Response to Sen McGlinn's "...a body of learned Baha'is"

Sen McGlinn - Self Proclaimed Baha'i Scholar and News Reporter.

Before I became a true Baha’i in 1997, I was a “Baha’i in good standing” (the “BIGS”) for 17 years, so I know that Sen McGlinn’s article “...a body of learned Baha’is,” reveals the open secret in the BIGS community that the “UHJ” with no Guardian has proven itself to certainly not be infallible in many things and many ways. The rank and file Baha’is could not understand how their supposedly infallible leadership (that must be free of criticism and questioning), could be so wrong.

The article is focused on one of many problems associated to the so-called “UHJ.” The entire article expresses angst over what can be done to remedy this problem of a fallible UHJ whose understanding of the Writings is evolving, for example it explains that:
”The ‘problem’ for the Bahais, is that it is clear from doctrine and practical observation that the Universal House of Justice, the head of the Bahai community, does not always understand the Bahai scriptures correctly. If there was a guarantee that it would always be correct, the Guardianship would have been unnecessary. The Bahais could simply have elected a house of justice, after the death of Abdu’l-Baha. But the understanding of the Universal House of Justice evolves through interaction with the community, and it may at a particular point be incomplete and even incorrect.
It seems to me that the BIGS are finally coming to terms with the fact that the “UHJ” they have is a man-made fallible elected body, in sharp contrast to the words of Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi about the divine Institutions under the infallible care of Baha’u’llah.  Having erroneously abandoned the vision of the Will and Testament of Abdu’l-Baha in which the Guardian is the living head of the Universal House of Justice, they seek a remedy for this.
“And now, concerning the House of Justice which God hath ordained as the source of all good and freed from all error, it must be elected by universal suffrage, that is, by the believers. Its members must be manifestations of the fear of God and daysprings of knowledge and understanding, must be steadfast in God's faith and the well-wishers of all mankind. By this House is meant the Universal House of Justice, that is, in all countries a secondary House of Justice must be instituted, and these secondary Houses of Justice must elect the members of the Universal one. Unto this body all things must be referred. It enacteth all ordinances and regulations that are not to be found in the explicit Holy Text. By this body all the difficult problems are to be resolved and the Guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head and the distinguished member for life of that body. Should he not attend in person its deliberations, he must appoint one to represent him. Should any of the members commit a sin, injurious to the common weal, the Guardian of the Cause of God hath at his own discretion the right to expel him, whereupon the people must elect another one in his stead.” (Abdu'l-Baha, The Will and Testament, p. 14)
According to the Will and Testament of Abdu’l Baha; a true and real Universal House of Justice must be a body that combines being “elected by universal suffrage” and having a “sacred head and the distinguished member for life of that body,” that is “the Guardian of the Cause of God” which Shoghi Effendi said was indispensable:
“Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn.” (Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Baha’u’llah)
Note that the guidance to define the sphere of legislative action is deemed necessary and without it the integrity of the Faith is imperiled,  But McGlinn ignores this and focuses instead on this paragraph of the World Order of Baha’u’llah to justify his assertion that the authority of the UHJ is free of the Guardian’s control:
“Though the Guardian of the Faith has been made the permanent head of so august a body he can never, even temporarily, assume the right of exclusive legislation. He cannot override the decision of the majority of his fellow-members, but is bound to insist upon a reconsideration by them of any enactment he conscientiously believes to conflict with the meaning and to depart from the spirit of Bahá’u’lláh’s revealed utterances. He interprets what has been specifically revealed, and cannot legislate except in his capacity as member of the Universal House of Justice. He is debarred from laying down independently the constitution that must govern the organized activities of his fellow-members, and from exercising his influence in a manner that would encroach upon the liberty of those whose sacred right is to elect the body of his collaborators.”  (Shoghi Effendi WOB)
McGlinn twists the point made by Shoghi Effendi, that the Guardian is not a dictator and has no right to overturn the legislation of the UHJ. He ignores the fact that if the Guardian tells the members of the UHJ that their legislation contradicts his interpretation of the Writings, then the members of the UHJ must obey and accept the Guardian’s interpretation.

When the Guardian is present in the meetings there will not be a “conflict with the meaning" and it will not be possible “to depart from the spirit of Bahá’u’lláh’s revealed utterance” because they will receive “the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action.” But perhaps when the Guardian is not present and has appointed “one to represent him” then it may be necessary that he “insist upon a reconsideration by them of any enactment he conscientiously believes to conflict with the meaning and to depart from the spirit of Bahá’u’lláh’s revealed utterance.”

From the Will and Testament of Abdu’l-Baha (emphasis added):
“The sacred and youthful branch, the Guardian of the Cause of God, as well as the Universal House of Justice to be universally elected and established, are both under the care and protection of the Abhá Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). Whatsoever they decide is of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither obeyeth them, hath not obeyed God; whoso rebelleth against him and against them hath rebelled against God; whoso opposeth him hath opposed God; whoso contendeth with them hath contended with God; whoso disputeth with him hath disputed with God; whoso denieth him hath denied God; whoso disbelieveth in him hath disbelieved in God; whoso deviateth, separateth himself and turneth aside from him hath in truth deviated, separated himself and turned aside from God. May the wrath, the fierce indignation, the vengeance of God rest upon him! The mighty stronghold shall remain impregnable and safe through obedience to him who is the Guardian of the Cause of God. It is incumbent upon the members of the House of Justice, upon all the Aghsán, the Afnán, the Hands of the Cause of God to show their obedience, submissiveness and subordination unto the Guardian of the Cause of God, to turn unto him and be lowly before him. He that opposeth him hath opposed the True One, will make a breach in the Cause of God, will subvert His Word and will become a manifestation of the Center of Sedition. Beware, beware, lest the days after the ascension (of Bahá’u’lláh) be repeated when the Center of Sedition waxed haughty and rebellious and with Divine Unity for his excuse deprived himself and perturbed and poisoned others. No doubt every vainglorious one that purposeth dissension and discord will not openly declare his evil purposes, nay rather, even as impure gold, will he seize upon divers measures and various pretexts that he may separate the gathering of the people of Bahá."
In any event, McGlinn seeks to come up with a solution to the problem of a fallible UHJ, that perhaps the UHJ needs to find expert advisors to fill them in on the meaning of the Writings and other things they need to know, McGlinn notes that Baha’u’llah calls upon people to turn to “the learned ones in Baha” but then agonizes over what that might mean, but it is clear that this is something beyond mere secular scholars and experts.

He then quotes Shoghi Effendi to define the learned as the Hands of the Cause of God, and others who have an eminent position in the teaching work.  They have no authority other than their persuasive knowledge and integrity, not power.  Of course the UHJ should consult with the learned, but this certainly does not solve the problem.

McGlinn hints at “the general opinion of the mass of the believers,” as being an aid to remedy the UHJ’s fallibility, that he will discuss in the future apparently,   Of course, the opinion of the mass of believers is certainly in play, since this must inevitably be indirectly reflected in the election of the UHJ by the representatives of the Baha’is.

The Baha’i Administrative Order is intended for a future society in which the mass of the believers will be much more spiritually advanced than we are today, because the effect of a Baha’i system on society will enrich and uplift the entire mass of the believers. It is precisely because a society of spiritually advanced souls having intuitive guidance from a life of prayer, meditation, and service in a spiritually advanced society, there will inevitably arise disputes of interpretation and understanding (since there will always be differences of advancement between individuals). The Guardianship is a beacon of light for such a society since there is an authorized Interpreter to settle disputes between spiritually advanced souls.

The problem for McGlinn and the BIGS is that they have denied the Guardian, and therefore they are deprived of the divine guidance they need.

The question is why are McGlinn and the BIGS trying so hard to find a man-made solution to solve the problem of the incompetence and illegitimacy of their “UHJ”? Why not simply return to the sacred provisions of the Will and Testament of Abdu’l Baha, and turn to the living Guardian of the Cause of God?
We have a fixed time for you, O peoples. If ye fail, at the appointed hour, to turn towards God, He, verily, will lay violent hold on you, and will cause grievous afflictions to assail you from every direction. How severe, indeed, is the chastisement with which your Lord will then chastise you."(Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 214)

Baha'i Writings : When Will a New "Manifetsation of God" Appear?

Never! [1]

Not before a thousand years![2]

Not before 500000 years![3]

[1] “I swear by my True Self, all manifestations have come to an end by this Most Great Manifestation (meaning Bahā’u’llāh). Whoever claims (to be a manifestation) after that is a slandering  liar,” Bahā’u’llāh, Iqtidārāt wa chand lauḥ dīgar, p. 327.

[2] “The Dispensation of Bahā’u’llāh will last until the coming of the next Manifestation of God, Whose advent will not take place before at least ‘a full thousand years’ will have elapsed,” Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitābi Aqdas, p. 195.

[3] `Abdu’l-Bahā uses the word cycle to refer to dispensation: “. . . in the first manifestation the sun will stop in the middle of the sky for ten days, in the second manifestation twenty days and in the third manifestation thirty days. Know that the first manifestation in this report is the manifestation of his Highness the Messenger (meaning Prophet Muḥammad) in which the sun of reality stopped for ten days in that constellation and every day is equal to one century and by this calculation [those ten days] are a thousand years and that was the Muḥammadan cycle and cycle (daur and kaur) [!] . . . the second manifestation, was the manifestation of the Primal point, may my soul be sacrificed for him, in which the Sun of Truth stopped in that cycle (daur) for twenty years . . . in the cycle (daur) of the blessed beauty . . . whose length will be at least 500000 years . . .” `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, pp. 75–76.

Baha'i teachings on sending their children to non-Baha’i schools !

Abdu’l-Husayn Ayati (Avarih) the former Baha’i historian and scholar mentions in his book Kashf al-Hiyal (Uncovering the Deceptions), that:

“[Baha’is] deem it a great sin to send their children to Muslim, Protestant, Jewish, or Zoroastrian schools and their leader has forbidden them from doing so. This is specially [evident] with respect to Islamic and Protestant schools. It was because of this that they established [Baha’i] schools so that no words originating from outside of Baha’ism reaches the ears of their children and those logical words influence them.” (Abdu’l-Husayn Ayati (Avarih), Kashf al-Hiyal (Uncovering the Deceptions), 3rd ed., vol. 1, p. 115)

Being labeled a covenant breaker, the words of Avarih are usually met with skepticism and are in many cases categorically denied by Baha’is. We have observed many times that what Avarih mentions is the truth and the denial by Baha’is is not justified. We will now proceed to show from authentic Baha’i scripture (as yet untranslated by Baha’i authorities), the official Baha’i order on the prohibition of Baha’is from attending non-Baha’i schools.

Pay attention to the following letter from Abdu’l-Baha:

“You had inquired about the Tarbiyat School. (Know that) it is absolutely prohibited for the children of the friends to go to the schools of others (meaning non-Baha’is) for this is [a cause of] humiliation (dhillat) for the Cause of God and they will be completely deprived of the Blessed Beauty’s graces. Because they will be educated/nurtured elsewise and they will disgrace the Baha’is.” (Abdu’l-Baha, Makatib (Letters), vol. 5, p. 170)

Since Abdu’l-Baha had prohibited his followers from sending their children to non-Baha’i schools, Baha’i schools such as the Madrisiy-i Tarbiyat (in Tehran) were established. What is extraordinary are the words used by Abdu’l-Baha to describe the result of Baha’is studying in non-Baha’i schools: humiliation (dhillat) of the Cause of God and disgrace (ruswā’ī) of Baha’is and being completely deprived of the Blessed Beauty’s graces!

One wonders why these words have been uttered. Does `Abdu’l-Baha regard all forms of education other than what the Baha’is preach invalid to such an extent that when Baha’is are educated and nurtured using those methods they will be regarded as a disgrace and cause of humiliation for this creed? Or is he afraid that Baha’i children will expose the true face of Baha’ism amongst non-Baha’is which will result in their disgrace and humiliation?

In another letter while praising Baha’i schools and giving guidelines on how to teach Baha’i children, Abdu’l-Baha concludes his statements by these words:

“Sending Baha’i children to non-Baha’i schools and nurturing them there is a cause of abatement (khumudat) and stagnation (jumudat).” (Abdu’l-Baha, Muntakhabati az makatib-i hadrat-i Abdu’l-Baha [Selections From the Letters of Abdu’l-Baha], vol. 6, no. 397)

Abdu’l-Baha’s description of non-Baha’i schools is no wise fair nor based on sound reasoning. The words khumudat and Jumudat used by Abdu’l-Baha used to describe the effect of non-Baha’i schools have a multitude of similar meanings with the former also meaning apathy, depression, passivity, dullness and the latter meaning stiffness, recession and freezing. It is not clear which meaning Abdu’l-Baha had intended although they are all derogatory. To make matters worse, Abdu’l-Baha states what he means by these two words in another statement:

“O true friends! There is no calamity greater than abatement (khumudat) and stagnation (jumudat) for they are death incarnate.” (Abdu’l-Baha, Muntakhabati az makatib-i hadrat-i Abdu’l-Baha [Selections From the Letters of Abdu’l-Baha], vol. 6, no. 7)

Thus, according to Abdu’l-Baha, studying in non-Baha’i schools is a form of incarnation of death itself. Do these statements conform with the Baha’i principles of ‘Removal of All Prejudice’ and the ‘Oneness of Humanity’? Is this how Compulsory Universal Education is achieved by isolating Baha’i children from non-Baha’i children and establishing separate schools for them? In yet another one of his letters, Abdu’l-Baha writes the following:

“You had written about Baha’i girls and that they are attending the schools of other peoples (non-Baha’is). The truth is, although these children are taught a few things in those schools, but the manners of the teachers will influence the (Baha’i) children and will cast doubts into their hearts and will convert and alter them. The friends of God (Baha’is) must establish a school for girls so that the (Baha’i) teachers educate them by Godly manners, divine morals, and methods of the Merciful Lord.” (Fadil Mazandarani, Amr wa khalq, vol. 3, p. 339)

Abdu’l-Baha is actually stating that he doesn’t want Baha’i children to study at non-Baha’i schools because Baha’i children might be influenced by the manners of their non-Baha’i teachers and doubts might be cast in their hearts about Baha’ism. How can the leaders of a creed claim they strive for the Oneness of Humanity and unity of mankind when they cannot tolerate their own children being educated by non-Baha’is?

The Baha’i attitude toward non-Baha’i teachers and schools and the words used to describe them are what one would except from a cult practicing an extreme form of information control on the adherents. One might even go as far as calling it a form of brainwashing. Anyway, since these orders were so illogical and impractical–like many other Baha’i teachings that Baha’is in the western world are kept in the dark about–they were temporarily abandoned until a “future state of society” when Baha’is are hopeful that they can be implemented…

What is even more interesting, is that although Abdu’l-Baha had prohibited his followers in the strictest sense and using threatening language from sending their children to non-Baha’i schools, he defied this order himself and sent his own beloved grandson to non-Baha’i schools in Palestine:

“It was here that Shoghi Effendi had a very significant dream which he recounted to me and which I wrote down.  He said that when he was nine or ten years old, living with his nurse in this house and attending school in Haifa, he dreamed that he and another child, an Arab schoolmate, were in the room in which 'Abdu'l-Bahā used to receive His guests in the house in Akka . . .” (Rūhīyyih Rabbani, The Priceless Pearl (London: Bahā’ī Publishing Trust, 1969), p. 16.)

“Shoghi Effendi entered the best school in Haifa, the College des  Freres, conducted by the Jesuits.  He told me he had been very unhappy there.  Indeed, I gathered from him that he never was really happy in either school or university.  In spite of his innately joyous nature, his sensitivity and his background - so different from that of others in every way - could not but set him apart and give rise to many a heart-ache; indeed, he was one of those people whose open and innocent hearts, keen minds and affectionate nature seem to combine to bring upon them more shocks and suffering in life than is the lot of most men.  Because of his unhappiness in this school 'Abdu'l-Baha decided to send him to Beirut where he attended another Catholic school as a boarder, and where he was equally unhappy.  Learning of this in Haifa the family sent a trusted Baha'i woman to rent a home for Shoghi Effendi in Beirut and take care of and wait on him.  It was not long before she wrote to his father that he was very unhappy at school, would refuse to go to it sometimes for days, and was getting thin and run down.  His father showed this letter to 'Abdu'l-Baha Who then had arrangements made for Shoghi Effendi to enter the Syrian Protestant College, which had a school as well as a university, later known as the American College in Beirut, and which the Guardian entered when he finished what was then equivalent to the high school.” (Rūhīyyih Rabbani, The Priceless Pearl, p. 17)

Anyway, one should think twice before joining a creed that claims its purpose is unity of the masses but does not allow the children of its own adherents to attend the schools of those same masses. And one should think twice before joining a creed that claims one of its main principles is the ‘Removal of All Forms of Prejudice’ but refers to schools that are run by non-Baha’is as “death incarnate” and believes attending these institutions is a cause of disgrace, humiliation and spiritual abatement and stagnation. Baha’is, especially in English speaking countries, will vehemently deny their leaders’ statements about non-Baha’i schools. We do not blame them for as we mentioned at the beginning of the article, these quotes have never been translated to English.

Source :

Mehrangiz Kar gives a tight slap to Baha'is in Virginia.

Some snaps from Facebook Debate between Fundamentalist Baha'is and Ex-Baha'is.
Mike Moum asks Baha'is to Shun Sen McGlinn.

Mehrangiz Kar with Kavian Sadeghzade Milani
Professor Mehrangiz Kar posted an article in Persian on the Rooz Online site, which referenced remarks she made as a guest speaker at a symposium in Virginia, focusing on the historical and social context of Taahereh’s unveiling at Badasht. Dr. Kar’s question, which she repeated in the article on Rooz online, (in Persian) was:

“Suppose that Taahereh were to miraculously return to life, and came to the same meeting [in Badasht], and put her name forward for membership of the House of Justice, the highest decision-making body for Bahais. Given the ruling of the new religion, that women are excluded from the principle centre of authority in the Bahai Faith simply by virtue of their sex, could Taahereh, with all her courage, passion, wisdom and knowledge, enter the House of Justice?”

The responses from some Bahais, at the symposium and following her article on Rooz Online, have been such that the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States has published a letter, in Persian and in English, which reproves “the harsh criticism made against Professor Kar by some Baha’is.”

Who says Baha'is don't drink Alcohol !? See this spiritual Baha'i Wedding !

Kumar & Rupinder Baha'i Wedding from leevideo on Vimeo.

BIA takes over BCCA

Matthew Weinberg is the current Program Director of the Baha’i Internet Agency, at the Baha'i World Centre, Israel.
This is an extremely difficult letter for us to write. We are saddened to announce that, after nearly a quarter century of services provided to the Baha'i community world-wide, the BCCA is closing down all services as of 31 July 2015.

This shutdown includes all email lists and websites that are currently managed by the BCCA. After that date, however, lists for Assemblies, clusters, teaching institutes and groups will be created and maintained under the newly-formed '' domain. Topical lists, such as Baha'i Writers and Baha'i Women will be discontinued. The Daily Readings and Baha'i Announce lists will also continue. Websites for National Spiritual Assemblies will be maintained by a different service provider.

It bears repeating to say that e-mail services to Assemblies, councils, clusters, teaching institutes and specific Baha'i-oriented services will be continued under the domain. Additional information as to this transition will be announced as the 31 July date approaches.

Founded in 1992, the BCCA has offered a variety of list services as well as web services to the Baha'i community around the world. These services have been offered free of charge to individuals and the Institutions of the Faith. The BCCA was, and still is being, operated by volunteers. For many years financial support was obtained solely from individuals, whereas for the last few years it was obtained from its sponsor.

Initially, the BCCA responded to a number of the communications possibilities offered by the then rapidly developing Internet and World Wide Web services as well as to the new and increasingly inexpensive personal computer technologies. Since 1992, Internet and personal computer usage have deeply penetrated almost all levels of society world-wide. Over the last ten years or so, wireless and mobile telephone technologies have increased even further this penetration and we all live in an increasingly connected world. New tools and services, such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, to name but a few, together with a very ubiquitous use of mobile devices, are creating new and challenging changes in the very structure of society, breaking down communication barriers and creating unprecedented and as yet poorly understood patterns of human behaviour and communications modalities.

As a consequence of all this, the Internet world has become so complex that the demand today on our human resources is simply too great for us to keep operating in an effective way. As you may appreciate, our own volunteers, all of them accomplished professionals, have been devoting their free time and energies to keeping the BCCA services running, some for more than 2 decades.

We wish to thank all of you who have been loyal supporters over the years and who have been patient when we have encountered difficulties. We wish to also thank our formal sponsor and all those who have contributed their own personal resources, financial and material, over the years to the BCCA.

Finally, to all BCCA list subscribers and website clients, we send our sincerest thanks for having used our services over the years. We sincerely hope that they have been of some use to you in all your efforts to serve the Cause of the Blessed Beauty as well as in your own personal spiritual development.

As always, please direct all questions and/or comments to

With most affectionate greetings to you all,

Co-ordinating Committee

Baha'i Computer and Communications Association

See also : WHAT IS BIA ?

How much Indian is the Baha'i Lotus Temple? How the Indian Baha'is contibuted to its construction !!!?

By Anupama R. (Ex-Baha'i from India)

On the order of the Hand of Bahaism (Baha'is call it "Hand of Cause of God") Mr. Rahmatullah Muhajir - Iranian Architect Fariborz Sahba was given the job to design the Indian House of Worship. He did not had any Idea for the design, so he did a tour of India to get an understanding of what will attract Indian Hindus to their "future structure"? What it should be like so that in the future it will serve as a conversion tool to build Baha'i Human Resource in India. Baha'is were convinced that Indians can only be converted to their cult if they use Indian culture to deceive them. Finally the shape of Lotus, which is a very important flower in Hinduism, was decided to be given to this temple.

Thus started the project :

•   The job of Structural Engineering was given to Flint and Neill Company of London.

•   All structural drawings and calculations were double checked in Geneva.

•   A study of what type of concrete of what strength to be used was carried out with the help of specialist concrete technologists of the Concrete Association of England.

•   A scale model of the Temple was made by specialists in London.

•   The final design and layout were approved by the Israeli UHJ in 1977.

Regarding the work that Lotus Temple is going to do in future - Ruhiyyih Kanum Says : "It
is symmetrical, it is exquisitely beautiful. And how does it grow? It grows in a swamp and it raises its head out of the slime absolutely clean and perfect."

May be through these rosy sentences she meant to say that in the Land of Hindus this temple will sow the seeds of Baha'ism. In this marshy land of cults and castes and religions Baha'ism will boom like a lotus in muddy waters.

Fundraising :

Regarding Fundraising Shoghi Effendi says : "...the greater the sacrifice, the greater the power of the Mashriqu'l-Azkar (Temple)". Baha'is were asked to donate money for this temple.

•   92000 Square Metres of land in Delhi was purchased merely for Rupees 140,289.

•   Ardashir Rustampur of Pakistan donated Rupees 100,190 for the Land of Lotus Temple.

•   The major amount for construction of Lotus Temple came due to a Baha'i serving a Prison Sentence in Mozambique, Africa.

•    Another major portion of sum came from Panama.

The contribution of Indian Baha'is to this project is not known except the mention of one village Baha'i who dropped into the Temple fund box a two-paise coin (one-fifth of a cent) and another Baha'i offered Rupees 100. Hence UHJ asked the Indian NSA to print coupons of Rupees 1 to 100 and collect funds from Indians. It is stated that 22% of construction cost was contributed by Indian Baha'is. But this is merely a claim without any proof. Even today, the Baha'is in India do not contribute to Baha'i Activities. Only a few Baha'is of Iranian origin sponsor Bahaism in India. For instance Zia Mody is the one who alone contributes Millions of Rupees to sponsor Bahaism in India.

On 30 July 1980 prayers were offered and, following Hindu tradition, coconuts were broken and sweets were distributed to the gathering. (Although Shoghi Effendi strictly forbids following the customs of other religions and celebrating their festivals)

Mrs. Golnar Sahba (Rafi'i), Iranian wife of Architect Fariborz Sahba poured the first trowelful of concrete into the first pit.

A brick from the Siyah-Chal (Black Pit in Iran where Baha'u'llah was Imprisoned), as directed by the Universal House of Justice (Israel), was laid into the foundation of this temple.

The marble for external shell cladding was imported from Italy.

Baha'is demanded official exemption from import duty for Italian Marble, which was granted to them by three Indian Ministries. (They took the benefits although they claim they do not accept any contribution from non-Baha'is)

This is how Indian Baha'i Temple came into existence and this is how the Largest Baha'i Community of more than 2 Million at that time helped in its construction.

Please refer Bahai World - Volume 18 for more details.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts

Total Pageviews


Blog Archive