقه ژاپني «الف» (آوم شينريکيو)، بدل شوند.

تمامي مختصاتي که براي کالت ذکر ميشود به روشنترين شکل بر فرقه بهائي انطباق دارد: عضويت در سازمان و تبعيت اکيد از رهبر فرقه، بهنحوي که فرد نميتواند بدون عضويت در فرقه بهعنوان بهائي شناخته شود يا اگر فرامين رهبر فرقه (بيتالعدل) را اطاعت نکند، طرد ميشود و با بايکوت کردنش، حتي در ميان اعضاي خانوادهاش در وضعي مخاطرهآميز قرار ميگيرد. بهعبارت ديگر بهائيت مختصات کالت را داراست نه دين. وجه تمايز اصلي کالت و دين، تشکيلاتي بودن کالت و باز بودن دين است؛ يعني دين صرفا اعتقادي است ولي کالت، صرف نظر از دعاوي ديني، کاملا تشکيلاتي و تابع رهبري متمرکز.

در مورد ساينتولوژي اين خطر براي محاکم آلمان يا بريتانيا و اف.بي.آي آمريکا شناخته شده است چون تاريخچه و عملکرد کالت فوق را ميشناسند. خاستگاه فرقه بهائيت ايران است و اين مخاطرات را ما در تاريخ ايران ميشناسيم و طبعا همان بدبيني را به سازمان بهائيت داريم.

بهائيت کالتي است که ادعاي جهاني بودن و جهانگستري دارد. فرقه بهائي رسما خود را «جامعه جهاني بهائيان» ميخواند يعني سازماني فراملي است که مرکزيت آن بيتالعدل حيفاست و همه اعضاي آن بايد تابع مرکزيت حيفا باشند.

در اينجا فعاليت فرقه بهائي با حق حاکميت ملي در ايران تعارض پيدا ميکند. بهعبارت ديگر ما با سازماني مواجهيم که تابع قوانين ايران نيست و قوانين و مقررات خود را فراتر از قوانين ملي اين و آن دولت ميداند و اعضاي آن در ايران ميخواهند شهروند ايران نيز باشند. اين پديده را ميتوان «دولت در دولت» ناميد که تناقض تبعيت دوگانه فرد از دو ساختار سياسي را پديد ميآورد: تبعيت از ساختار سياسي فراملي مستقر در حيفا و تبعيت از ساختار سياسي ملي در ايران. به اين کاري ندارم که حيفا در اسرائيل است و سياست دولت اسرائيل و نيز بيتالعدل حيفا عليه ايران بهشدت خصمانه بوده است. مرکزيت اين فرقه در خارج از مرزهاي ايران است و همين کفايت ميکند.

آيا از نظر شما اين دوگانگي و مرکزيت داشتن اين فرقه در شهر حيفاي اسرائيل بر شدت تقابل ميافزايد؟! آيا بهائياني را که با بيتالعدل مستقر در اسرائيل مرتبط هستند ميتوان جدا از اين سيستم نگريست؟!

شايد تشبيه بهائيت به يهوديت درست نباشد زيرا بهائيت فرقهاي است جديد و نسبت به يهوديت گمنامتر و کماهميتتر است ولي يهوديت کهنترين دين ابراهيمي است با تاثيرات بزرگ تاريخي.

يهوديان در طول تاريخ طبق سنن سياسي و ديني خود، از ساختارهاي سياسيشان تبعيت ميکردند که جنبه فراملي و جهاني داشت. با تشکيل دولت ـ ملت‎‎هاي مدرن در اروپا از اواخر سده هجدهم ميلادي، معضل تابعيت دوگانه يهوديان به مسئلهاي جدي بدل شد و به انشقاق در ميان يهوديان انجاميد. گروهي از يهوديان که جنبش «هاسکالا» يا «روشنگري يهودي» را شکل دادند و موسس مندلسون، فيلسوف يهودي آلماني، نظريهپرداز موثر آن بود، مسئله شهروندي دوگانه و لزوم تبعيت از دولت ملي را مطرح کردند. ماسکيلي‎‎ها (ماسکيليم)، يعني پيروان جنبش هاسکالا، يهوديت را صرفا بهعنوان «دين» اعلام کردند نه «ساختار سياسي» و اين شعار را مطرح کردند که «در خيابان انسان باشد و در خانه يهودي». چهره‎‎هاي برجسته و متفکري در جنبش هاسکالا حضور داشتند مانند لئوپولد زونز، که به پدر پژوهش‎‎هاي نوين يهودي معروف است، همين طور آبراهام گيگر، محقق نامدار يهودي، و خاندان‎‎هاي ثروتمند يهودي مثل همان مندلسون در آلمان يا پرر و فولد در فرانسه. جنبش هاسکالا با مقابله شديد اکثريت يهوديان يعني يهوديان متشرع، مواجه شد که تبعيت از ساختار سياسي يهوديت را فراتر از تبعيت از قوانين ملي ميدانستند. اين مخالفت به تحريم ماسکيلي‎‎ها انجاميد تا سرانجام ناپلئون اين معضل را حل کرد. او براي بررسي نسبت قوانين ملي فرانسه با قوانين يهود و معضل تبعيت دوگانه يهوديان از دو ساختار سياسي (دولت فرانسه و نهادهاي سياسي يهودي)، خواستار تشکيل جلسه سِنهِدرين (شوراي عالي يهوديان که عاليترين نهاد ديني و قانوني يهوديان جهان است) شد. اجلاس سِنهِدرين در فوريه و مارس 1807 در پاريس با شرکت 71 عضو آن تشکيل شد و اين مصوبه را اعلام کرد: «يهوديان هر کشور بايد با شهروندان [آن کشور] بهعنوان برادران خود و براساس قوانين عام اخلاقي سلوک کنند و يهودياني که شهروند يک کشور ميشوند بايد آن کشور را ميهن خود [سرزمين پدري خود] بدانند».

چنان که ميبينيم، در اروپا معضل تعارض تابعيت از ساختارهاي سياسي ديني فراملي با تابعيت از دولت ملي در اوايل سده نوزدهم ميلادي حل شده ولي بهائيان امروزه، در سده بيست و يکم، آن را مطرح ميکنند و ميخواهند از طريق جنجال «حق شهروندي بهائيان» و تحريک مجامعي چون سازمان ملل يا دولت‎‎هاي بزرگ غربي عليه ايران، آن را بر جمهوري اسلامي ايران تحميل کنند.

همانطور که عرض کردم حقوق شهروندي بهائيان در ايران بهعنوان فرد نقض نميشود بلکه معضلي که مورد سوء استفاده بيتالعدل و کانون‎‎هاي شريک آن قرار ميگيرد، وجه صنفي بهائيت است. تصور ميکنم اگر بهائيان ايران از رويه کليميان ايران تبعيت کنند ـ که خود را ناوابسته به دولت اسرائيل و ايراني ميدانند ـ، ميتوانند براي مشکلات خود راه حلي داشته باشند. (قانون اساسي ايران «کليميان» را بهعنوان اقليت ديني ميشناسد نه «يهوديان» را. اين دو مفهوم متفاوت است و بايد در تعاريف سياسي و حقوقي به اين تفاوت توجه کرد.)

بهائيان ايراني بايد به سبک يهوديان اوايل سده نوزدهم ميلادي عمل کنند و خود را قبل از هر چيز ايراني بدانند و حاضر شوند سازماني ملي و کاملا مستقل و ناوابسته به حيفا را در ايران بهصورت NGO ـ و طبق قوانين ايران ـ براي تمشيت امور صنفي خود ثبت کنند. توجه کنيم که «سازمان جهاني بهائيان» در سال 1948 بهعنوان NGO ثبت شده است نه يک دين. اين سازمان به عضويت بخش NGO‎‎هاي سازمان ملل درآمده و يکي از ده‎‎ها NGO است که در بخش سازمان‎‎هاي غيردولتي سازمان ملل حضور دارد. در اين مورد فرقه بهائيت اصراري نداشت که بهعنوان دين شناخته شود و در بسياري از کشورها مثل همان آلمان نيز براساس قوانين بهعنوان NGO حضور دارد. عنوان «ديانت بهائي» نيز به عنوان «آيين بهائي» تقليل يافته است.

با اين حساب بهائيت را ميتوان يک کالت يا فرقه نوظهور به حساب آورد؟!

بحث بهائيت را از منظرهاي مختلف ميتوان دنبال کرد. در گذشته درباره تاريخ بهائيت کار تحقيقي مفصلي کردهام و نشان دادهام که بهائيت در تاريخ معاصر ايران، بهدليل رويکرد فعالان ديني عليه بهائيت، بهويژه انجمن حجتيه و اقداماتش در نقد و رد دعاوي مهدويت و پيامبري باب و بهاء و پيروان ايشان، جرياني شناخته نشده است. اين رويکرد شايد براي مقابله با تبليغات ديني بهائيان مفيد بوده باشد ولي سبب شده که بهائيت از منظر سياسي ناشناخته بماند و تبديل شود به يک گفتمان ديني صِرف که برخي پيامدها داشته است. يک پيامد، واکسينه شدن جامعه ايران در قبال کارکردهاي فرقه بهائي بهعنوان سازماني سياسي و لابي مافيايي مالي است که به غفلت در شناخت اين پديده پس از انقلاب انجاميد که براي جامعه ايران مخاطرات جدي داشته است. پيامد ديگر، ايجاد دستاويز براي بهائيان است که احساسات ضدبهائي در ايران را به عقايد ديني مرتبط کنند و خود را «دگرانديشان ديني» معرفي کنند که در ميان اکثريت مسلمانان مظلوم واقع شدهاند و صرفا بهخاطر عقايدشان تحت ستم و فشار قرار گرفتهاند.

بهدليل غلبه اين نوع نگاه، بهائيت بهعنوان يک جريان تاثيرگذار در تاريخ معاصر ايران ناشناخته مانده است. بهائيت را بايد متشکلترين حزب يا فرقه سياسي در ايران دانست که داراي سازمان مخفي و کارکردهاي متنوع سياسي و مالي بوده است؛ يعني تشکيلاتي بهطور عمده پنهان که بهعنوان لابي قدرت و ثروت عمل کرده و اگر مبدا آن را دعوي پيامبري (منيُظهرهاللهي) بهاء در سال 1863 ميلادي بدانيم و پيشينه بابيگري را محاسبه نکنيم، 153 سال قدمت دارد.

ارتباط اين تشکيلات سياسي، اقتصادي و البته اعتقادي که عنوان بهائيت را بر خود نهاده است با قدرت‎‎هاي بزرگ در عرصه بينالملل چگونه ميبينيد؟ بهصورت واضحتر اشارهام به بريتانيا، رژيم صهيونيستي و البته تشکيلات فراماسونري است.

در بررسي تاريخ و عملکرد فرقه بهائي، يکي از ابعاد مسئله، پيوند عميق سران اين فرقه است با لابي‎‎هاي قدرتمند مالي در جهان و نقش سران اين فرقه در تاريخ معاصر ايران بهعنوان يک شبکه گسترده مالي از اواخر قاجاريه تا امروز. منظورم فعاليت بهائيان معمولي در بخش‎‎هاي مختلف اقتصادي مثلا صنعت و تجارت عينک در ايران ـ که معمولا عنوان ميشود ـ نيست بلکه منظورم نقش سران اين فرقه در دلالي‎‎هاي بزرگ بينالمللي مرتبط با ايران بهويژه در حوزه نفت و گاز است که درآمدهاي کلاني براي آن‎‎ها داشته است  
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts

Total Pageviews


Blog Archive

About Me