The Baha'i faith (Bahaism)

Bahá’í Scandals Unmasked

The glossy brochures of the Baha’i Faith promise a world of universal peace and high morality, but as a former insider who has seen the gears grind from the top, I am here to unmask the institutional rot that smells far worse than any of their flowery sermons. The primary weapon in their marketing arsenal is the Ruhi class system, a "moral" factory that churns out "McBaha’is" who are trained to smile and never ask questions. These classes are nothing more than manuals of silence, designed to keep the rank-and-file busy while the elite leadership deals with scandals that would make a soap opera writer blush. The strategic gap between the "high morality" they preach and the "immoral" actions they hide is a chasm wide enough to swallow the faith whole. If the Baha’is spent as much time on actual peace as they do on illicit bed-hopping, the world might actually be united. Take the case of the fifty-year-old Auxiliary Board Member in Orissa, India, a man supposed to be a "protector" of the faith. Instead of protecting anything, he used his Ruhi books to woo a twenty-five-year-old student, eventually eloping and leaving his wife and two children behind. The girl's parents were absolutely terrified, calling the Baha’is double-faced and hypocrites because they realized that behind the religious garb was absolute immorality. These parents weren't alone in their shock; in Chennai, another high-ranking official was caught red-handed in a homosexual relationship inside a Baha’i center, only to be moved onto a local spiritual assembly afterward as if nothing happened. In Kerala, the saga of Mr. Gopalakrishnan and Mrs. Rijesh turned into a multi-year tangle of extra-marital affairs and children born from illicit relations, while even the "Baha’i Mona," (Tahirih Gaur of Bombay) "martyred" her own marriage for a third party despite her status as a moral class teacher. The administration’s response is a satirical masterpiece: they hand out a "Teaching Pass" by removing "voting rights"- meaning you can’t help pick the local committee, but you are perfectly welcome to keep teaching children and paying your Huquq money. It is an absurd system where the "Universal Appeal" of the faith really just means a universal pass for the elite to ignore the laws they force on others.

When the leadership is too busy covering up their own affairs, it is no surprise they leave the door open for predators, and the "So What?" of their institutional failure is a trail of broken lives. In Hungary, the Baha’i Foundation hired Gabor Farkas, a convicted pedophile, as a soccer coach for marginalized children, crowing about his "youth leadership" until a newspaper exposed his past. Rather than owning the disaster, the administration's instinct is to blame the victim to save the reputation of the organization. This was most sickening in Peru, where Shirin, the daughter of a NSA Chairman, accused her father of years of incestuous abuse. Instead of calling the police, high-ranking Counselors told her to go home and forgive him because the Universal House of Justice wanted it. From the incest scandals in Fiji to the sexual harassment case of Om Joshi at the New Era High School in Panchgani (India), the pattern is the same: silence the victim and protect the image. In Pakistan, the depravity reached a peak when a Baha’i UN worker was accused of raping refugees, a crime he dismissively called "consensual sex" in what might be the most demonic euphemism in the history of the faith. Even in the United States, the "Ruhi factory" was allegedly used by pimps and traffickers to groom young girls, while the NSA responded by slandering the grandmothers who dared to report the crimes. These aren't isolated accidents; they are systemic failures. Even the Marc Dutroux case in Belgium left the local community in a state of deep shame, yet the leadership continues to hide behind their "stats" rather than protecting their children.

Keeping these secrets quiet isn't cheap, which is where your mandatory Huquq payments really go while the elite stash millions in offshore accounts. While poor followers are guilt-tripped into giving every spare cent, Dr. Jehangir Sorabjee was exposed in the Panama Papers for stashing wealth in secret accounts while his mother Zena Sorabjee, sat on the national board demanding donations. In Italy, Franco Ceccherini managed to embezzle 360,000 Euros over fifteen years, a feat made easy by an administration that has no transparency and no term limits. The corruption even enters the world of international espionage. In India, a Spy Ring was busted where leaders were accused of smuggling classified defense documents to foreign agencies. One official, N.K. Bhudhiraja, even used the fake name Captain S. Budhiraja to masquerade as a military officer while penetrating prohibited defense areas. It is the ultimate irony that a group preaching "Universal Peace" is caught red-handed masquerading as the military to smuggle secrets. This high-pressure environment also produces tragic failures like Mohammad Sadegh Moghaddam, the Walmart hostage-taker in Texas. He was a Baha’i who fled persecution only to be crushed by debt and passed over for promotion; once he snapped and became a "bad stat," the community quickly abandoned him, calling it a "personal conflict" rather than admitting their support system is a hollow shell.

The entire "Covenant" is a carefully managed family business dominated by a Persian elite who treat local members like propagation drones. In India, Counselor Omid and his inner circle use their "cunning" to ensure that Persian families maintain a dictatorial grip over administrative bodies, replacing any local members who dare to speak up. They treat the faith like a franchise, appointing relatives to key positions and cleaning any internal dissent. They boycotted Kalimat Press and disenrolled scholars like Sen McGlinn without a single hearing, simply because these people dared to suggest that the leadership’s version of a theocracy wasn't the only way to read the books. The goal of this administration is to create a culture of "exit by troops," where the talented and honest are humiliated until they leave, leaving behind only the "McBaha'is" who will facilitate the leadership’s exaggerated achievement reports. In the end, the "Great Baha’i Myth" is a story of profound irony. A religion that preaches the oneness of humanity is defined by internal rifts, lawsuits, and a leadership that protects rapists and embezzlers while calling sincere believers criminals. As we look at the spy rings, the sex scandals, and the millions in Panama, we must ask: where is this "infallibility" the House of Justice claims for itself? If the leadership cannot stop its own officials from stealing or smuggling, then their divine guidance is just a corporate slogan. The reality proves that the only thing "universal" about the Baha’i Faith is the lengths its leaders will go to protect their power and money, regardless of the lives they destroy along the way.

Source: https://bahai-scandals.blogspot.com

The Baha'i Guide to Picking Friends: Beware of "Spiritual Germs"!

The Two Faces of Baha'i Childhood

If you read a Baha'i brochure, you will see a lot of nice words about kids. They claim children should have an "independent investigation of truth." They even say it is "futile" to force a kid to follow a religion. It sounds like a lovely, free-thinking playground where every child is a little seeker of light.

But behind the scenes, Baha'i leaders are shaking in their boots. While they talk about freedom in public, they have unhinged rules about who Baha'i kids can talk to in private. It turns out that for a group that claims to love everyone, they are terrified of "spiritual germs." They have a long list of "scary" kids—like the "descendants of Azal"—who must be treated like a biological hazard.

The "Good" Kids

The Baha'i big-shots want their own kids to be "brilliant lights" in a "dark world." The "real object of life" for these children is to grow up and support Baha'i institutions. To get them ready, the leaders give them some very specific instructions on how to be "tender."

For example, Baha'i kids are taught to be "infinitely tender" to animals. If a bird is hungry, they should feed it. If a dog is sick, they should try to heal it. But there is a creepy catch. You are not allowed to be nice to "bloodthirsty wolves" or "poisonous snakes." The leaders claim being kind to a "pernicious creature" is an "injustice." This is a great lesson for a five-year-old: only be nice to the things we tell you are good!

The "Scary" Kids

This is where the hypocrisy gets real. Baha'i kids are told to heal a sick animal, but they are ordered to "strenuously avoid" a classmate if that child has the wrong parents. The leaders call this an "inherited spiritual disease." They aren't just afraid of people who disagree with them; they are afraid of their "grand-children" too.

According to official Baha'i letters, these "bad" kids have "imbibed" a false concept of the Faith since they were babies. They literally claim these children sucked down hatred with their "mother's milk." The leaders argue that these kids have a "lifelong habit of wrong thought" and that it takes a literal "miracle" for them to ever be normal. Imagine telling a ten-year-old that their desk-mate's brain is full of "poison" just because of who their grandpa was.

How to Shun Your Classmates

So, what happens if one of these "poisoned" kids shows up at your school? Baha'i leaders released a "how-to" guide on playground shunning in 1976. They told Baha'i students that they "must not choose" these children as personal friends.

But they want you to be sneaky about it. They tell students to avoid "companionship" without making an "open issue" in front of the school. It is a policy of stealth shunning. If a Baha'i kid is too weak to ignore the "poisoned" classmate, the leaders suggest an extreme move: the Baha'i child should just change schools. They would rather pull a kid out of class than risk them catching "wrong thoughts" from a "diseased" peer.

Saying Sorry for Your Parents' Sins

If one of these "poisoned" kids wants to join the Baha'i club, they can't just sign up. They have to "repudiate" their own family. That is a fancy word for disowning your parents and admitting they are "sinners."

It gets even weirder. High-level officials called the "Hands of the Cause" have to step in and conduct an interrogation. They have to "ascertain" if the child truly "understands the sin" of their parents. You aren't "clean" until a committee of grown men decides you have successfully squeezed all the "poison" out of your head and cut ties with your own flesh and blood.

Fear is the Greatest Name

Baha'is love to talk about the "independent investigation of truth." But how can a kid investigate the truth when they are told that certain people are "poisonous snakes"?

If Baha'i kids are supposed to be "brilliant lights," why are they so afraid of catching "germs" from a kid on the playground? It seems the Baha'i version of "freedom" comes with a "keep away" list. In this religion, you are free to choose any path you want—as long as it is the one the leaders picked for you, and as long as you never talk to the "diseased" kids in the back of the room.

Check the following:

https://bahai9.com/wiki/Child

https://bahai9.com/wiki/Descendants_of_Covenant-breakers

Mary Maxwell was the Baha’i Jezebel

(Ruhiyyih = “Handmaiden of Glory”, was the pompous title she was given), just a bit rude like some other poorly behaved Baha’is or was she actually that special JEZEBEL/JUDAS who ruined the faith this time around? In other words, do you all think it was the Hands as a collective or was it mostly her alone who absolutely destroyed the faith and infected it with her misplaced pride, snottiness and judgmental attitude? I am starting to think she really is patient zero of the greatest spiritual infections that have diseased the body of any faith. The faith is pure delusion now and her pressuring the Hands and insisting that Shoghi can “guide them from the Abha realm” had derailed everything.

It was being ruined in some ways but if she was a different person, she should have been able to secure an heir for the Guardian earlier or a successor after hum but she likely had other self interested priorities such as being a leader who would not submit to another Guardian beside Shoghi. She could have saved the faith but instead she sped up it’s demise. History will probably see her as a post-Shoghi villain eventually, at least by Baha’is with good sense. I hope to be wrong somehow so that is why I am asking. I don’t really see any other moments so pivotal that would have led to Baha’is being so terribly misled, beside her and her involvement with the Guardianship, or lack thereof once Shoghi passed away.

Just 27 people who called themselves head disciples elected 9 and derailed an entire faith. They never took a vote with all the Baha’is about the Guardianship, the Custodians just abruptly took power made everyone deal with it! How could the Hands and all of the Baha’is be so foolish as to follow all of this? Who is primarily to blame and at fault? Is Shoghi’s wife the main person to blame or were all the Hands and many Baha’is collectively wanting to ruin the Guardianship and the faith?

I stumbled upon this today and it seems like Mary Maxwell liked to use the faith’s funds for her personal use. It seems like she thought of being a Hand of the Cause as a job that she had because she did in fact get money for fun stuff in addition to necessities even though she brags elsewhere about how Hands of the Cause like her were not on an official payroll unlike other religions. It appears though now there was an unofficial payroll.

“Milly Collins who is mild and innured to long suffering exploded to me today (24 December). It seems that from the Baha’i Administration n treasury, Ruhiyyih Khanum receives $500.00 a month for her personal expenses. Her meals and lodging etc. all are apart from this. These expenses come out of the common living fund. This $500.00 per month is for her personal things. She likes to go shopping to buy presents for her friends and she is fond of dress and jewelry and pretty things that she pays for out of her monthly stipend from the Baha’i treasury.

Now this is exasperating to Milly who is a very provident and economical spender, even though she is a wealthy person of the cause and gives large sums toward Baha’i projects, she is economical with her own expenses – always well dressed but never extravagantly so. In the Guardian’s House, she has a small and not a comfortable room without running water. She has to run to the other end of the house from her room for the toilets, bath, running water and kitchen where she has to prepare her own food (she is on a diet) and taking it all in all her lot is not agreeable, nevertheless she takes it all because she thinks she must serve the cause in this way. But today she blew up to me at Ruhiyyih Khanum’s extravagances at the expense of the Administrative Baha’i Fund contributed to by the Baha’is in various lands. Of cource Milly is right in her righteous indignation.” These are from Mason’s notes and contradicts Haifan narratives so they will just say Mason is lying to suit their own narratives.

https://proofsforguardian.blogspot.com/2024/03/daily-observations-of-bahai-faith-in_78.html

$500 in 1957 is approximately $5,800 dollars today. MARY MAXWELL MADE OVER $5000 a month off the funds of innocent believers which is $60,000 per year!!! SHE MADE MORE MONEY OFF THE BELIEVERS THAN MANY PRIESTS! Oh that’s right, she was Shoghi’s wife so everyone had to bow down and kiss her feet regardless of her horrid behavior, give me a break! She was very selfish and thought of her own needs first, demanding there be no other Guardian so she could stay in the Guardian’s house and have nice things. Her “service to the Cause” was again probably just a job for her.

“One day in one of our recent meetings of the Hands in the Holy Land I made some reference to the Guardian’s House whereupon Ruhiyyih Khanum turned and said to me, ‘That house will never again be lived in by one but me’, thus showing by this remark her intention of maintaining herself in command of the nine Custodians of the Faith by eliminating the possibility of a series of Guardians to follow Shoghi Effendi. Of course she insists that the Guardianship is BADAH because when the cause has the Second Guardian installed (the one I saw in my vision) she will then no longer be in the supreme position that she now has taken and this she is not yet ready to accept.”

The Baha’is now have no courage or backbone and don’t have the strength to stand up for anything that really matters!

How many times has the administration lied by now and why don’t the Baha’is care? They obviously lie about enrollment numbers, lie about the end of the Guardianship and now lie about Ruhiyyih too if you try to bring it up. I almost cannot believe how many lies the Baha’is willingly stuff into their minds and just look the other way. Haifa is becoming more cult-like by the day and they somehow wonder why the growth continues to dwindle. All that administration does is slow people down and confuse them. It is no longer just useless, but getting in the way of real spiritual progress.

What was the main point of derailment in the Baha’i movement? I think it was when Mary was the Baha’i Jezebel by encouraging Baha’s to now worship the false idol of the infallible House in place of God and Baha’u’llah.

https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeechBahai/comments/1qfm0s5/was_mary_maxwell_the_bahai_jezebel/

The account of Baha'u'llah's close confident, Jarullah

Mirza Hussain Jarullah was a neighbor and a close, devoted associate of Baha'u'llah during his time in Baghdad. According to Kashful Hiyal of Avarih, he was a trusted individual who held the keys to Baha'u'llah’s house and was responsible for daily tasks such as opening the home every morning to prepare tea and coffee.

Origin of His Name

It was a habit of Baha'u'llah to give his close followers titles that incorporated the word "Allah". Because Mirza Hussain lived in the immediate vicinity of Baha'u'llah’s home, he was given the title "Jarullah" which means "Neighbor of God".

The Incident in Baghdad

The most significant account regarding Jarullah involves an event that led to his eventual departure from the Baha'i faith:

The Discovery: One night, Jarullah accidentally left a door locked with Baha'u'llah inside. Upon returning the next morning and opening the door, he encountered a foul odor.
State of Intoxication: Jarullah found Baha'u'llah in a state of extreme intoxication, rendered unconscious by "pure wine" to the point where he could not be woken.
Physical Illness: Because Baha'u'llah was too drunk to leave his spot, he had used an expensive crystal drinking glass as a temporary toilet (chamber pot). Jarullah was shocked and disgusted by the scene. He felt that someone claiming to be the "Supreme God" should have more self-control and dignity. He couldn't understand how a divine being could be so overpowered by his own physical needs and the effects of alcohol.

Defection and Criticism

Following this incident, Jarullah renounced his faith in Baha'u'llah. He began to publicly criticize and curse him, questioning how an individual who could not maintain his own physical dignity or control his intake of intoxicants could be considered a "Supreme God" or a reformer of the human race.

Official Baha'i Perspective vs. Avarih's View

Baha'i Explanation: Baha'is who are aware of this story often claim that Jarullah was a "good man" who simply chose to withdraw quietly into seclusion to protect the reputation of the faith rather than because he had actually lost his faith.
Avarih's Critique: Avarih views Jarullah as a key witness to the leaders' human fallibility. He claims that if individuals like Jarullah had been more vocal about what they saw behind closed doors rather than remaining silent out of a sense of "wisdom" or social preservation, thousands of people might have been saved from what he describes as a "web of deception".

A First-Hand Account of Baha'u'llah's True Beliefs

I [Avarih] myself heard directly that the late Sepahsālār, four years before his death, on a day when the writer together with Sayyid Naṣrallāh Bāqerāf had gone to his house—and Bāqerāf was inclined to proselytize him to the Bahāʾī faith—that late man listened to his words, smiled, and said: My father used to say: I was in the house of Mīrzā Āqā Khān, the Ṣadr-i Aʿẓam, when they brought Mīrzā Ḥusayn-ʿAlī Nūrī to me under guard, on the very day that Nāṣir al-Dīn Shāh had been shot. When they brought Mīrzā in, the Ṣadr-i Aʿẓam became angry with him and said: ‘Out of shared homeland ties I was a friend of your father, and he was not a bad man. It was possible that you might have taken his place and attained a position of chancery and courtly administration. But you are so wretched that you attach yourself to Sayyid-i- Bāb—about whom it is not even known what madness possessed him—and now you are also inciting the killing of the Shāh!’

Mīrzā immediately replied that he did not believe in Sayyid-i-Bāb, nor even in his ancestors … —but he immediately restrained his tongue. The Ṣadr-i Aʿẓam also rebuked him sharply and said, ‘Do not be impertinent,’ and gestured that they should take him away; so they took him. After his departure from the assembly and his entry into confinement, the Ṣadr-i Aʿẓam said: This statement which Mīrzā Ḥusayn-ʿAlī uttered involuntarily was in fact true—that he does not even believe in the Bāb’s ancestors [i.e. the Fourteen Infallibles]—because he is absolutely not upon the path of religion and has no aim other than misuse and exploitation.

[Kashf-al-Ḥīl, Vol. 1: 26 by Abd al-Husayn Ayati (Avarih)]

Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/BAYAN/comments/1q4a62e/account_in_vol_1_of_avarih_regarding_haba/

The Baha’i faith does not have clergy but instead maintains a rebranded, centralized, and authoritarian clerical system operating under a different name.

The Baha’i Faith’s public claim of having “no clergy” is misleading when examined in terms of function rather than terminology. Although it rejects ordained priests, the Baha’i Administrative Order, led by the Universal House of Justice (UHJ), performs all the core roles traditionally associated with a clergy. The UHJ is an infallible authority demanding absolute obedience, controlling doctrine through centralized interpretation and strict literature review, and suppressing dissent via censorship and punishment. Those who challenge the administrative authority risk expulsion (disenrollment) creating a powerful system of social and spiritual control.

The Baha’i leadership directs organized missionary activity, oversees standardized teaching programs, and manages mandatory financial contributions such as Huquq'ullah and national funds, reinforcing its clerical character. Despite its rhetoric of democracy and egalitarianism, Baha'ism is governed by a rigid, hierarchical structure with indirect elections that insulate top leadership from ordinary members. Cronyism, intolerance toward dissent, and ridicule of critics deepen the contradiction between the Baha'i faith’s public image and internal reality.

The Baha’i faith does not have clergy but instead maintains a rebranded, centralized, and authoritarian clerical system operating under a different name.

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?

Translate

Video : Baha'u'llah admits to have supplied women to Subh-i-Azal

Video : How Ruhiyyih Khanum's marriage affected Shoghi Effendi's family and the Baha'i Faith?

Scandals in the world-wide Baha'i communities