Another Haifan Baha'i Gets Busted on Reddit

 Posted on February 7, 2023

A subreddit devoted to religion in general got a post from a Muslim about the Baha’i Faith.

Questions for bahai's
by u/Narwhal_Songs in religion

But among the comments there was a verbal tennis match between trident, a Unitarian Baha’i, and FrenchBread, a Haifan Baha’i.

You will have many responses if you post this in r/bahai
________________
Baha’i
r/Freespeechbahai for alternative Bahai perspectives

________________

you aren’t even a Baha’i
________________
Baha’i

Yes I am

_______________

There is no such thing as Haifan or Unitarian Bahá’ís. You can’t make things up like that. I can call myself the Wizard of Oz but it doesn’t mean anything.
___________________________
Baha’i

The difference between Haifan and Unitarian Bahais is Haifan Baha’is believe that after Baha’u’llah’s death Abdul Baha’s Will was to be followed, which appointed Shoghi Effendi and then the UHJ as the successors, whereas Unitarian Bahais believe that after Baha’u’llah’s death the instructions of the Kitab i Ahd were to be followed, which appointed Mirza Muhammad Ali as the successor of Abdul Baha.

I don’t see why you think there is no such thing as a Unitarian Bahai.

__________________

The Kitab-i-Ahd did not appoint Mirza Muhammad Ali. Go read it again.
_______________________
Baha’i

It says Abdul Baha and then Muhammad Ali after him.

_____________________

No it says the station of Muhammad Ali is beneath that of Abdul’Baha. It says nothing of him succeeding Abdul’Baha. It also says we must obey Abdul’Baha and to turn away from him is like turning away from Baha’u’llah. Abdul’Baha was free to choose his successor and he chose Shoghi Effendi. It’s a done deal. There is nothing to argue.
____________________

Only in the Haifan translation. Beneath is a mistranslation of the word بعد, which means “after” and does not mean “beneath”. Earlier translations did not use the word beneath. I include the Horace Holley translation in this post:

https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeechBahai/comments/pbkwoe/my_interpretation_of_bahaullahs_successor/

The word “beneath” is not found here.

This is what the Kitab i Ahd says in the original language:

وصيّة اللّه آنکه بايد اغصان و افنان و منتسبين طرّاً بغصن اعظم ناظر باشند انظروا ما انزلناه فی کتابی الاقدس اذا غيض بحر الوصال و قضی کتاب المبدء فی المآل توجّهوا اِلی من اراده اللّه الّذی انشعب من هذا الاصل القديم مقصود از اين آيه مبارکه غصن اعظم بوده کذلک اظهرنا الامر فضلاً من عندنا و انا الفضّال الکريم قد قدّر اللّه مقام الغصن الاکبر بعد مقامه انّه هو الآمر الحکيم قد اصطفينا الاکبر بعد الاعظم امراً من لدن عليم خبير

_______________________

Whether or not you translate it as “beneath” or “after” does not change the fact that the passage is not implying in any way about who should be the successor after Abdul’Baha. I can’t fathom how you can read it in such a matter. Once Muhammad Ali broke the covenant by not recognizing Abdul’Baha it’s a moot point. Muhammad Ali was excommunicated so he can’t be the successor anyway. You need to stop spreading this kind of disinformation. It’s so harmful to your soul that I am deeply saddened for you.
_____________________

It doesn’t imply it. It commands it explicitly:

Verily, God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch after the station of the former. Verily, He is the Ordainer, the Wise. We have surely chosen the Greater after the Greatest as a Command from the All-Knowing, the Omniscient!

____________________

It says station not succession. My station is lower than Abdul’Baha but that doesn’t mean I am to succeed him. The key word is station.
____________________
Baha’i

So what was the point of mentioning Muhammad Ali at all?

____________________

To make sure Muhammad Ali (and everyone else in the family and the community) knew that Muhammad Ali was to obey Abdul’Baha. So that Muhammad Ali would not challenge the successorship after Baha’u’llah’s death, and everyone would turn to Abdul’Baha for leadership and there wouldn’t be a schism.
________________

Baha’i

Wouldn’t it make things clearer to just not mention Muhammad Ali, and just say that everyone was to obey Abdul Baha?

____________________

Clearly Baha’u’llah felt the need to address Muhammad Ali by name specifically so that there would be no doubt or question amongst everyone in the family. I’d recommend you read God Passes Bye which talks quite a bit about the trouble that Muhammad Ali was causing at the time for Abdul’Baha. Later in Abdul’Baha’s ministry, Muhammad Ali went as far as trying to have Abdul’Baha crucified by the Ottomans.
________________________
Well, that was over two months ago. When I found that thread, I decided that FrenchBread needed to be taught a lesson in humility. So I went after him!
Unitarian Universalist

If other Baha’is are anything like YOU in the way you argued with trident here, then clearly those responses in the Baha’i subreddit are not to be trusted.

You said:

There is no such thing as Haifan or Unitarian Bahá’ís. You can’t make things up like that. I can call myself the Wizard of Oz but it doesn’t mean anything.

That’s like saying there is no such thing as a Christian outside the Roman Catholic Church. Don’t be so bigoted! Then you claimed:

[The Kitab-i-Ahd] says the station of Muhammad Ali is beneath that of Abdul’Baha. It says nothing of him succeeding Abdul’Baha. It also says we must obey Abdul’Baha and to turn away from him is like turning away from Baha’u’llah. Abdul’Baha was free to choose his successor and he chose Shoghi Effendi. It’s a done deal. There is nothing to argue.

Do you read the original languages of Baha’u’llah’s writings, Arabic and Persian? Apparently not! When trident tried to correct you with the actual quotation from the passage in question, you simply doubled down on the falsehoods.

Whether or not you translate it as “beneath” or “after” does not change the fact that the passage is not implying in any way about who should be the successor after Abdul’Baha. I can’t fathom how you can read it in such a matter. Once Muhammad Ali broke the covenant by not recognizing Abdul’Baha it’s a moot point. Muhammad Ali was excommunicated so he can’t be the successor anyway. You need to stop spreading this kind of disinformation. It’s so harmful to your soul that I am deeply saddened for you.

Why do you assume Mirza Muhammad-Ali broke the Covenant? Because you believe what was written about him decades after the fact? You weren’t there, so you don’t know what really happened, do you?

The real reason for the dispute between the brothers was because Abdu’l-Baha falsely claimed infallibility for himself after Baha’u’llah made clear in the Kitab-i-Aqdas that NO ONE but God and a Messenger of God could be infallible. He also warned his followers in that book that no one could claim direct revelation from God for 1000 years after his time. Abdu’l-Baha’s claim about himself made it look like he was equal to his father and that made Muhammad-Ali think Abdu’l-Baha violated the Covenant. And once the Covenant was broken, the obligation to obey Abdu’l-Baha became irrelevant. Abdu’l-Baha was just as bound to the rules of his father as Muhammad-Ali was. Having Muhammad-Ali act as a check on Abdu’l-Baha’s absolute power was actually a wise thing for Baha’u’llah to do, in hindsight. Too bad most Baha’is, including you, have chosen to ignore the actual facts about Baha’u’llah’s own teachings. Instead, you use talking points that really don’t make sense. Trident did say:

Wouldn’t it make things clearer to just not mention Muhammad Ali, and just say that everyone was to obey Abdul Baha?

Obviously, yes! Then you said:

Clearly Baha’u’llah felt the need to address Muhammad Ali by name specifically so that there would be no doubt or question amongst everyone in the family.

Because……if Abdu’l-Baha was caught breaking the Covenant, Muhammad-Ali would have the right to challenge him by the authority given to him by both the Kitab-i-Aqdas and the Kitab-i-Ahd. And THAT’S WHAT HE DID!

And as for this final claim of yours:

Later in Abdul’Baha’s ministry, Muhammad Ali went as far as trying to have Abdul’Baha crucified by the Ottomans.

That’s absurd! And when did the Ottoman Empire ever crucify people?

It’s only natural for Shoghi Effendi after being made Abdu’l-Baha’s successor to demonize Muhammad-Ali to justify what was done. Therefore, his book God Passes By is not credible. It’s like Joseph Stalin demonizing Leon Trotsky after Stalin became the Soviet dictator, even though Trotsky was also a loyal Communist.

_____________________

The next day after I made that comment, I discovered that FrenchBread had blocked me and my comment had been downvoted by several people. Such pathetic cowardice! But that’s what happens when Haifan Baha’is can’t control the conversation like they can in r/bahai! They run away!

A 'capable and devoted' Baha'i, Husayn Ruhi, was also a 'capable and devoted' British agent!

A gathering of Bahá'ís with Mírzá Abu'l-Faḍl in Cairo, April 1907 (seated, 3rd from right), on the occasion of the pilgrimage to 'Akká of Thornton Chase, the first American Bahá'í (seated next to him) and Mr and Mrs Arthur S. Agnew (seated across the table). Also identified are Hájí Mírzá Níyáz, one of the early believers of Persia, loved by all, who lived many years in Cairo until his death in 1919 (seated at front, with white turban); Husayn Rúhí, who owned and directed two schools in Cairo (at table, centre foreground); and Shaykh Muhyiddín Sabrí Sanandají al-Kurdí (standing, hatless, below the tree at left), a disciple of Mírzá Abu'l-Faḍl and a well-known scholar and Bahá'í teacher invited by 'Abdu'l-Bahá to go to Tunisia and North Africa.

He appears as a bit character in generally British-focused narratives of the Revolt, and intelligence during the First World War. T. E. Lawrence briefly refers to Ruhi as “more like a mandrake than a man” (perhaps in reference to his multiple wives and numerous children). Storrs, who spent many more months with Ruhi, gave him the codename “the Persian Mystic” and described Ruhi as “a fair though not profound Arabist, and a better agent than scholar.” Ruhi himself, a petite spy, translator, poet, and textbook author spent decades working for British officials, diplomats, spies, and educationalists, including a fifteen-year stint in the Department of Education of the Mandate for Palestine.

His interactions with colleagues in the Mandate bureaucracy, as well as the British individuals who had hired him, point to the chameleon-like character of the man himself.

Ruhi grew up in Persia after the death of his father, and received some schooling in Chicago as part of a Baha’i mission to that city, earning a license in the English language. Upon his return, Ruhi taught English in Cairo at a variety of schools, and published a bi-weekly magazine that promoted the Baha’i religion.

By 1912, Ruhi had married two of the three wives he would marry (possibly simultaneously), and had fathered two of the twelve children he would raise. Ruhi founded two schools in Egypt, one for boys and one for girls, which closed at the end of the First World War.

While Storrs [Sir Ronald Storrs (Britain’s Oriental Secretary, spy, and later governor of Jerusalem)] viewed him as Persian, Ruhi’s colleague Abdul Latif Tibawi, a fellow inspector of education in the Mandate for Palestine, defined him in passing as Arab, although in later works described Ruhi in more detail as an Egyptian “of Persian origin” and an “Arabic-speaking Persian.”

...a lack of attachment both to the Ottoman Empire and to the Arab community among whom Ruhi lived (and married) facilitated his career with different British administrations. Ronald Storrs preferred employing Baha’i individuals, believing them to be naturally suited to intelligence (one would presume due to their frequent need to keep their religion secret).* Ruhi’s fitness for his post as an intelligence officer, from the point of view of his employers, is clear.

*[Storrs noted that the “leading Persian of Jedda, a Bahai,” not only protected British agents, but also supplied the British with information himself. Ronald Storrs, “Hejaz Events, Excerpt from Diary,” 27 September 1916, Middle East Politics and Diplomacy, 1904–1950: The Papers of Sir Ronald Storrs (1881–1956) from Pembroke College, Cambridge (Marlborough, Wiltshire [England]: Adam Matthew Publications, 1999), Reel 5, Section II, Box 4. Storrs also employed a Baha’i doctor, asserting that this doctor, “being of Ruhi’s spiritual persuasion – can be trusted to keep you well and intimately informed on professional and non-professional matters.” Letter from Ronald Storrs to Colonel Wilson, 1 August 1916. Middle East Politics and Diplomacy, Reel 5, Section II, Box 4.]

From 1914 to 1920, Husayn Ruhi, and briefly his father-in-law, worked as agents for the British government across the Middle East.

Husayn Ruhi translated documents; wrote clandestine reports on the local situation in Cairo, Mecca, and Jeddah; carried messages and funds from the British to the Hijaz and back again; and generally contributed to the fomenting of the Arab Revolt. Ruhi’s official title was “confidential secretary,” working from 1914 to 1916 for Ronald Storrs, then British Oriental Secretary living in Cairo. From 1916 to 1918, Ruhi became the “confidential secretary to the British Agency Jeddah,” under Colonel Cyril Wilson. In transferring Ruhi’s services, Storrs commended Ruhi to Wilson: “he is delivered over to you body and soul. He is to consider himself not only your eyes and ears, but also if necessary your hands and feet. He may even, should an especially unsavoury occasion present itself, be called upon to represent your nose.”

Husayn Ruhi (second from left) with Emir Abdallah bin Husayn al-Hashimi (the first king of Transjordan). Photograph by Ronald Storrs, “Suleiman Qabil, Hussein Ruhi, Emir Abdulla Bin Husain al-Hashimi, Sheikh Abdullah Ba Naji at Jidda,” October 1916, courtesy of the Imperial War Museum, London.


Ruhi is best known for his translation of the Husayn-McMahon correspondence.

Elie Kedourie in particular criticized Ruhi’s Arabic as “shaky” with “grammatical mistakes” that indicated a lack of the necessarily facility to deal with the correspondence. Kedourie argues that certain mistranslations of difficult words led to confusion over the territory promised to Sharif Husayn. Kedourie also attributes to Ruhi the “florid style” of McMahon’s letters to Husayn, citing a British representative at Jeddah’s statement that “Ruhi used to address the King (Hussein) with the most extravagant titles when he wanted anything out of him.” It seems that the Sharif returned the favor, as Ruhi’s translation of one letter of the Sharif reads, “To our most ingenious, respectable and honourable [M]ister [S]torrs. Verily, I present to you my propensity and I ask for your health and rejoice.” Leaving aside the question of Ruhi’s Arabic, his English indicates a lack of fluency. Ruhi’s reports and his translations of Sharif Husayn’s correspondence, written in pen, are replete with crossed out words and phrases, words inserted after having completed a line, misspelled words, and prepositions used incorrectly.

One British captain noted Ruhi’s invaluable services, lauding his ability to find information due to “his energy, unique knowledge of the workings of men of the stamp concerned in this conspiracy and his selection of agents.” The captain further praised Ruhi’s dedication to his job, stating that “at great personal risk, underlying extreme discomfort and abuse, being imprisoned on several occasions he (Ruhi) traversed the whole [Suez] canal zone gaining information of the greatest value.” Ruhi not only collected intelligence, he also offered “disconcerting suggestions” of tactics that could be employed against those who were not friendly to the Revolt or the British. Ruhi told Storrs to “take strict measures” to prevent Rashid Rida from travelling to the Hijaz and convincing the people to “ignore the English.” Ruhi floated the idea of deporting Rida to Malta.

In his own evaluation of his espionage abilities, Ruhi boasted to Storrs, “I am known here as an Alem or Mohammedan Theologian as I went into mosques and delivered lectures and interpreted some verses. …All of the great people here are my friends. I picked some of them whom I found really pro-English and they may be a great help to our work.” It is of course impossible to verify Ruhi’s account of his own exploits. It is interesting that Ruhi sold himself as being able to pass as a Muslim scholar, despite the fact that he was Baha’i, and a somewhat lackluster academic overall. Ruhi’s infiltration of Mecca and ability to preach in a mosque would also likely have appealed to British officials’ overarching focus on religious affiliation as the primary motivating factor behind Middle Easterners’ actions.

Ruhi’s motivations for working for the British, beyond his paycheck, remain obscure. However, in that same report to Ronald Storrs in which Ruhi boasted of his ability to charm the Sharif, and indeed pull the wool over the eyes of the citizens of Mecca, he begged Storrs to support his school, by convincing others to support it. Ruhi’s passion for the school he had founded clearly increased his need for funds. He claimed the school could be propped up by Egyptian awqaf. Ruhi asserted that he would “live loyal to the British government” for his entire life, so long as they supported his school, claiming, “If my school will fall I will be the saddest fellow upon earth.”

Sadly, for Ruhi, both the boys and girls sections of the school he founded would close during the war, due to “force of circumstance.” But Ruhi was able to find new work in education: He maintained a certain loyalty to the British, and continued his tendency to inform, in his new post as an inspector of education in Mandate Palestine.

In 1917, Hussein Ruhi was awarded 100 pounds in lieu of a title, which was feared would preclude him from ever working again secretly on behalf of the British government.

Ruhi also became the focus of some international ire: the French mission in the Hijaz complained that Ruhi was spying on them.

Ruhi apparently ceased his work in espionage in 1919. He received the titles of Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire (CIE) and Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE). In March of 1920, he became an inspector with the Department of Education in Jerusalem.

Ruhi’s unique career demonstrates the variety of experiences government educators’ possessed, but also points to the complications of post-Ottoman nationality. Although Ruhi, like many others, was now a citizen of Palestine, the category of Palestinian nationality – and, to some degree, nationality itself as a way of defining identity – ill fitted him, due to his languages, birthplace, family, and religion.

In returning to the profession of education, Ruhi also authored Arabic language textbooks specifically focused on Palestine for use in its government schools. Ruhi’s texts illustrate his unique perspective and perhaps a desire to pander to British preferences, as the books concentrate on the specific territory of Palestine, as opposed to either Greater Syria or the Arab world, and include Jewish as well as Arab narratives. His history of Palestine, al-Mukhtasar fi al-ta’rikh, printed in 1922, listed its most important sources as the Qur’an and other holy books, contemporary American and Middle Eastern works of history and literature, as well as Titus Flavius Josephus’s writings. Ruhi’s history begins with the story of Abraham and ends with Ibrahim Pasha. It also contains a surprisingly positive portrayal of certain aspects of Jewish history in the region, describing the Maccabees, for example, as a family of patriotic heroes. Ruhi’s geography of Palestine (al-Mukhtasarfi Jughrafiyat Filastin) was written up briefly in al-Muqtaṭaf, which noted that the book included the political, natural, and administrative geography of Palestine as well as more than twenty maps. This work begins with a Muslim blessing (bismillah al-rahman al-rahim) and includes a discussion of Palestine’s Jewish colonies and an overview of its educational system, as well as a somewhat pointed drill that required students to calculate the meager proportion of Palestine’s inhabitants attending school at all. Husayn Ruhi even drew some of the book’s maps himself. Moreover, in another unique turn, this Arabic language geography was published by the London Jews Society, a British missionary society geared toward converting Jews to Christianity and encouraging Jews’ resettling in Palestine.

In the Mandate, Ruhi’s presence was in some ways an affront to his peers. One Palestinian academic derided Ruhi as simply Ronald Storrs’s “protégé,” whose appointment in the education department was incongruous at best. Khalil al-Sakakini, who also worked as an inspector in the Mandate Department of Education and authored grammar textbooks, held up Ruhi as an example of problems with the department as a whole. In a somewhat lengthy series of complaints to his son, Sakakini listed individuals employed by the British administration in Palestine whom he thought were undeserving of their salaries and status, specifically including Husayn Ruhi.

Husayn Ruhi retired from service in the Mandate for Palestine in 1935. He returned to Cairo where he founded a school, as he had before his service with the British. Ruhi died in 1960. Ruhi remains best remembered for his translations and reports. Yet, his preference for British-backed governments continued in the careers of two of his sons. ‘Ali Husayn Ruhi and Hasan Husayn Ruhi followed their father’s example working as educators and government officials in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. ‘Ali taught in Transjordan from 1928 to 1945. He composed several mathematics and science textbooks used by Arabic-speaking students throughout the region, specifically in the government schools of Transjordan and Palestine. ‘Ali seems to have also renounced his father’s faith, or at least hidden it, as he defined himself as Muslim on his application to teach in Transjordan.

Husayn Ruhi’s journey from education to espionage and back is hardly characteristic of educators or ethnic or religious minorities in the Middle East. However, his story raises (although does not answer) a number of questions and issues connecting to schooling, governance, and intelligence in the twentieth-century Middle East. By choosing Ruhi, a Baha’i of unclear nationality, the British presumed, to some degree correctly, that they could command a greater sway over Ruhi’s loyalties than those of other Egyptians, Persians, or Palestinians.

(Hilary Falb Kalisman - The Little Persian Agent in Palestine: Husayn Ruhi, British Intelligence, and World War I, Jerusalem Quarterly 66)

Read complete article here :

https://www.academia.edu/28212491/The_Little_Persian_Agent_in_Palestine_Husayn_Ruhi_British_Intelligence_and_World_War_I

https://www.nli.org.il/en/articles/RAMBI990005858830705171/NLI

Additional points from Baha'i sources:


The journey began after Mirza Asadu'llah had returned to Persia from the Holy Land and had recovered the casket (of the Bab's remains) from its hiding place in Tehran. He then set off with the assistance of other believers, including a ‘capable and devoted’ Baha'i named Husayn Ruhi, who was the son of Haji ‘Ali-‘Askar, a distinguished Bahai who had attained the presence of the Bab. Like his father, Husayn Ruhi had been in prison in Acre with Baha'u'llah.

(Michael Day, Journey to a Mountain - The Story of the Shrine of the Bab)

Ruhi's father 'Ali-'Askar-i-Tabrizi?

Haji Haji 'Ali-'Askar was one of the notable merchants of Tabriz, and a believer from the time of the Bab. At last the persecutions forced him to leave his home town and he emigrated with his brother and family to Adrianople, where he settled down and made a living by peddling small wares. He was arrested and sent with Baha'u'llah to 'Akka, where he passed away in AH 1291 (AD 1874)....

...Muhammad-Javad-i-Qazvini next records in his tract the murder of two other men, previous to the murder of Siyyid Muhammad-i-Isfahani and his two accomplices. He names them as Husayn-'Ali of Kashan, known as Khayyat-Bashi, and Haji Ibrahim, also of Kashan; but he does not name those who murdered them. Apparently, these two men of Kashan, who had always been fickle, had been in communication with the Azalis, although they lived with the companions in Khan al-'Umdan. Muhammad-Javad writes that one day, in the bazar, Haji Ibrahim denounced Aqay-i-Kalim, in his presence, before the Mufti. This reprehensible behaviour roused the ire of the companions, and some of them (unnamed) murdered those two, and buried them in a room in the inn. This happened at a time when Baha'u'llah, because of the mounting animosity of the Azalis, had ceased admitting anyone into His presence. However, Siyyid Muhammad had noted their disappearance and had reported it to the authorities. But, at the time, there was no reason to suspect any crime. After the murder of the three Azalis, during the interrogation of the companions, the murder of the two Kashanis came to light. Again, Muhammad-Javad does not mention any names, but merely records that the authorities were told that the two had died of cholera, and lest all should be taken away and put into quarantine, they had been immediately and quietly interred in a room of the inn. The authorities exhumed their corpses and had them buried beside the Azalis.

Another point worth noting in the tract by Muhammad-Javad-i-Qazvini is that whereas the wife of Mirza Yahya, sister of Mirza Rida-Quliy-i-Tafrishi, has been named elsewhere as Badri-Jan, Muhammad-Javad calls her Badr-i-Jahan. And the sixteen men detained in the Khan-i-Shavirdi for six months are named as follows: Haji 'Ali-'Askar-i-Tabrizi, his son, Husayn-Aqa, and his brother, Mashhadi Fattah; Haji Ja'far and his brother, Haji Taqi; Muhammad-Javad-i-Qazvini, himself; Aqa Faraj-i-Sultanabadi; Aqa Riday-i-Shirazi; Mirza Mahmud-i-Kashani; Haji Faraju'llah-i-Tafrishi; Aqa 'Azim-i-Tafrishi; Aqa Muhammad-'Aliy-i-Isfahani; Aqa Muhammad-'Aliy-i-Yazdi; Darvish Sidq-'Aliy-i-Qazvini; Aqa Muhammad-Ibrahim-Nayrizi, known as Amir-i-Nayrizi; and Haji Aqay-i-Tabrizi.

(Baha'u'llah - The King of Glory by Hasan Balyuzi)

For some time 'Abbás Effendi bore with these alarming circumstances, until latterly he set himself to stir up the fanaticism of a man named Hájji Mírzá Hasan of Khurásán, one of the leading Bábís in Egypt, and commissioned him to proceed to America to repair this rupture. The latter obediently accepted this commission, took with him as interpreter Husayn Rúhí the son of Hájji Mullá 'Ali of Tabriz, and went to America, where he remained some time. At first he tried to bring back Ibráhím Khayru'lláh to Abbás Effendi, but, not succeeding in his efforts, he busied himself for a while in declaring and proving to his friends the sanctity of 'Abbás Efendi. But he failed to achieve his object, and returned to Egypt, where he was stricken with imbecility, and is at present under treatment in Egypt.

https://books.google.com/books?id=eLnR-tJO5MQC&pg=PA146&dq=%22Husayn+ruhi%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjLs8LJ4JX9AhXYEogKHZzZAQ4Q6AF6BAgJEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Husayn%20ruhi%22&f=false

An Iranian Baha'i who had 80 government jobs!

Abdol Karim Ayadi with Ne'matollah Nasiri, Director of the SAVAK

Abdol Karim Ayadi, who was the son of one of the famous Baha'i families in Iran, was a doctor in the army, and he first visited the court of the Shah to treat the mental illnesses of Alireza Pahlavi, the brother of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and then he became Pahlavi II's comrade. This friendship went to a point where it was said: "No one believed that Ayadi would make a request to the king and it would not be granted".

General Ayadi was versatile and had many jobs, and once "Hussein Fardoost", the general of the Pahlavi regime, told Mohammad Reza that this gentleman had many government jobs and described the story in the book "The Rise and Fall of the Pahlavi Sultanate" as follows: He [Ayadi] had created about 80 jobs for himself in the country, jobs that were all important and money-making; He was the head of the general health department of the army and in this position, he was in charge of the building of the army hospitals, importing the equipment for this hospital, importing necessary medicines, and everything else. The rank of medical personnel of the army from sergeant to lieutenant general was under his command, and no colonel doctor could become a brigadier general without his order, and any violation of his order was accompanied by dismissal and punishment.

Ayadi was the head of "ATKA" of the army and police forces, and in this position, all the requirements had to be prepared by his order. Whatever he wanted, even if it was available in the country, had to be imported for the army from abroad, especially England and America. Determining the quota and hundreds of other tasks and even determining the heads of the bases and its personnel were with him. The pharmaceutical organization of the country was completely under the command of Ayadi.

Southern Fisheries were under Ayadi's authority, and it was Ayadi's authority to determine which countries and companies were allowed to fish and which ones were not. As a result of his policies fishing in Iran was done with the most primitive means. The appointment of the director and personnel of the fisheries was also with Ayadi.

Someone checked his jobs once and it reached 80. He reported to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Mohammad Reza asked him why does he want 80 jobs? Ayadi answered jokingly: "My goal is to get 100 jobs".

Ayadi with Mohammad Reza Pahlavi


Some references from the Baha'i sources :

An installment of the Soraya Memoirs, autobiographical story of Princess Soraya Esfendiary, onetime queen of Iran, appeared in the June 30 issue of the magazine Quick, published in Munich, Germany. Several pages were taken up by the article and its illustrations, the first of which showed the Shah and his former consort with Dr. Ayadi, the faithful Bahá’í physician whom Princess Soraya credits with saving her life. Temporarily relieved of duty, as a protective measure, during the Bahá’í persecution, Dr. Ayadi now ranks high in the Shah’s service.

https://bahai.works/Baha%27i_News/Issue_391/Text

When Jeanne was forty years old, she accepted a position as governess for the children of the Dutch ambassador in Tihran. Perhaps she was the only Dutch Bahá’í who first heard about the Cause in the very Cradle of the Faith. The story began the moment that she, through her own physician, came in contact with Dr. Ayadi. Later she read in the newspaper that he was not only a Bahá’í but that he was also the personal physician of the Shah...

...At her next visit to Dr. Ayadi, she asked him if she could visit the temple of the Bahá’ís. He laughed and said that he would be happy to bring her, but they did not have a temple. Later Jeanne got the address of the administrative center and found behind an old entrance “another world, with a beautiful garden.”

https://bahai.works/In_Memoriam_1992-1997/Jeanne_Kranen

General Dr. Ayadi, the son and grandson of two Hands of the Cause respectively, was the shah’s personal physician for many years. When the shah wanted to go to America on an official visit, General Dr. Ayadi informed him that he would have to have permission from the Head of the Baha’i Faith, Shoghi Effendi, before he could go to America.

https://bahai.works/Hand_of_the_Cause_of_God_Furútan/Reference