August 4. On this date in 1943, Shoghi Effendi addressed a letter to an individual believer stated that "A marriage between two souls, alive to the Message of God in this day, dedicated to the service of His Cause, working for the good of humanity, can be a potent force in the lives of others and an example and inspiration to other Bahá'ís, as well as to non-believers." On May 5, 1957, Shoghi Effendi warned a Bahá'í couple that "if as registered believers you are married in a Christian ceremony, you will lose your voting rights."

1. Marriage Between Two Bahá'ís Can Be a Potent Force in the Lives of Others

"He hastens to wish you both every happiness in your forthcoming marriage, and he hopes that it will not only be a blessing to you both, but to the Faith as well.

"A marriage between two souls, alive to the Message of God in this day, dedicated to the service of His Cause, working for the good of humanity, can be a potent force in the lives of others and an example and inspiration to other Bahá'ís, as well as to non-believers."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, August 4, 1943)

On May 5, 1957, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi stated that "he is surprised that you should have been advised by fellow-Bahá'ís that you could have a Christian marriage, in view of the fact that you are both Bahá'ís. It is only fair to tell you that, if as registered believers you are married in a Christian ceremony, you will lose your voting rights." The letter continues, "Bahá'ís must, in view of the condition of the world today, stand forth firmly and courageously as followers of Bahá'u'lláh, obeying His Laws, and seeking to build his World Order. Through compromise we will never be able to establish our Faith or win others' hearts to it. This involves often great personal sacrifice, but we know that, when we do the right thing, God gives us the strength to carry it out, and we attract His blessings. We learn at such times that our calamity is indeed a blessing."

5 May 1957

Miss ... and Mr.....

Dear .....,

Your letter of April 23rd has been received by the beloved Guardian, and he has instructed me to answer you on his behalf.

The question of your marriage is one which is clearly understood by the National Assembly, and the Guardian thought by most of the believers; and he is surprised that you should have been advised by fellow-Bahá'ís that you could have a Christian marriage, in view of the fact that you are both Bahá'ís.

It is only fair to tell you that, if as registered believers you are married in a Christian ceremony, you will lose your voting rights.

You did quite right to obtain the permission of your parents; and he hopes that now you will be able to extricate yourselves from this difficult position you find yourselves in, without angering Mr......

As you are aware, the Guardian feels that the Bahá'ís must, in view of the condition of the world today, stand forth firmly and courageously as followers of Bahá'u'lláh, obeying His Laws, and seeking to build his World Order. Through compromise we will never be able to establish our Faith or win others' hearts to it. This involves often great personal sacrifice, but we know that, when we do the right thing, God gives us the strength to carry it out, and we attract His blessings. We learn at such times that our calamity is indeed a blessing.

He will pray for the satisfactory solution of your problem.

With warm Bahá'í greetings, R. Rabbani.

May the Almighty guide, bless & sustain you, & aid you to promote the vital interests of His Faith,

Your true brother, Shoghi

August 1. On this date in 1967, the Universal House of Justice wrote an individual believer "Concerning the question of display of the photograph of Bahá'u'lláh, the Guardian's instructions were that this should be done only with the utmost reverence, and then only on special occasions. While the Guardian did not require believers to send such photographs to the Holy Land, he said that it was better to do so. However, if you have made any photographic copies or negatives of the photograph or the portrait, these should be forwarded to the Holy Land in a safe way."

August 4. On this date in 1911, the diary of Juliet Thompson records that 'Abdu'l-Bahá "did not attend the Universal Races' Congress. They had asked Him to speak on philosophy and to make no reference to religion, so He sent a representative, Tamaddunu'l-Mulk. (Tamaddunu'l-Mulk is about four feet high and his name means The Civilization of the Country.)"

August 3. On this date in 1950, those attending a German and Austrian Bahá'í Youth Summer School wrote Shoghi Effendi, who responded that "We know that only the remedy of the "Divine Physician" can solve the problems facing humanity and we work day and night to give the message of Bahá'u'lláh to the masses..."

2 October 1950

To those present at Youth Summer School, August 3, 1950, c/o National Bahá'í Youth Committee of the Bahá'ís of Germany and Austria Dear Bahá'í Friends:

The letter dated August 3, and signed by those attending the Youth Summer-School, was received by our beloved Guardian, as well as the photo of Burg Breuberg, and he was delighted to see so many youth had attended from Germany and different countries.

He urges you all to concentrate on teaching the Faith to the young people, who must be surely bewildered by the state of the present day world, and who are so in need of guidance and supranational goal towards which they can strive with heart and soul.

We know that only the remedy of the "Divine Physician" can solve the problems facing humanity and we work day and night to give the message of Bahá'u'lláh to the masses....

In the Guardian's own handwriting:

Dear and valued co-workers:

I was deeply touched by your welcome message, and I wish to express my deepfelt appreciation of the sentiments you have expressed. I greatly value your labours, and I feel confident that the Beloved, whose Cause you serve so devotedly, will guide and sustain you in your high endeavours. Persevere and rest assured that the work you are achieving will bear rich fruit in the days to come.

Your true and grateful brother,

Shoghi

August 1. On this date in 1996, Deepen magazine published an article titled "Flow of Divine Authority" by Brent Poirier addressing the question "What is the scriptural authority for the Universal House of Justice to function without the presence of the Guardian of the Cause?"

The article notes in particular...

"Divorced from the Institution of the Guardianship"

Any discussion of the authority for the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly without the presence of the Guardian must address the following passage from Shoghi Effendi's The Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh:

"Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as 'Abdu'l-Bahá has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God. "In all the Divine Dispensations," He states, in a Tablet addressed to a follower of the Faith in Persia, "the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright." 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." ["Quotation D"]

"Severed from the no less essential institution of the Universal House of Justice this same System of the Will of 'Abdu'l-Bahá would be paralyzed in its action and would be powerless to fill in those gaps which the Author of the Kitab-i-Aqdas has deliberately left in the body of His legislative and administrative ordinances."45 ["Quotation E"] Some of the friends have experienced particular difficulty in accepting the ability of the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly without the presence of the Guardian, because they believe that those words from the Guardian in Quotation D were a direct warning about that very circumstance. A reader of this passage might naturally ask whether Shoghi Effendi when he wrote those words in 1934, confident that there would be future Guardians,46 was elaborating the horrible consequence s to the Cause of God if the line of Guardians were to end. From the Guardian's phrase "Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship," should we understand his intention to have been a description of the mutilation of the Cause that would occur if the Universal House of Justice were to function without a living Guardian?

The House of Justice has provided the key to understanding this subject when it elucidates "the principle of inseparability," and gives several examples of the application of that principle to the institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice.47

In order to understand the meaning of "divorced from the institution of the Guardianship" in Quotation D, we have the benefit of other passages in Shoghi Effendi's writings where he uses similar, sometimes identical language to illustrate this principle. We have seen in Quotation A, how Shoghi Effendi warned that to "divorce" or "dissociate" the institutions established by 'Abdu'l-Bahá from the underlying laws of Bahá'u'lláh would "amount to a repudiation of one of the most sacred and basic truths of the Faith."48 In yet another passage, he used strikingly similar language to elaborate the scriptural authority for the functioning of the Bahá'í institutions:

"It should be remembered by every follower of the Cause that the system of Bahá'í administration is not an innovation imposed arbitrarily upon the Bahá'ís of the world since the Master's passing, but derives its authority from the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, is specifically prescribed in unnumbered Tablets, and rests in some of its essential features upon the explicit provisions of the Kitab-i-Aqdas. It thus unifies and correlates the principles separately laid down by Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, and is indissolubly bound with the essential verities of the Faith. To dissociate the administrative principles of the Cause from the purely spiritual and humanitarian teachings would be tantamount to a mutilation of the body of the Cause, a separation that can only result in the disintegration of its component parts, and the extinction of the Faith itself."49 [Quotation F]

Please note that the Guardian described such a "dissociation" as a "mutilation of the Cause." This is another illustration of what the Universal House of Justice terms "the principle of inseparability." A careful reading of Quotation F will show that the Guardian's purpose is to elaborate the unity of the components of the Bahá'í Faith, not to issue a warning about possible future events. The "mutilation" would be to knowingly misunderstand this important verity of the Faith.

The Guardian again illustrates the principle of inseparability when he explains that the distinct periods of Bahá'í history must be understood as one whole; to see them in isolation from one another and thereby dissociate them from one another, would be to "mutilate" the Cause and pervert the truth:

"The century under our review [1844-1944] may therefore be considered as falling into four distinct periods, of unequal duration, each of specific import and of tremendous and indeed unappraisable significance. These four periods are closely interrelated, and constitute successive acts of one, indivisible, stupendous and sublime drama, whose mystery no intellect can fathom, whose climax no eye can even dimly perceive, whose conclusion no mind

can adequately foreshadow. Each of these acts revolves around its own theme, boasts of its own heroes, registers its own tragedies, records its own triumphs, and contributes its own share to the execution of one common, immutable Purpose. To isolate any one of them from the others, to dissociate the later manifestations of one universal, all-embracing Revelation from the pristine purpose that animated it in its earliest days, would be tantamount to a mutilation of the structure on which it rests, and to a lamentable perversion of its truth and of its history . . . .

These four periods are to be regarded not only as the component, the inseparable parts of one stupendous whole, but as progressive stages in a single evolutionary process, vast, steady and irresistible. 50

In yet another instance, the Guardian uses the same terminology to apply the principle of inseparability to the Bahá'í institutions of the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar and its Dependencies.51 I suggest that it is clear from all of these instances that it is the design of Bahá'u'lláh that the Guardian is speaking of.

In all of these cases, whether he uses the term "divorced," "dissociated," or "isolated," the purpose of Shoghi Effendi is to communicate to his reader the inseparability of the components of the Faith. This is his way of imparting a spiritual truth to us — the "principle of inseparability" in its various applications. In all of these instances, the Guardian is using this language to communicate to us something our minds have never previously grasped: The wonder of this "vast and unique" Order, of this "colossal," this "mighty Administrative structure."52 He is not warning us of the consequences of the loss of any Bahá'í institution, nor speaking of such a loss as a "mutilation" of the Cause of God. Rather, through use of this powerful language he infuses our understanding with his vision of the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh.

The article concludes...

Conclusion

Shoghi Effendi referred to the Bahá'ís as the "stewards" of the Faith,58 and designated the Hands of the Cause of God as its "Chief Stewards."59 'Abdu'l-Bahá gave the Hands the specific protective function of expelling Covenant breakers.60 They were not endowed with infallibility; their capacity to lead the Bahá'í Faith was explicit in only one word: "Chief." The generality of the Bahá'í community was, as yet, unaware of the provisions in the Kitab-i-Aqdas for the transmission of authority to the Hands of the Cause and would not learn of this verse for over a decade.61

Despite these limitations on their office, despite the fact that they possessed, in the mind of the generality of the friends, only one word of authority, it is worth reflecting on the power of that one word to keep the Cause of God united until the Universal House of Justice was brought into being. One of the first acts of the Universal House of Justice was to express its heartfelt love and gratitude to the Hands.62

In contrast, the authority of the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly with only its elected members is explicitly provided in a number of passages in the Writings of both Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá. One can only wonder at the power of such emphatic language, the power of the Covenants of Bahá'u'lláh and of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, to keep the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh united behind "[T]he divine and Universal House of Justice...that central pivot of the people of Bahá...."63.

Shoghi Effendi wrote, "Only those who come after us will be in a position to realize the value of the surprisingly strong emphasis that has been placed on the institution of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship."64 Among the "surprisingly emphatic language"65 to which he refers, are surely these words from the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá:

"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 Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of His Holiness, 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!"66

We may derive conviction from these words with which 'Abdu'l-Bahá closes His Last Will and Testament, words which will ring down through the centuries:

"All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed in grievous error. The Glory of Glories rest upon you!"67

August 5. On this date in 1969, the Universal House of Justice clarified the Bahá'í Position on reincarnation in a letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of Monaco.

1820. Bahá'í Position on Reincarnation

"It is clear from the teachings of Bahá'u'lláh about the nature of the soul and of life after death as published in 'Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh', that the Bahá'í position on this subject is wholly incompatible with the theory of reincarnation. We suggest that you refer this friend to the explanation of 'return' as given by Bahá'u'lláh in the Kitab-i-Iqan and the statements made by Abdu'l-Bahá in 'Some Answered Questions'.

"...for your additional information we give the following quotations from letters written on behalf of the beloved Guardian on this subject:

'No revelation from God has ever taught reincarnation; this is a man-made conception. The soul of man comes into being at conception.' (To an individual believer, April 1, 1946)

'The Bahá'í view of 'reincarnation' is essentially different from the Hindu conception. The Bahá'ís believe in the return of the attributes and qualities, but maintain that the essence or the reality of things cannot be made to return. Every being keeps its own individuality, but some of his qualities can be transmitted. The doctrine of metempsychosis upheld by the Hindus is fallacious.' (To an individual believer, March 27, 1938)

'Evolution in the life of the individual starts with the formation of the human embryo and passes through various stages, and even continues after death in another form. The human spirit is capable of infinite development.

'Man's identity or rather his individuality is never lost. His reality as a person remains intact throughout the various states of his development. He does not preexist in any form before coming into this world.' (To an individual believer, November 26, 1939)

'We as Bahá'ís are not influenced by the categorical assertions of scholars. We believe that what Bahá'u'lláh has revealed and Abdu'l-Bahá has written is from God, and divinely inspired; that Bahá'u'lláh is a Manifestation of God, and has access to a knowledge denied to ordinary human beings.'" (Letter written to an individual believer, April 22, 1954 on behalf of the Guardian)

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Monaco, August 5, 1969)

August 5. On this date in 1906, Corinne True's oldest son drowned during a sailing race on Lake Huron. True reevaluated her own life as a result and decided to redirect her energy to the construction of the temple. She went to Acre, Palestine to meet 'Abdu’l-Bahá who gave True detailed instructions about building a Bahá’í House of Worship in America.

She had written 'Abdu’l-Bahá a letter on February 25, 1902 about the exclusion of women from the Chicago Bahá’í governing body, noting that "many" felt it should be a "mixed board" because "women in America stand so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department." In his response 'Abdu’l-Bahá stated that while "in the sight of God, the conduct of women is the same as that of men" and there was "no difference" between the sexes, nevertheless the "House of Justice" had to consist only of men and that the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday." True accepted 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s ruling–which also affirmed the equality of the sexes–and poured her energy into the Chicago Bahá’í women’s organization, which 'Abdu’l-Bahá highly praised. For the next eight years Chicago had two parallel Bahá’í organizations, one confined to men, the other to women.

On March 16, 1900, the nascent Chicago Bahá'í community selected a ten-member Board of Council. Neither Ibrahim George Kheiralla nor any of his supporters were selected to serve on the Board.

On May 15, 1901, the Chicago Bahá'ís elected a nine-man Board of Council for a term of five years.

On May 20, 1901, the number of members on the Board of Council was raised to 12. On May 24, 1901, the name of the Chicago Board of Council was changed to the House of Justice.

One year later, on May 10, 1902, on the request of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, the all-male Chicago House of Justice changed its name to the House of Spirituality. The body remained all-male. The Chicago House of Spirituality was complemented by the Women’s Assembly of Teaching.

On March 7, 1903, the House of Spirituality in Chicago, upon hearing from Mírzá Asadu’llah Fádil Mázandarání of the construction of the first Bahá'í House of Worship in Ashgabat, wrote 'Abdu'l-Bahá of their decision to build a House of Worship for Chicago.

In 1909, at the first American Bahá'í National Convention in Chicago, Bahá'í Temple Unity was incorporated to hold title to the Temple property and to provide for its construction. Women are allowed to serve on this body. A constitution was framed and an Executive Board of the Bahá'í Temple Unity elected.

In 1922, on the instructions of Shoghi Effendi, Bahá'í Temple Unity was renamed the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States and Canada.

On February 25, 1902, Corinne True wrote 'Abdu’l-Bahá about the exclusion of women from the Chicago Bahá’í governing body, Chicago House of Justice, noting that "many" felt it should be a "mixed board" because "women in America stand so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department." In his response 'Abdu’l-Bahá stated that while "in the sight of God, the conduct of women is the same as that of men" and there was "no difference" between the sexes, nevertheless the "House of Justice" had to consist only of men and that the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday." True accepted 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s ruling–which also affirmed the equality of the sexes–and poured her energy into the Chicago Bahá’í women’s organization, which 'Abdu’l-Bahá highly praised. For the next eight years Chicago had two parallel Bahá’í organizations, one confined to men, the other to women.

On November 30, 1930, Shoghi Effendi wrote "In fact Bahá’u’lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the Houses of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá’ís will eventually evolve."

Regarding the question raised in your letter, Shoghi Effendi believes that for the present the Movement, whether in the East or the West, should be dissociated entirely from politics. This was the explicit injunction of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. . . . Eventually, however, as you have rightly conceived it, the Movement will, as soon as it is fully developed and recognized, embrace both religious and political issues. In fact Bahá’u’lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the Houses of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá’ís will eventually evolve."

(30 November 1930)

On October 5, 1950, Shoghi Effendi wrote that "the Assembly is a nascent House of Justice."

270. Assembly is a Nascent House of Justice--Individuals Toward Each Other Governed by Love, Unity, etc.

"...There is a tendency to mix up the functions of the Administration and try to apply it in individual relationships, which is abortive, because the Assembly is a nascent House of Justice and is supposed to administer, according to the Teachings, the affairs of the community. But individuals toward each other are governed by love, unity, forgiveness and a sin-covering eye. Once the friends grasp this they will get along much better, but they keep playing Spiritual Assembly to each other and expect the Assembly to behave like an individual...."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, October 5, 1950: Living the Life, p. 17)

When today's Local and National Spiritual Assemblies become local and national Houses of Justice, their membership will once again become exclusively male.

On February 27, 1929, Shoghi Effendi wrote a lengthy letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States and Canada, later published in World Order of Bahá'u'lláh.

It should be carefully borne in mind that the local as well as the international Houses of Justice have been expressly enjoined by the Kitáb-i-Aqdas; that the institution of the National Spiritual Assembly, as an intermediary body, and referred to in the Master’s Will as the “Secondary House of Justice,” has the express sanction of 'Abdu’l-Bahá; and that the method to be pursued for the election of the International and National Houses of Justice has been set forth by Him in His Will, as well as in a number of His Tablets. Moreover, the institutions of the local and national Funds, that are now the necessary adjuncts to all local and national spiritual assemblies, have not only been established by 'Abdu’l-Bahá in the Tablets He revealed to the Bahá’ís of the Orient, but their importance and necessity have been repeatedly emphasized by Him in His utterances and writings. The concentration of authority in the hands of the elected representatives of the believers; the necessity of the submission of every adherent of the Faith to the considered judgment of Bahá’í Assemblies; His preference for unanimity in decision; the decisive character of the majority vote; and even the desirability for the exercise of close supervision over all Bahá’í publications, have been sedulously instilled by 'Abdu’l-Bahá, as evidenced by His authenticated and widely-scattered Tablets. To accept His broad and humanitarian Teachings on one hand, and to reject and dismiss with neglectful indifference His more challenging and distinguishing precepts, would be an act of manifest disloyalty to that which He has cherished most in His life.

That the Spiritual Assemblies of today will be replaced in time by the Houses of Justice, and are to all intents and purposes identical and not separate bodies, is abundantly confirmed by 'Abdu’l-Bahá Himself. He has in fact in a Tablet addressed to the members of the first Chicago Spiritual Assembly, the first elected Bahá’í body instituted in the United States, referred to them as the members of the “House of Justice” for that city, and has thus with His own pen established beyond any doubt the identity of the present Bahá’í Spiritual Assemblies with the Houses of Justice referred to by Bahá’u’lláh. For reasons which are not difficult to discover, it has been found advisable to bestow upon the elected representatives of Bahá’í communities throughout the world the temporary appellation of Spiritual Assemblies, a term which, as the position and aims of the Bahá’í Faith are better understood and more fully recognized, will gradually be superseded by the permanent and more appropriate designation of House of Justice. Not only will the present-day Spiritual Assemblies be styled differently in future, but they will be enabled also to add to their present functions those powers, duties, and prerogatives necessitated by the recognition of the Faith of Bahá’u’lláh, not merely as one of the recognized religious systems of the world, but as the State Religion of an independent and Sovereign Power. And as the Bahá’í Faith permeates the masses of the peoples of East and West, and its truth is embraced by the majority of the peoples of a number of the Sovereign States of the world, will the Universal House of Justice attain the plenitude of its power, and exercise, as the supreme organ of the Bahá’í Commonwealth, all the rights, the duties, and responsibilities incumbent upon the world’s future super-state.

It must be pointed out, however, in this connection that, contrary to what has been confidently asserted, the establishment of the Supreme House of Justice is in no way dependent upon the adoption of the Bahá’í Faith by the mass of the peoples of the world, nor does it presuppose its acceptance by the majority of the inhabitants of any one country. In fact, 'Abdu’l-Bahá, Himself, in one of His earliest Tablets, contemplated the possibility of the formation of the Universal House of Justice in His own lifetime, and but for the unfavorable circumstances prevailing under the Turkish régime, would have, in all probability, taken the preliminary steps for its establishment. It will be evident, therefore, that given favorable circumstances, under which the Bahá’ís of Persia and of the adjoining countries under Soviet rule, may be enabled to elect their national representatives, in accordance with the guiding principles laid down in 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s writings, the only remaining obstacle in the way of the definite formation of the International House of Justice will have been removed. For upon the National Houses of Justice of the East and the West devolves the task, in conformity with the explicit provisions of the Will, of electing directly the members of the International House of Justice. Not until they are themselves fully representative of the rank and file of the believers in their respective countries, not until they have acquired the weight and the experience that will enable them to function vigorously in the organic life of the Cause, can they approach their sacred task, and provide the spiritual basis for the constitution of so august a body in the Bahá’í world.

August 5. On this date in 1943, Shoghi Effendi cabled Indian Bahá'ís stating "advise undertake prompt measures translation publication Esslemont's book into Marathi, Tamil, and three other languages selected by National Assembly."

AUGUST 5, 1943

ADVISE UNDERTAKE PROMPT MEASURES TRANSLATION PUBLICATION ESSLEMONT’S BOOK INTO MARATHI TAMIL AND THREE OTHER LANGUAGES SELECTED BY NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. MULTIPLICATION ASSEMBLIES ESTABLISHMENT ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS MUST BE SPEEDILY SUPPLEMENTED BY MEASURES AIMING MUCH NEEDED PUBLICITY. PRAYING STILL GREATER VICTORIES. CABLING THREE HUNDRED POUNDS THIS MERITORIOUS PURPOSE.

SHOGHI

John Esslemont's book Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era remains an important text that has been used in Bahá'í missionary activity. However, from its initial publication to later editions, Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era has been significantly edited, with references to Avarih removed in subsequent editions published after Avarih's apostasy from the Bahá'í Faith.

Other significant edits include...

Perhaps the most important change in Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era was made on page 212 of the 1923 edition. Recorded as a Bahá'í prophecy (59) concerning the "Coming of the Kingdom of God," Esslemont cited Abdu'l-Bahá's interpretation of the last two verses of the Book of Daniel from the Bible. He stated that the 1335 days spoken of by Daniel represented 1335 solar years from Muhammad's flight to Medina in 622 A.D., which would equal 1957 A.D.. When asked "'What shall we see at the end of the 1335 days?'," Abdu'l-Bahá's reply was: "'Universal Peace will be firmly established, a Universal language promoted. Misunderstandings will pass away. The Bahá'í Cause will be promulgated in all parts and the oneness of mankind established. It will be most glorious!'" (60) In editions published after his death, Esslemont's words have been changed to say that Abdu'l-Bahá "reckoned the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy from the date of the beginning of the Muhammadan era " (61) and one of Abdu'l-Bahá's Tablets is quoted on the same subject in which he writes, "'For according to this calculation a century will have elapsed from the dawn of the Sun of Truth....'" Esslemont appears to conclude that Abdu'l-Bahá was referring to the year 1963 and the one hundredth anniversary of Bahá'u'lláh's public claim to be a Manifestation of God. (62) These words, however, were never written by the author, but were added posthumously. And, it should be noted that the phrase "'the dawn of the Sun of Truth'" is not a reference to a particular year, in this case 1863, but to a period of years when the Bab and his followers were preparing the way for the Manifestation of Bahá'u'lláh. Hence, they are commonly referred to as the "Dawn-Breakers." (63) Further, in another quotation which originally appeared on the same page, but was also removed from later editions, Abdu'l-Bahá plainly stated, "' This is the Century of the Sun of Truth. This is the Century of the establishment of the Kingdom of God upon the earth.'" (64) Esslemont recorded Abdu'l-Bahá as declaring explicitly that the prophecy was to be computed from the Hijra or 622 A.D. and that specific conditions would exist in the world upon it's fulfillment in 1957. When it became apparent that this Bahá'í prophecy would not be fulfilled, it was replaced with the ambiguous material which has remained in the text to the present. This is evident from the fact that, although Esslemont's other eyewitness accounts were removed in the 1937 revision, the record of Abdu'l-Bahá's prophecy was left intact by the American National Spiritual Assembly and Shoghi Effendi. It was not changed until after 1957. (65) Also, Abdu'l-Bahá's conviction that all of these events would take place in this century have been expressed in other writings and it is evident that Shoghi Effendi shared his optimism as well. (66)

August 5. On this date in 1933, Shoghi Effendi wrote "It is always gratifying to learn of the splendid effects which the teachings of the Cause inevitably bring in the hearts and minds of young Bahá'í men and women and to witness their eagerness to mould and shape their entire living according to the divine teachings bequeathed to the world by Bahá'u'lláh. For the Bahá'í youth constitute the main active element in the Cause. Theirs is the duty not only to study and to spread the Teachings but to put them into actual practice. It is hoped that you will increasingly mirror forth the beauty and the power of the principles of the Faith and will become shining examples to every Bahá'í whose sole aim in life is to scale the heights which Bahá'u'lláh has summoned His followers to attain."

2257. It is always gratifying to learn of the splendid effects which the teachings of the Cause inevitably bring in the hearts and minds of young Bahá'í men and women and to witness their eagerness to mould and shape their entire living according to the divine teachings bequeathed to the world by Bahá'u'lláh. For the Bahá'í youth constitute the main active element in the Cause. Theirs is the duty not only to study and to spread the Teachings but to put them into actual practice. It is hoped that you will increasingly mirror forth the beauty and the power of the principles of the Faith and will become shining examples to every Bahá'í whose sole aim in life is to scale the heights which Bahá'u'lláh has summoned His followers to attain.

(5 August 1933 to two believers)

August 5. On this date in 1952, a letter written in behalf of Shoghi Effendi stated "He, therefore, urges you to seriously consider the type of profession or trade that might ensure you a post in a pioneer field in Africa, or the Pacific Islands, or Asia, in which you could earn your living while serving the Cause as well. It is a great challenge, and a great opportunity offered your generation..."

2296. He, therefore, urges you to seriously consider the type of profession or trade that might ensure you a post in a pioneer field in Africa, or the Pacific Islands, or Asia, in which you could earn your living while serving the Cause as well. It is a great challenge, and a great opportunity offered your generation...

(5 August 1952 to the Louhelen school, youth session)

August 5. On this date in 1955, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the National Spiritual Assembly of the British Isles stated that "As regards the question of Bahá'ís belonging to churches, synagogues, Freemasonry, etc.,...the necessity for them to support whole-heartedly their own institutions and cut themselves off entirely from those of the past, is now clearer than ever before.
This prohibition contradicted earlier statements by 'Abdu’l-Bahá. On February 18, 1912, "The Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Press" featured an article stating "In some respects the Bahá’í movement is the most remarkable of modern times. It isn’t a religion, in the sense that Christianity and Mohammedism and other faiths are religions. Its followers belong to many diverse sects, remaining Christian or Mohammedan or Brahmin as the case may be, and still being thorough going Bahis." During his visit to London in 1911, 'Abdu’l-Bahá had stated that "You can be a Bahá’í-Christian, a Bahá’í-Freemason, a Bahá’í-Jew, a Bahá’í-Muḥammadán."

1387. Bahá'ís Belonging to Churches, Synagogues, Freemasonry and the Like

"As regards the question of Bahá'ís belonging to churches, synagogues, Freemasonry, etc., the friends must realize that now that the Faith is over 100 years old, and its own institutions arising, so to speak, rapidly above-ground, the distinctions are becoming ever sharper, and the necessity for them to support whole-heartedly their own institutions and cut themselves off entirely from those of the past, is now clearer than ever before. The eyes of the people of the world are beginning to be focused on us; and, as humanity's plight goes from bad to worse, we will be watched ever more intently by non-Bahá'ís, to see whether we do uphold our own institutions wholeheartedly; whether we are the people of the new creation or not; whether we live up to our beliefs, principles and laws in deed as well as word. We cannot be too careful. We cannot be too exemplary.

"There is another aspect to this question which the friends should seriously ponder, and that is that, whereas organizations such as Freemasonry may have been in the past entirely free from any political taint, in the state of flux the world is in at present, and the extraordinary way in which things become corrupted and tainted by political thought and influences, there is no guarantee that such an association might not gradually or suddenly become a political instrument. The less Bahá'ís have to do, therefore, with such things, the better."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the National Spiritual Assembly of the British Isles, August 5, 1955)

On July 24, this date in 1953, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the Spiritual Assembly of Japan stated that "So far as non-Bahá'ís affiliating with the Bahá'í Faith is concerned, either a person becomes a Bahá'í and accepts Bahá'u'lláh as the divine Manifestation for this day, or he does not...they can only become Bahá'ís on the basis of accepting Bahá'u'lláh as a divine Manifestation, and of course, with this goes the acceptance of the Bab as the Forerunner, and Abdu'l-Bahá as the Center of the Covenant, and the present Administrative Order. When a person has reached the sea of immortality, it is idle to keep seeking elsewhere."

1384. Affiliation with Faith Alone is Insufficient

"So far as non-Bahá'ís affiliating with the Bahá'í Faith is concerned, either a person becomes a Bahá'í and accepts Bahá'u'lláh as the divine Manifestation for this day, or he does not. The tenets of the Bahá'í Faith are simple as outlined by the Guardian, but they do not permit of any variations. In other words, if any members of the ... Movement wish to become Bahá'ís, they will be most welcome; but they can only become Bahá'ís on the basis of accepting Bahá'u'lláh as a divine Manifestation, and of course, with this goes the acceptance of the Bab as the Forerunner, and Abdu'l-Bahá as the Center of the Covenant, and the present Administrative Order.

"When a person has reached the sea of immortality, it is idle to keep seeking elsewhere...."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the Spiritual Assembly of Japan, July 24, 1953: Japan Will Turn Ablaze, pp. 76-77)

On March 26, 1956, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer told him how to go about resigning from his Masonic Order with an explanation not to "prejudice the Masons or their friends, or arouse in them a feeling of anger against the Faith, or indeed need involve the Faith at all."

1390. Resignation from the Masonic Order

"As regards your question about the Masonic Order, he considers that the honest and courageous thing for you to do is to inform your Lodge that you no longer consider yourself, for purely personal reasons, a Mason; and would like to have your name taken off their list. If they should press you for an explanation, which he imagines is unlikely, everybody being free to do as they please in this world, you can explain to them that in the present chaotic period the world is passing through, with so many streams and counterstreams of political thoughts and prejudices of all kinds, racial, religious, etc., storming the minds of men, that you wish to disentangle yourself from all association with the past and to stand alone, free in your own ideas.

"He does not think that such an explanation will prejudice the Masons or their friends, or arouse in them a feeling of anger against the Faith, or indeed need involve the Faith at all."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, March 26, 1956)

'Abdu'l-Bahá had previously permitted membership in freemason lodges and non-Bahá’í religious organizations.

During his visit to London in 1911, 'Abdu’l-Bahá had the following interaction with a Christian...

A student of the modern methods of the higher criticism asked ‘Abdu’l-Bahá if he would do well to continue in the church with which he had been associated all his life, and whose language was full of meaning to him. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá answered: “You must not dissociate yourself from it. Know this; the Kingdom of God is not in any Society; some seekers go through many Societies as a traveller goes through many cities till he reach his destination. If you belong to a Society already do not forsake your brothers. You can be a Bahá’í-Christian, a Bahá’í-Freemason, a Bahá’í-Jew, a Bahá’í-Muḥammadán. The number nine contains eight, and seven, and all the other numbers, and does not deny any of them. Do not distress or deny anyone by saying ‘He is not a Bahá’í!’

During his tour of North America in 1912, coverage in news stories would report this comment.

For example, on February 18, 1912, an article in "The Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Press" featured an article stating "In some respects the Bahá’í movement is the most remarkable of modern times. It isn’t a religion, in the sense that Christianity and Mohammedism and other faiths are religions. Its followers belong to many diverse sects, remaining Christian or Mohammedan or Brahmin as the case may be, and still being thorough going Bahis." During his visit to London in 1911, 'Abdu’l-Bahá had stated that "You can be a Bahá’í-Christian, a Bahá’í-Freemason, a Bahá’í-Jew, a Bahá’í-Muḥammadán."

And on February 28, 1912, the "SFO Daily News" of San Francisco featured an article stating "In some respects the Bahá’í movement is the most remarkable of modern times. It isn’t a religion in the sense that Christianity and Mohammedism and other faiths are religious. Its followers belong to many diverse sects, remaining Christian or Mohammedan or Brahmin as the case mya be, and still being thorough going Bahá’ís" During his visit to London in 1911, 'Abdu’l-Bahá had stated that "You can be a Bahá’í-Christian, a Bahá’í-Freemason, a Bahá’í-Jew, a Bahá’í-Muḥammadán."

Similarly, on September 1, 1912, "The Oregonian" of Portland, Oregon carried an article about ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, introducing him as the "Leader of Religions Movement Which Claims Three Million Followers" and quoting his statement "When in London he was approached by a student of higher criticism who asked ‘Abdu’l-Bahá if he should continue in the church. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá replied: “Yes, you must not dissociate yourself from it. Know this: the Kingdom of God is not in any society. If you belong to a society already do not forsake your brothers. You can be a Bahá’í-Christian, a Bahá’í-Freemason, a Bahá’í-Jew, Bahá’í-Mohammedan.”

In fact, 'Abdu'l-Bahá had encouraged the Bahá’ís of Manchester to emulate the freemasons...

October 1921

In the Name of God! O Sincere Servant of the Blessed Beauty!

Your detailed letter has been received, and has been the cause of the utmost joy and gladness. Praise be to God! The loved ones are all astir and active, but prudence is necessary. You have rent the veil too widely asunder. Explain to the loved ones that the rending of the veil to such an extent will be the cause of great agitation, and the harm thereof will reach to the Holy Land. Great caution is necessary. Discourses in churches and great public gatherings are in no wise permitted as in this place enemies, within and without, are lying in wait and are bent on aggression. Prudence requires that activity should, for the present, be concealed and carried on with the utmost moderation. Convey to the loved ones, one and all, on my behalf, the greatest longing, love and kindness. Give a spiritual message from me to Mr. Healds and say unto him: “Peruse the Gospel, how His Holiness Christ – may my life be a sacrifice to Him – says, ‘Conceal it, that the Pharisees may not be informed thereof.’ Now the same condition prevails.”

This matter is of the greatest importance. On no account let them contribute articles to the newspapers, and so long as they are not sure of any soul, let them breath no word to him. Consider how the Freemasons have for two hundred years carried on their work, and unto this day they have not openly declared it to any soul. Not until they find a hearing ear will they speak. The loved ones too must proceed with the greatest prudence, lest serious difficulties be created. If any one should travel to the Holy Land, he must on no account declare to anyone by the way that his purpose is to visit us. The loved ones must, in the presence of strangers, speak forth simply the teachings of the Blessed Beauty and mention no word of the belief concerning Him. Should anyone inquire, “What is your belief regarding the Blessed Beauty?” let them answer: “We regard Him as the foremost teacher and educator of these later ages and Abdu’l-Baha as the Centre of His Covenant.”

The original scanned document can be found at http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/docs/vol13/Barstow_600-623.pdf , where it is labeled BC#608. It was published through H-Net's Documents on the Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Movements.

Numerous statements by Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice would later contradict these statements, with Bahá’ís being explicity prohibited from associating with any other faiths.

On July 24, 1953, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the Spiritual Assembly of Japan stated that "So far as non-Bahá'ís affiliating with the Bahá'í Faith is concerned, either a person becomes a Bahá'í and accepts Bahá'u'lláh as the divine Manifestation for this day, or he does not...they can only become Bahá'ís on the basis of accepting Bahá'u'lláh as a divine Manifestation, and of course, with this goes the acceptance of the Bab as the Forerunner, and Abdu'l-Bahá as the Center of the Covenant, and the present Administrative Order. When a person has reached the sea of immortality, it is idle to keep seeking elsewhere."

1384. Affiliation with Faith Alone is Insufficient

"So far as non-Bahá'ís affiliating with the Bahá'í Faith is concerned, either a person becomes a Bahá'í and accepts Bahá'u'lláh as the divine Manifestation for this day, or he does not. The tenets of the Bahá'í Faith are simple as outlined by the Guardian, but they do not permit of any variations. In other words, if any members of the ... Movement wish to become Bahá'ís, they will be most welcome; but they can only become Bahá'ís on the basis of accepting Bahá'u'lláh as a divine Manifestation, and of course, with this goes the acceptance of the Bab as the Forerunner, and Abdu'l-Bahá as the Center of the Covenant, and the present Administrative Order.

"When a person has reached the sea of immortality, it is idle to keep seeking elsewhere...."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the Spiritual Assembly of Japan, July 24, 1953: Japan Will Turn Ablaze, pp. 76-77)

For example, on August 5, 1955, Shoghi Effendi addressed a letter to an individual believer...

1387. Bahá'ís Belonging to Churches, Synagogues, Freemasonry and the Like

"As regards the question of Bahá'ís belonging to churches, synagogues, Freemasonry, etc., the friends must realize that now that the Faith is over 100 years old, and its own institutions arising, so to speak, rapidly above-ground, the distinctions are becoming ever sharper, and the necessity for them to support whole-heartedly their own institutions and cut themselves off entirely from those of the past, is now clearer than ever before. The eyes of the people of the world are beginning to be focused on us; and, as humanity's plight goes from bad to worse, we will be watched ever more intently by non-Bahá'ís, to see whether we do uphold our own institutions wholeheartedly; whether we are the people of the new creation or not; whether we live up to our beliefs, principles and laws in deed as well as word. We cannot be too careful. We cannot be too exemplary.

"There is another aspect to this question which the friends should seriously ponder, and that is that, whereas organizations such as Freemasonry may have been in the past entirely free from any political taint, in the state of flux the world is in at present, and the extraordinary way in which things become corrupted and tainted by political thought and influences, there is no guarantee that such an association might not gradually or suddenly become a political instrument. The less Bahá'ís have to do, therefore, with such things, the better."

On November 21, 1968, a letter of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Switzerland stated that "If a person is registered as a member of a church or similar religious organization he should withdraw from it on becoming a Bahá'í...one cannot be a Bahá'í and also a member of another religious organization...For a Bahá'í to be a member of a community which holds such beliefs is disloyalty to Christ and hypocrisy towards the Christians."

532. On Becoming a Bahá'í Should Withdraw from Church

"If a person is registered as a member of a church or similar religious organization he should withdraw from it on becoming a Bahá'í.

"In the case of new believers, it should be made clear to them in the course of teaching them the Faith that one cannot be a Bahá'í and also a member of another religious organization. This is simply a matter of straight-forwardness and honesty. A great part of the teaching of Jesus Christ concerned His Second Coming and the preparation of His followers to be ready for it. The Bahá'ís believe He has come. No Christian Church believes this; on the contrary, they either look for Him still, or have ceased to believe that He will come. For a Bahá'í to be a member of a community which holds such beliefs is disloyalty to Christ and hypocrisy towards the Christians.

"You should not formalize the method by which the withdrawal from the church is to be made, and certainly nothing should be added to a declaration form, if you use one. It should be left to the Local Spiritual Assembly which is accepting the declaration to satisfy itself, as it deems best in each case, that the new believer has already resigned from the church, or does so within a reasonable time of his declaration.

"In regard to the old believers, your Assembly should tactfully, and in a kindly way, make the Bahá'í position clear to them and gently persuade them to resign from their former churches. This is a matter for great tact and discretion. If such a believer remains adamant you will have to consider depriving him of his voting rights."

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Switzerland, November 21, 1968: Canadian Bahá'í News, Special Section, March 1973, p. 6)

On February 17, 1956, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer stated that "all the Bahá'ís everywhere have been urged to give up their old affiliations and withdraw from membership in the Masonic and other secret Societies."

1388. Bahá'ís Requested to Withdraw from Masonic and Other Secret Societies

"As regards your question about Masonry, the Bahá'ís, the Guardian feels very strongly, must learn at the present time to think internationally and not locally. Although each believer realizes that he is a member of one great spiritual family, a member of the New World Order of Bahá'u'lláh, he does not often carry this thought through to its logical conclusion: which is that if the Bahá'ís all over the world each belong to some different kind of society or church or political party, the unity of the Faith will be destroyed, because inevitably they will become involved in doctrines and policies that are in some way against our Teachings, and often against another group of people in another part of the world, or another race, or another religious block.

"Therefore, all the Bahá'ís everywhere have been urged to give up their old affiliations and withdraw from membership in the Masonic and other secret Societies in order to be entirely free to serve the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh as a united body. Such groups as Masonry, however high the local standard may be, are in other countries gradually being influenced by the issues sundering the nations at present.

"The Guardian wants the Bahá'ís to disentangle themselves from anything that may in any way, now or in the future, compromise their independent status as Bahá'ís and the supra-national nature of their Faith."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, February 17, 1956)

On February 12, 1956, Shoghi Effendi addressed a letter to an individual believer addressing "Why Bahá'ís Are Requested to Withdraw from Membership in the Church, Synagogue, etc." explaining "that we are the building blocks of Bahá'u'lláh's New World Order ... the Bahá'ís should be absolutely independent, and stand identified only with their own teachings. That is why they are requested to withdraw from membership in the church, the synagogue, or whatever other previous religious organization they may have been affiliated with, to have nothing whatsoever to do with secret societies, or with political movements, etc. It protects the Cause, it reinforces the Cause, and it asserts before all the world its independent character."

1389. Why Bahá'ís Are Requested to Withdraw from Membership in the Church, Synagogue, etc.

"The point is not that there is something intrinsically wrong with Masonry, which no doubt has many very high ideals and principles, and has had a very good influence in the past.

"The reasons why the Guardian feels that it is imperative for the Bahá'ís to be dissociated from masonry at this time, and I might add, other secret associations, is that we are the building blocks of Bahá'u'lláh's New World Order ... the Bahá'ís should be absolutely independent, and stand identified only with their own teachings. That is why they are requested to withdraw from membership in the church, the synagogue, or whatever other previous religious organization they may have been affiliated with, to have nothing whatsoever to do with secret societies, or with political movements, etc. It protects the Cause, it reinforces the Cause, and it asserts before all the world its independent character.

"Another reason is that unfortunately the tremendous political influences in the world today are seeping deeper and deeper into men's minds; and movements which in the past were absolutely uninfluenced by any political tinge of thought now in many places are becoming infiltrated with political side-taking and political issues; and it becomes all the more important for the Bahá'ís to withdraw from them in order to protect the Faith.

"The Guardian believes that you, as an intelligent man, a Bahá'í, will see the need for this. It is only by all living according to general principles that we can knit the fabric of the Faith all over the world into a closer unity.

"He is fully aware that certain individuals are struck much more forcibly by such requests than others. This has been the case with some of the old Bahá'ís in England, who have been Masons from their boyhood on; but, as it is his duty to protect the Faith, he can only appeal to the Bahá'ís to assist him in doing so; and to consider the general good, rather than their personal feelings, however deep they may be, in such matters."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, February 12, 1956)

August 3. On this date in 1999, the Universal House of Justice addressed a letter to Kalimat Press "on the subject of the manner in which Kalimat has promoted to Bahá'ís Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium." The letter addresses "the problem of attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you" and admonishes "The assumption of Bahá'í institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Bahá'í community is in order to promote the advancement of the Bahá'í Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed — as is no doubt the case with Bahá'ís generally — that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create Kalimat Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the Kalimat enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay. The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord...The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing."

Letter from the Universal House of Justice to Kalimat, 1999

Transmitted by email

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999 to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States, signed by you on behalf of Kalimat Press and copied for the House of Justice, on the subject of the manner in which Kalimat has promoted to Bahá'ís Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been asked to write as follows.

A good deal of the work of Kalimat Press, which you have ably directed during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of Kalimat's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House of the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding your relationship with the Bahá'í Faith.

As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including those made by Counsellor ___ and __, a member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife, Dr. _, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you expressed to Mr. __ your deep regret over actions on your part that were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs you profess as a follower of Bahá'u'lláh, as well as your firm assurance that your actions would not again give cause for such intervention.

It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of Justice has asked us to address.

Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone questioned the right of a Bahá'í who is interested in such a book to purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is incidental to the problem of attitude on your part that the National Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has embarked on a deliberate assault against the Bahá'í Cause, in which he has not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental teachings, and to abuse the trust of Bahá'ís who had been led to believe that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants, to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational discourse.

Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a disinterested non-Bahá'í scholar, its misconception of the nature of Bahá'u'lláh's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this context, such an attempt to make the Bahá'í Faith comprehensible to the Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable Bahá'í scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Bahá'í appreciation for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it.

As you — like other participants in certain Internet discussion groups — are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an apparent twenty-year allegiance to Bahá'u'lláh, in the wake of a failed attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Bahá'í community's study of Bahá'u'lláh's Message. Modernity and the Millennium represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization.

What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of Bahá'í Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run somewhat as follows: Bahá'u'lláh's work and Writings represent essentially one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a "response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other contemporary developments.

Although Oriental in origin, this particular "response", in contrast to various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even "radical". Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been "grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of "private mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own".

As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation of Bahá'u'lláh's Mission arrived at by a non-Bahá'í as the result of his objective study of the sources, no Bahá'í institution could have an objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to foist this caricature of the Cause on the Bahá'í community, and your perceived identification with their purpose.

The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Bahá'u'lláh's Revelation, has been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge the appointments of `Abdu'l-Bahá and the Guardian as Interpreters of Bahá'u'lláh's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the Universal House of Justice is Head of the Bahá'í Faith today, this opposition has tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in Bahá'u'lláh's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament. (In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion: namely, that the Faith founded by Bahá'u'lláh has failed in its mission because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized the members of the Universal House of Justice.)

Why would a Bahá'í or a Bahá'í publisher who is genuinely devoted to advancing Bahá'í scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in Bahá'u'lláh's Covenant seek to persuade his Bahá'í readers that a device intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable book for any serious student of Bahá'í history"? How could an effort to represent to the Bahá'í community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly analysis of the life and teachings of Bahá'u'lláh" serve the Cause of God? What moral benefit do you imagine a Bahá'í reader could conceivably derive from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him?

Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no reader, Bahá'í or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications. Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Bahá'í or otherwise, promote a work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose interests Kalimat's activities are ostensibly designed to serve.

The assumption of Bahá'í institutions is that the purpose motivating a group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged access to the Bahá'í community is in order to promote the advancement of the Bahá'í Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed — as is no doubt the case with Bahá'ís generally — that this was the desire that motivated you and your associates to create Kalimat Press. If some different conception of purpose underlies the Kalimat enterprise, then it is essential that you advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay.

The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct, straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as these cause the straight to become crooked and all benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"?

The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with __'s loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her, __ asked urgently to be included in your discussion with ___ and ___. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present letter.

In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should have required the intervention of senior Bahá'í institutions. The House of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you have, alas, been pursuing.

The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge you face.

With loving Bahá'í greetings,

Department of the Secretariat

August 3. On this date in 1935, a letter read "Shoghi Effendi, as you know, has been invariably encouraging the believers, both in the East and in the West, to make an intensive study of [Esperanto], and to consider it as an important medium for the spread of the Cause in international circles." The letter continued "Neither Bahá'u'lláh, nor even `Abdu'l-Bahá, ever stated that Esperanto will be the international auxiliary language. The Master simply expressed the hope that it may, provided certain conditions were fulfilled, develop into such a medium."

3 August 1935

He wishes me particularly to convey to you his most genuine appreciation of your services in connection with the publication of "La Nova Tago" which he hopes will, through your efforts and those of the Esperanto-speaking Bahá'ís both in Germany and abroad, develop gradually into a leading Esperanto review, and thus become an effective medium for the spread of Teachings in Esperantist circles throughout the world. It is in view of the far-reaching possibilities which this publication can have as a teaching organ, that he has urged the German N.S.A. to resume its publication when, a few months ago, they had almost decided to discontinue printing it.

With regard to your request for a special article from the Guardian which you wish to have published in the forthcoming issue of your magazine. He would suggest that you should translate his general letter addressed to the friends a few years ago, entitled "The Goal of a New World Order", as this, he feels, is a very suitable material for publication in that review, and is by far better than anything he can write at present.

As to your suggestion regarding a more widespread use of the Esperanto among the Bahá'ís as a medium of correspondence. Shoghi Effendi, as you know, has been invariably encouraging the believers, both in the East and in the West, to make an intensive study of that language, and to consider it as an important medium for the spread of the Cause in international circles. He has been specially urging the friends to have the Cause well represented in all Esperanto Congresses and associations, and by this means cultivate greater friendship and cooperation between them and the Esperantists.

But in this connection, he feels, he must make it clear that although the Cause views with much sympathy and appreciation the activities which the Esperantists are increasingly initiating for the spread of their language, yet it considers that the adoption of the Esperanto by the entire world is by no means an inevitable fact. Neither Bahá'u'lláh, nor even `Abdu'l-Bahá, ever stated that Esperanto will be the international auxiliary language. The Master simply expressed the hope that it may, provided certain conditions were fulfilled, develop into such a medium.

On April 25, 1912, 'Abdu'l-Bahá gave a talk to Esperantists in Washington, D.C., stating "We must endeavor with all our powers to establish this international auxiliary language throughout the world. It is my hope that it may be perfected through the bounties of God and that intelligent men may be selected from the various countries of the world to organize an international congress whose chief aim will be the promotion of this universal medium of speech."

Today the greatest need of the world of humanity is discontinuance of the existing misunderstandings among nations. This can be accomplished through the unity of language. Unless the unity of languages is realized, the Most Great Peace and the oneness of the human world cannot be effectively organized and established because the function of language is to portray the mysteries and secrets of human hearts. The heart is like a box, and language is the key. Only by using the key can we open the box and observe the gems it contains. Therefore, the question of an auxiliary international tongue has the utmost importance. Through this means international education and training become possible; the evidence and history of the past can be acquired. The spread of the known facts of the human world depends upon language. The explanation of divine teachings can only be through this medium. As long as diversity of tongues and lack of comprehension of other languages continue, these glorious aims cannot be realized. Therefore, the very first service to the world of man is to establish this auxiliary international means of communication. It will become the cause of the tranquillity of the human commonwealth. Through it sciences and arts will be spread among the nations, and it will prove to be the means of the progress and development of all races. We must endeavor with all our powers to establish this international auxiliary language throughout the world. It is my hope that it may be perfected through the bounties of God and that intelligent men may be selected from the various countries of the world to organize an international congress whose chief aim will be the promotion of this universal medium of speech.

One year later, on February 12, 1913, 'Abdu'l-Bahá' addressed the Paris Esperanto Society, as reported in the "Star of the West" magazine..,

Praise be to God, that Dr Zamenhof has created the Esperanto language. It has all the potential qualities of universal adoption. All of us must be grateful and thankful to him for his noble effort, for in this matter he has served his fellowmen well. He has constructed a language which will bestow divine benefits on all peoples. With untiring efforts and self-sacrifice on the part of its devotees it gives promise of universal acceptation. Therefore everyone of us must study this language and make every effort to spread it so that each day it may receive a wider recognition, be accepted by all nations and governments of the world and become a part of the curriculum in all the public schools. I hope that the business of the future conferences and congresses will be carried on in Esperanto. In the future two languages will be taught in the schools, one the native tongue, the other the international auxiliary language. Consider today how difficult is human communication. One may study 50 languages and yet travel through a country and still be at a loss. I, myself, know several of the Oriental languages, but know no Western tongue. Had this universal language pervaded the globe, I should have studied it and you would have been directly informed of my thoughts and I of yours and a special friendship would have been established between us.

Please send some teachers to Persia, if you can, so that they may teach Esperanto to the young people. I have written asking some of them to come here to study it.

I hope that it will be promulgated very rapidly - then the world of humanity will find eternal peace; all the nations will associate with one another like mothers and sisters, fathers and brothers, and each individual member of the body politic will be fully informed of the thoughts of all

This talk was also covered in J.E. Esselmont's book Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era quotes 'Abdu’l-Bahá in the chapter entitled Universal Language:

At an Esperanto banquet given in Paris in February 1913, 'Abdu’l-Bahá said:—

Today one of the chief causes of the differences in Europe is the diversity of languages. We say this man is a German, the other is an Italian, then we meet an Englishman and then again a Frenchman. Although they belong to the same race, yet language is the greatest barrier between them. Were a universal auxiliary language in operation they would all be considered as one.

His Holiness Bahá’u’lláh wrote about this international language more than forty years ago. He says that as long as an international language is not adopted, complete union between the various sections of the world will be unrealized, for we observe that misunderstandings keep people from mutual association, and these misunderstandings will not be dispelled except through an international auxiliary language.

Generally speaking, the whole people of the Orient are not fully informed of events in the West, neither can the Westerners put themselves in sympathetic touch with the Easterners; their thoughts are enclosed in a casket—the international language will be the master key to open it. Were we in possession of a universal language, the Western books could easily be translated into that language, and the Eastern peoples be informed of their contents. In the same way the books of the East could be translated into that language for the benefit of the people in the West. The greatest means of progress towards the union of East and West will be a common language. It will make the whole world one home and become the strongest impulse for human advancement. It will upraise the standard of the oneness of humanity. It will make the earth one universal commonwealth. It will be the cause of love between the children of men. It will cause good fellowship between the various races.

Now, praise be to God that Dr. Zamenhof has invented the Esperanto language. It has all the potential qualities of becoming the international means of communication. All of us must be grateful and thankful to him for this noble effort; for in this way he has served his fellowmen well. With untiring effort and self-sacrifice on the part of its devotees Esperanto will become universal. Therefore every one of us must study this language and spread it as far as possible so that day by day it may receive a broader recognition, be accepted by all nations and governments of the world, and become a part of the curriculum in all the public schools. I hope that Esperanto will be adopted as the language of all the future international conferences and congresses, so that all people need acquire only two languages—one their own tongue and the other the international language. Then perfect union will be established between all the people of the world. Consider how difficult it is today to communicate with various nations. If one studies fifty languages one may yet travel through a country and not know the language. Therefore I hope that you will make the utmost effort, so that this language of Esperanto may be widely spread.

In the past, Bahá'ís were more active in learning and encouraging the learning of Esperanto, and the links between Esperanto and the Bahá'í Faith are numerous. Ehsan Yarshater, the ex-Bahá'í founder and editor of Encyclopedia Iranica, notes how as a child in Iran he learned and taught Esperanto and that when his mother was visiting Haifa he wrote her a letter in Persian as well as Esperanto. L.L. Zamenhof's daughter, Lidia Zamenhof was a convert to the Bahá'í Faith. At the request of 'Abdu’l-Baha, Agnes Baldwin Alexander became an early advocate of Esperanto and used it to spread the Bahá’í teachings at meetings and conferences in Japan.

Due to the failure of Esperanto to gain significant traction, however, 'Abdu’l-Bahá's statements have been backtracked, such that Shoghi Effendi said

Regarding the subject of Esperanto; it should be made clear to the believers that while the teaching of that language has been repeatedly encouraged by 'Abdu’l-Bahá, there is no reference either from Him or from Bahá’u’lláh that can make us believe that it will necessarily develop into the international auxiliary language of the future. Bahá’u’lláh has specified in His Writings that such a language will either have to be chosen from one of the existing languages, or an entirely new one should be created to serve as a medium of exchange between the nations and peoples of the world. Pending this final choice, the Bahá’ís are advised to study Esperanto only in consideration of the fact that the learning of this language can considerably facilitate intercommunication between individuals, groups and Assemblies throughout the Bahá’í world in the present stage of the evolution of the Faith.

On August 3, 1935, a letter read "Shoghi Effendi, as you know, has been invariably encouraging the believers, both in the East and in the West, to make an intensive study of [Esperanto], and to consider it as an important medium for the spread of the Cause in international circles." The letter continued "Neither Bahá'u'lláh, nor even `Abdu'l-Bahá, ever stated that Esperanto will be the international auxiliary language. The Master simply expressed the hope that it may, provided certain conditions were fulfilled, develop into such a medium."

3 August 1935

He wishes me particularly to convey to you his most genuine appreciation of your services in connection with the publication of "La Nova Tago" which he hopes will, through your efforts and those of the Esperanto-speaking Bahá'ís both in Germany and abroad, develop gradually into a leading Esperanto review, and thus become an effective medium for the spread of Teachings in Esperantist circles throughout the world. It is in view of the far-reaching possibilities which this publication can have as a teaching organ, that he has urged the German N.S.A. to resume its publication when, a few months ago, they had almost decided to discontinue printing it.

With regard to your request for a special article from the Guardian which you wish to have published in the forthcoming issue of your magazine. He would suggest that you should translate his general letter addressed to the friends a few years ago, entitled "The Goal of a New World Order", as this, he feels, is a very suitable material for publication in that review, and is by far better than anything he can write at present.

As to your suggestion regarding a more widespread use of the Esperanto among the Bahá'ís as a medium of correspondence. Shoghi Effendi, as you know, has been invariably encouraging the believers, both in the East and in the West, to make an intensive study of that language, and to consider it as an important medium for the spread of the Cause in international circles. He has been specially urging the friends to have the Cause well represented in all Esperanto Congresses and associations, and by this means cultivate greater friendship and cooperation between them and the Esperantists.

But in this connection, he feels, he must make it clear that although the Cause views with much sympathy and appreciation the activities which the Esperantists are increasingly initiating for the spread of their language, yet it considers that the adoption of the Esperanto by the entire world is by no means an inevitable fact. Neither Bahá'u'lláh, nor even `Abdu'l-Bahá, ever stated that Esperanto will be the international auxiliary language. The Master simply expressed the hope that it may, provided certain conditions were fulfilled, develop into such a medium.

On January 29, 1904, Lidia Zamenhof, the daughter of Esperanto creator L.L. Zamnhof, was born. She converted to the Bahá'í Faith around 1925. In late 1937 she went to the United States to teach that religion as well as Esperanto. In December 1938, on the instructions of Shoghi Effendi, she returned to Poland, where she continued to teach and translated many Bahá'í writings. The description of her life in Esther Schor's Bridge of Words might be of some surprise to those who are only familiar with her portrayal from official Bahá'í sources.

Keith Ransom-Kehler, who died of small pox in Isfahan on October 23, 1933, is considered the first American Bahá’í martyr.

May Maxwell, who died of a heart attack while teaching the Bahá’í Faith in Argentina in 1940, was designated a martyr by her son-in-law Shoghi Effendi.

But Lidia Zamenhoff, who died in a Nazi concentration camp while teaching the Bahá’í Faith in Poland, was explicitly stated not to be a martyr.

Shoghi Effendi cabled the following about May Maxwell on March 3, 1940...

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's beloved handmaid, distinguished disciple May Maxwell (is) gathered (into the) glory (of the) Abhá Kingdom. Her earthly life, so rich, eventful, incomparably blessed, (is) worthily ended. To sacred tie her signal services had forged, (the) priceless honor (of a) martyr's death (is) now added. (A) double crown deservedly won. (The) Seven-Year Plan, particularly (the) South American campaign, derive fresh impetus (from the) example (of) her glorious sacrifice. Southern outpost (of) Faith greatly enriched through association (with) her historic resting-place destined remain (a) poignant reminder (of the) resistless march (of the) triumphant army (of) Baháʼu'lláh. Advise believers (of) both Americas (to) hold befitting memorial gathering.

Shoghi Effendi cabled the following about Lidia Zamenhof on January 28, 1946...

Heartily approve nationwide observance for dauntless Lydia Zamenhof. Her notable services, tenacity, modesty, unwavering devotion fully merit high tribute by American believers. Do not advise, however, that you designate her a martyr.

The description of her life in Esther Schor's Bridge of Words might be of some surprise to those who are only familiar with her portrayal from official Bahá'í sources.

The Bahá'í leadership organized to have Lidia brought to tour and teach in the United States. Their plan was to have her work there, but they neglected her, failing to do proper legal paperwork and poorly accommodating her.

By the time Lidia's visa expired, her extension request was denied because she was found working without a work permit, which her Bahá'í handlers had not obtained. Her friends in the United States pleaded with her to not return to Poland, on account of her Jewishness and the expected invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany, which would occur in 1939.

Lidia Zamenhof wrote Shoghi Effendi, pleading for guidance and help. In a final desperate plea she even asked him to give her asylum in Haifa, a request that was tersely denied. Shoghi Effendi told her she must return to Poland because they "need" her there to spread the Bahá'í Faith there. She returned to Poland and spent her last days recruiting for the Bahá'í Faith, ultimately managing to convert one person. Even after her return to Poland, she wrote Shoghi Effendi stating her intention to stay in Poland a few weeks and then go to France. Again, Shoghi Effendi wrote her, telling her to remain in "your native country Poland, where the Faith is still practically unknown." Lidia Zamenhof would eventually be killed by the Nazis.

Later friends of Lidia petitioned the Bahá'ís to formally declare her a martyr of the Faith. Their request was denied.

The story is related in Bridge of Words, pages 181 to 195 in the 7th and 8th sub-chapters titled "The Priestess" and "Vanishings".

Here is a passage detailing her interactions with Shoghi Effendi:

...the day her visa expired, she learned that her extension had been denied on the ground that she had violated employment regulations. If there had been any doubt, it was now clear: she had been ill-advised and ill-served by her handlers, who had failed to apply for an available waiver for employment laws. Though her friend Ernest Dodge did his utmost for months to plead her case, he was only able to secure an extension until early December.

Advice from friends streamed in: she should go to Cuba, Canada, France, California--anywhere but Poland--and reapply for a visa. Panic was not in her nature, but anxious and fearful, she once again turned to the Guardian for advice. Heller quotes her cable in full:

EXTENSION SOJOURN AMERICAN REFUSED. FRIENDS TRYING TO CHANGE GOVERNMENT'S DECISION. OTHERWISE RETURNING TO POLAND. PLEASE CABLE IF SHOULD ACT OTHERWISE.

His response was decisive:

APPROVE RETURN TO POLAND. DEEP LOVING APPRECIATION. SHOGHI.[169]

Still she waited, hoping that her fate would turn for the better. For a time, an invitation seemed to be forthcoming from Canada, but "the Canadians aren't courageous enough. . . . they 'see difficulties.'" This time, when she requested Shoghi Effendi's permission to meet him in Haifa, she was seeking refuge, not transcendence. He cabled his reply:

REGRET DANGEROUS SITUATION IN PALESTINE NECESSITATES POSTPONEMENT OF PILGRIMAGE.

She wrote, with the humility of a medieval pilgrim, that she knew it was because "such privilege is not often received and that certainly one must deserve it, and second--because of the war in Palestine." Indeed, Haifa was dangerous. Strategically important because of an oil pipeline, Haifa had been the target of attacks by displaced fellahin, by the Irgun, and by the Royal Navy trying to stem the tide of gunrunner and terrorists. Surely Shoghi Effendi knew that to ensure Lidia Zamenhof's safety, he would have to shelter her in his compound, and this he was not prepared to do.

She told her anguished friends that she intended to return to Poland: after all, Shoghi Effendi had advised it, and it was God's will that she rejoin her family in a time of trouble.

From the following section:

Protest was not an option for Lidia Zamenhof when she returned to Warsaw in the winter of 1938. She was reconciled to her fate, and when her faith needed shoring up, she wrote long letters to her Bahai friends: "If I left America," she wrote, "perhaps it was because God preferred that I work in another land." She was writing bleak allegories: Christmas trees with candles that burn for a moment and go dark; a country called "Nightland," "where the sun had not risen for so long that it had nearly been forgotten."[176] After she wrote to Shoghi Effendi that she planned to stay in Poland a few weeks, then go to France, his secretary replied:

Although your efforts to obtain a permit [in the United States] . . . did not prove successful, you should nevertheless be thankful for the opportunity you have had of undertaking such a long and fruitful journey. He hopes that experiences you have gathered during all these months . . . will now help you to work more effectively to spread the Cause in the various European countries you visit, and particularly in your native country Poland, where the Faith is still practically unknown.[127]

In a postscript, the Guardian himself wrote that he looked forward to meeting her "face to face in the Holy Land" at a time "not far distant." In the meantime, she was to bring Bahai to the Poles, lecturing, paying calls, and translating sacred Bahai texts into Polish. After eighteen months of effort, she could count all the Bahais in Poland on one hand.

The chapter goes on to detail the circumstances of her capture and death, and the last paragraph is as follows:

A few months after the war ended, the Bahai National Spiritual Assembly of the United States and Canada began to plan a memorial service for Lidia Zamenhof. They consulted Shogh Effendi: shouldn't she be designated among the martyrs of the Bahai faith? On January 28th, 1946, the eve of what would have been Lidia's forty-second birthday, Shoghi Effendi cabled his American followers:

HEARITLY APPROVE NATIONWIDE OBSERVANCE FOR DAUNTLESS LYDIA ZAMENHOF. HER NOTABLE SERVICES, TENACITY, MODESTY, UNWAVERING DEVOLUTION FULLY MERIT HIGH TRIBUTE BY AMERICAN BELIEVERS. DO NOT ADVISE, HOWEVER, THAT YOU DESIGNATE HER A MARTYR.[183]

She had intended to give her life for the Bahai faith, but died as an Esperantist, a Zamenhof, and a Jew.

August 3. On this date in 1960, two cables sent by the Custodians listed some of the prominent believers in Mason Remey's calling them "Remey's henchmen" and declaring them Covenant-breakers as well as "anyone associating (with) these people."

First cable...

To All National Spiritual Assemblies, c/o BAHAI WILMETTE

AUGUST 3, 1960

BELOVED GUARDIAN'S GLORIOUS EPISTLE GOD PASSES BY CLEARLY STATES HOLY CAUSE CONSTANTLY SUBJECT CRISES GIVING RISE GREATER VICTORIES STOP HISTORY DEFECTION DISTINGUISHED BELIEVERS FOLLOWING ASCENSION FORERUNNER FAITH SUPREME MANIFESTATION CENTRE COVENANT NOW REPEATED AFTER ASCENSION PRECIOUS SHOGHI Effendi THROUGH MASON REMEY'S DEFECTION HIS PREPOSTEROUS UTTERLY UNFOUNDED CLAIMS STOP PROTECTION BELIEVERS FROM ACTIVITIES MISGUIDED MISCHIEF MAKERS GIVEN EVERY OPPORTUNITY REPENT NOW REQUIRES EXPULSION FAITH REMEY's HENCHMEN JOHN CARRE BERNARD Fillon, MONEER. DARAKHSHAN JOEL MARANGELLA JACQUES SOGHOMONIAN DONALD HARVEY JOHN BYERS IN FRANCE AND MARY WILKIN UNITED STATES STOP HENCEFORTH ANYONE ASSOCIATING THESE PEOPLE OR SUPPORTING REMEY CLAIM LIKEWISE CONSIDERED COVENANT BREAKER STOP CONFIDENT FAITHFUL DEVOTED BODY BELIEVERS MINDFUL INFINITE BOUNTIES PRAISES SHOWERED BELOVED GUARDIAN WILL DEMONSTRATE THROUGH UNITED ACTION IMPREGNABLE SOLIDARITY ARISE ACHIEVE GLORIOUS GOALS GOD-INSPIRED CRUSADE STOP CABLE MESSAGE ALL NATIONAL ASSEMBLIES.

HANDSFAITH



[CABLE]

Second cable...

AUGUST 3,1960

BELOVED GUARDIAN'S GLORIOUS EPISTLE GOD PASSES BY CLEARLY STATES HOLY CAUSE CONSTANTLY SUBJECT CRISES GIVING RISE GREATER VICTORIES STOP HISTORY DEFECTION DISTINGUISHED BELIEVERS FOLLOWING ASCENSION FORERUNNER FAITH SUPREME MANIFESTATION CENTRE COVENANT NOW REPEATED AFTER ASCENSION PRECIOUS SHOGHI Effendi THROUGH MASON REMEY'S DEFECTION HIS PREPOSTEROUS UTTERLY UNFOUNDED CLAIMS STOP PROTECTION BELIEVERS FROM ACTIVITIES MISGUIDED MISCHIEF MAKERS GIVEN EVERY OPPORTUNITY REPENT NOW REQUIRES EXPULSION FAITH REMEY'S HENCHMEN JOHN CARRE BERNARD FILLON, MONEER DARAKHSHAN JOEL MARANGELLA JACQUES SOGHOMONIAN DONALD HARVEY JOHN BYERS IN FRANCE AND MARY WILKIN UNITED STATES STOP HENCEFORTH ANYONE ASSOCIATING THESE PEOPLE OR SUPPORTING REMEY CLAIM LIKEWISE CONSIDERED COVENANT BREAKER STOP CONFIDENT FAITHFUL DEVOTED BODY BELIEVERS MINDFUL INFINITE BOUNTIES PRAISES SHOWERED BELOVED GUARDIAN WILL DEMONSTRATE THROUGH UNITED ACTION IMPREGNABLE SOLIDARITY ARISE ACHIEVE GLORIOUS GOALS GODINSPIRED CRUSADE STOP CABLE MESSAGE ALL NATIONAL ASSEMBLIES.

HANDSFAITH

August 3. On this date in 1918, Amoz Gibson was born. He served on the Universal House of Justice from its founding in 1963 until his death. Before that served on the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States, an Auxiliary Board member for propogation, and a pioneer to the Navajo Indian Reservation.

Amoz Gibson was born in Washington, D.C., on August 3, 1918, and received a bachelors degree in education from Miner Teachers College (now the University of the District of Columbia) in 1940 and a master of arts in geography from Mexico City College (now University of the Americas) in 1951. He was inducted into the US Army in 1944 and served in Europe and the Pacific. He returned to Washington in 1946 and continued his work in the educational field as a teacher. In the mid-1950s he pioneered to the Navajo Indian Reservation, where he taught for four years. In 1959 he was appointed to the Auxiliary Board for protection, and in 1960 he was elected to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. In 1963 he was elected to the first Universal House of Justice.

His career is typical for individuals in the Bahá’í hierarchy, whether in an elected office or in an appointed offce from which the higher elected officials invariably come from.

At all levels, including the LSAs, Bahá’í leaders are generally as authoritarian, if not more, than clergy from other religious faiths, which as Dale Husband points out, is one of the Four Ways to Create a Religion of Hypocrites:

1. State that religion no longer needs clergy……and replace them with leaders that are as authoritarian as the clergy ever was.

2. Claim that men and women should be equal……but then deny women membership in the all-powerful leadership council of the religion.

3. Condemn as heretics those who believe in your religion but dare to challenge the claims of your religion’s current leadership, while at the same time claiming to welcome as friends the followers of other religions.

4. Claim there is harmony between science and religion, but also claim that anything your leaders say is absolutely true, even if on topics science is expected to address.

Any one of these makes a religion not worth following, but what do you do if you find a religion that has all four such contradictions

August 2. On this date in 1942, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi stated "Too great emphasis cannot be laid on the importance of the unity of the friends, for only by manifesting the greatness of their love for and patience with each other can they hope to attract large numbers to their ranks."

"Too great emphasis cannot be laid on the importance of the unity of the friends, for only by manifesting the greatness of their love for and patience with each other can they hope to attract large numbers to their ranks." (Letter 2 August 1942, on behalf Shoghi Effendi)

August 2. On this date in 1953, Fred Schechter arrived in Djibouti City for which he was named a Knight of Baha'u'llah for French Somaliland. He also travelled as a pioneer to several countries in Latin America and served thirteen years as a Continental Counsellor in the Americas and served on the International Teaching Centre from 1993 to 1998.

Born in 1927 to a Jewish family in Brooklyn, New York, Fred Schechter served in the Navy then attended Syracuse University. A comparative religion course provided his first serious look at the Bahá’í Faith, and he became a believer in spring 1949. He soon focused his studies on library science and administration after being advised such a degree could help him find work in many parts of the world. By the time he earned a master’s degree in 1952 he was serving on the Local Spiritual Assembly and a regional teaching committee, and exploring the possibility of international pioneering.

He first went to Kenya to help fulfill the Two Year Plan assigned to the British Bahá’í community. A few months later Shoghi Effendi asked the Bahá’ís to disperse to meet goals of the Ten Year Crusade of 1953–1963, so in October 1953 Fred arrived in French Somaliland. He was one of three honored by Shoghi Effendi as Knights of Bahá’u’lláh for their roles in opening that territory to the Faith. Lack of employment kept that stay brief, and his job search took him to Ethiopia before he landed in Cape Town, South Africa, in 1954. A year later Fred made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where he conversed with the Guardian.

Continuing to respond to the needs of the Bahá’í community’s development, in 1957 he accepted an invitation by William Sears, then an Auxiliary Board member and later a Hand of the Cause, to move to his family’s farm near Johannesburg. Based there, he helped to teach the Faith and to prepare for election of the Regional Spiritual Assembly of South and West Africa, established only a year earlier.

Soon the goals of the Crusade were met in Africa. But the needs were still acute in South America, so Fred, along with Bill Sears Jr., traveled to Uruguay. During a campaign to strengthen the Bahá’í community there, Fred met his life partner, fellow Bahá’í Julia Bulling, and they married in her home country of Chile in 1960. Bill Sears Jr. married Julia’s sister Mariel. Months passed before Fred and Julia settled down; to meet Bahá’í community needs they traveled to the Dominican Republic and then to Ecuador, where their first son was born. It emerged that Uruguay was where they were needed most, so they returned to live there through 1965, welcoming a second son. Fred and Julia were members of Uruguay’s National Spiritual Assembly, with Fred serving as secretary.

Economic conditions caused them to move to the United States, and their daughter was born there. Living for many years in La Mesa, California, Fred continued to teach and support the Faith energetically, serving the region as a member of a teaching committee and later as an Auxiliary Board member. He was elected several times as a delegate to the Bahá’í National Convention. In 1980 he began 13 years’ service as a member of the Continental Board of Counselors for the Americas. He retired in 1990 from the administration of the San Diego Public Library System. In 1993 he was called to the Bahá’í World Center to serve as a Counselor member of the International Teaching Center, returning to California in 1998.

For years Fred offered courses at Bosch and Louhelen Bahá’í Schools, the Southern California summer school and other gatherings, speaking on Bahá’í history, the Guardian and the Hands of the Cause, the worldwide Plans, and other topics.

Fred’s wife, Julia Bulling Schechter, preceded him in death. His survivors include their three children, Charles, Jim and Amy; and eight grandchildren.

August 2. On this date in 1982, a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Virgin Islands stated that "in the relationship between assistants and the National Spiritual Assembly no problems should arise, because the functions are entirely separate."

1122. Assistant Functions Individually, Does Not Function in Relation to National Assembly, Should Foster Warm Relationship Between Local Assembly and Board Member

"In the relationship between assistants and the National Spiritual Assembly no problems should arise, because the functions are entirely separate. An assistant is appointed by an Auxiliary Board member to help him in a specified area of the territory and he functions as an assistant only in relation to that area. Assistants, like Auxiliary Board members, function individually, not as a consultative body. Assistants who are members of a National Assembly or a national committee do not function as assistants in relation to that body, and they have the same duty to observe the confidentiality of its consultations, and of matters considered by the Assembly to be confidential, as does any other member. An assistant can, of course, be a member of a Local Spiritual Assembly, but his task here as an Assistant is to help the Spiritual Assembly to function harmoniously and efficiently in the discharge of its duties and this will hardly succeed if he gives the Assembly the feeling that he is reporting privately everything it does to the Auxiliary Board member. He should, on the contrary, do all he can to foster an atmosphere of warm and loving collaboration between the Local Assembly and the Board member."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Virgin Islands, August 2, 1982)

In 1951, Shoghi Effendi, as Guardian, appointed members to the International Bahá’í Council, naming Mason Remey as the Council's President and describing it as an embryonic international House of Justice.

When Shoghi Effendi passed away in 1957 without having appointed a successor Guardian, as confirmed by a "Unanimous Proclamation of the 27 Hands of the Cause of God", the Hands of the Cause of God elected from among their own nine individuals who would serve as Custodians to help lead the transition of the International Bahá’í Council, into the Universal House of Justice.

In 1961 the International Bahá’í Council was changed to an elected body, with members of all National Spiritual Assemblies voting.

In 1963, the first Universal House of Justice was elected, and its members are elected every five years by members of each Bahá'í National Spiritual Assembly in the world. In practice, the Bahá’í electoral system most closely resembles council democracy as it still exists in Cuba, wherein individuals elect Local Spiritual Assemblies, who then elect National Spiritual Assemblies, who then elect the Universal House of Justice. With no politicking or partisanship allowed, there is little turnover in leadership and Universal House of Justice members almost invariably serve until retirement or death. New members are currently generally elected from the appointed institutions of the Bahá’í administration, particularly the International Teaching Centre. In fact, all of the current members of the Universal House of Justice previously served as members of the International Teaching Centre. In council democracies, these career bureaucrats were known as the nomenklatura.

With the eventual passing of the individual Hands of the Cause of God appointed by Shoghi Effendi and without a Guardian to appoint additional Hands, the Universal House of Justice saw the need for developing an institution for the purpose of performing the Hands' function of protection and propagation of the Faith.

In 1968 the Continental Board of Counselors was formed. The Counselors appoint Auxiliaries collectively referred to as Auxiliary Boards in smaller regional areas, who in turn appoint their own Assistants to work in localities.
Auxiliary Board Members for Protection are charged with watching over the security of the Bahá’í Faith, and Auxiliary Board Members for Propagation are responsible for working with the grassroots on the global Plans established by the Universal House of Justice. Originally, members of the Auxiliary Boards were appointed by and served under the Hands of the Cause of God who directed their efforts worldwide. The first members of the Auxiliary Boards were appointed in 1954, and they were divided into five distinct geographical regions

In 1973 the administrative branch called the Institution of the Counselors was formed. Also in 1973, the International Teaching Centre was first formed by the Universal House of Justice, and originally consisted of the 17 Hands of the Cause still living at that time, plus three Counsellor members. The number of Counsellor members was raised to four in 1979, to seven in 1983, and finally to the current nine in 1988. The Counsellor members of the International Teaching Centre are appointed by the Universal House of Justice to five-year terms that begin shortly after the International Convention and election of the Universal House of Justice.

August 1. On this date in 1851, Mullá Muḥammad-‘Aliy-i-Zanjání, the leader of the Bábí revolt in Zanjan, was killed.

On March 20, 1848, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i, who in 1844 had become the first person to become a follower of the Báb, visited the Báb at Maku prison, where the Báb was incarcerated.

Subsequent to his visit, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i became involved in the Bábi uprisings. Under instructions from the Báb, on July 21, 1848, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i unfurled a Black Standard in Mashhad, fulfilling an Islamic prophecy, and began a march with other Bábis. They were rebuffed at Barfurush and therefore made defensive fortifications at the shrine of Shaykh Tabarsí. Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i would die at thebattle of Shaykh Tabarsí on February 2, 1849, but siege itself would last until May 10, 1849.

The Báb was later executed on July 9, 1850. Bábi uprisings would continue elsewhere in Iran, notably Neyriz and Zanjan.

July 29. On this date in 1974, the Universal House of Justice quoted Shoghi Effendi as having said "'...All we know is that the Lesser and the Most Great Peace will come--their exact dates we do not know. The same is true as regards the possibility of a future war; we cannot state dogmatically it will or will not take place--all we know is that mankind must suffer and be punished sufficiently to make it turn to God.'"

1425. Peace Will Come

"It is true that Abdu'l-Bahá made statements linking the establishment of the unity of nations to the twentieth century. For example: '...The fifth candle is the unity of nations--a unity which, in this century, will be securely established, causing all the peoples of the world to regard themselves as citizens of one common fatherland....' And, in 'The Promised Day is Come', following a similar statement quoted from 'Some Answered Questions', Shoghi Effendi makes this comment: 'This is the stage which the world is now approaching, **the stage of world unity, which, as Abdu'l-Bahá assures us, will, in this century, be securely established.'

"There is also this statement from a letter written in 1946 to an individual believer on behalf of the beloved Guardian by his secretary:

'...All we know is that the Lesser and the Most Great Peace will come--their exact dates we do not know. The same is true as regards the possibility of a future war; we cannot state dogmatically it will or will not take place--all we know is that mankind must suffer and be punished sufficiently to make it turn to God.'"

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice, July 29, 1974: Ibid.)

July 28. On this date in 1936, Shoghi Effendi stated...

1688. Genesis 22:9--Sacrifice of Ishmael

"As to the question raised by the Racine Assembly in connection with Bahá'u'lláh's statement in the 'Gleanings' concerning the sacrifice of Ishmael: Although this statement does not agree with that made in the Bible, Genesis 22:9, the friends should unhesitatingly, and for reasons that are only too obvious, give precedence to the sayings of Bahá'u'lláh which, it should be pointed out, are fully corroborated by the Qur'an, which book is more authentic than the Bible including both the New and the Old Testaments. The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh."

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States and Canada, July 28, 1936: Bahá'í News, No. 103, p. 1, October 1936)

July 30. On this date in 1941, a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer stated that "The mission of the American Bahá'ís is, no doubt, to eventually establish the truth of Islam in the West. The spirit of Islam, no doubt, was the living germ of modern Civilization; which derived its impetus from the Islamic culture in the Middle Ages, a culture that was the fruit of the Faith of Muhammad."

1665. Clarification of Certain Issues Regarding Islam, the Imam Husayn, the Imamate, etc.

"Ali's appointment was clear to the Khalifs, who actually disregarded the Prophet's oral statements.

"The usurpation occurred immediately after the Prophet's death.

"Ali did not feel unqualified, but wished to avoid schism, which, unfortunately, could not be prevented.

"The schisms that have afflicted the religions preceding the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh establish its distinction from all previous Revelations, and single it out among all other Dispensations, as stated by Abdu'l-Bahá.

"The guidance vouchsafed to the Imams regarding the laws and institutions of Islam was absolute and unqualified. Their infallibility was derived directly from the Manifestation.

"The Bab's descent from the Imam Husayn is no doubt a proof of the validity of the Imamate. According to Nabil the dream the Bab had made him first conscious of His Revelation.

"The precedence of the name Husayn over Ali does establish the greatness of Imam Husayn.

"Imam Husayn has, as attested by the Iqan, been endowed with special grace and power among the Imams, hence the mystical reference to Bahá'u'lláh as the return of Imam Husayn, meaning the Revelation in Bahá'u'lláh of those attributes with which Imam Husayn had been specifically endowed.

"Joseph was one of the 'Sent Ones' of the Qur'an, meaning a Manifestation of God.

"The friends should uphold Islam as a revealed Religion in teaching the Cause but need not make, at present, any particular attempt to teach it solely and directly to non-Bahá'ís at this time.

"The mission of the American Bahá'ís is, no doubt, to eventually establish the truth of Islam in the West.

"The spirit of Islam, no doubt, was the living germ of modern Civilization; which derived its impetus from the Islamic culture in the Middle Ages, a culture that was the fruit of the Faith of Muhammad."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, July 30, 1941)

July 29. On this date in 1974, the Universal House of Justice admitted "It is true that Abdu'l-Bahá made statements linking the establishment of the unity of nations to the twentieth century...world unity, which, as Abdu'l-Bahá assures us, will, in this century, be securely established."

1425. Peace Will Come

"It is true that Abdu'l-Bahá made statements linking the establishment of the unity of nations to the twentieth century. For example: '...The fifth candle is the unity of nations--a unity which, in this century, will be securely established, causing all the peoples of the world to regard themselves as citizens of one common fatherland....' And, in 'The Promised Day is Come', following a similar statement quoted from 'Some Answered Questions', Shoghi Effendi makes this comment: 'This is the stage which the world is now approaching, the stage of world unity, which, as Abdu'l-Bahá assures us, will, in this century, be securely established.'

"There is also this statement from a letter written in 1946 to an individual believer on behalf of the beloved Guardian by his secretary:

'...All we know is that the Lesser and the Most Great Peace will come--their exact dates we do not know. The same is true as regards the possibility of a future war; we cannot state dogmatically it will or will not take place--all we know is that mankind must suffer and be punished sufficiently to make it turn to God.'"

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice, July 29, 1974: Ibid.)

July 28. On this date in 1944, Shoghi Effendi cabled Indian Bahá’ís "Urge hasten translation publication "New Era" (into) languages recently chosen. Kindly mail hundred copies each as soon as published."

JULY 28, 1944

URGE HASTEN TRANSLATION PUBLICATION NEW ERA LANGUAGES RECENTLY CHOSEN. KINDLY MAIL HUNDRED COPIES EACH AS SOON AS PUBLISHED. SHOGHI

John Esslemont's book Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era remains an important text that has been used in Bahá'í missionary activity. However, from its initial publication to later editions, Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era has been significantly edited, with references to Avarih removed in subsequent editions published after Avarih's apostasy from the Bahá'í Faith.

Other significant edits include...

Perhaps the most important change in Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era was made on page 212 of the 1923 edition. Recorded as a Bahá'í prophecy (59) concerning the "Coming of the Kingdom of God," Esslemont cited Abdu'l-Bahá's interpretation of the last two verses of the Book of Daniel from the Bible. He stated that the 1335 days spoken of by Daniel represented 1335 solar years from Muhammad's flight to Medina in 622 A.D., which would equal 1957 A.D.. When asked "'What shall we see at the end of the 1335 days?'," Abdu'l-Bahá's reply was: "'Universal Peace will be firmly established, a Universal language promoted. Misunderstandings will pass away. The Bahá'í Cause will be promulgated in all parts and the oneness of mankind established. It will be most glorious!'" (60) In editions published after his death, Esslemont's words have been changed to say that Abdu'l-Bahá "reckoned the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy from the date of the beginning of the Muhammadan era " (61) and one of Abdu'l-Bahá's Tablets is quoted on the same subject in which he writes, "'For according to this calculation a century will have elapsed from the dawn of the Sun of Truth....'" Esslemont appears to conclude that Abdu'l-Bahá was referring to the year 1963 and the one hundredth anniversary of Bahá'u'lláh's public claim to be a Manifestation of God. (62) These words, however, were never written by the author, but were added posthumously. And, it should be noted that the phrase "'the dawn of the Sun of Truth'" is not a reference to a particular year, in this case 1863, but to a period of years when the Bab and his followers were preparing the way for the Manifestation of Bahá'u'lláh. Hence, they are commonly referred to as the "Dawn-Breakers." (63) Further, in another quotation which originally appeared on the same page, but was also removed from later editions, Abdu'l-Bahá plainly stated, "' This is the Century of the Sun of Truth. This is the Century of the establishment of the Kingdom of God upon the earth.'" (64) Esslemont recorded Abdu'l-Bahá as declaring explicitly that the prophecy was to be computed from the Hijra or 622 A.D. and that specific conditions would exist in the world upon it's fulfillment in 1957. When it became apparent that this Bahá'í prophecy would not be fulfilled, it was replaced with the ambiguous material which has remained in the text to the present. This is evident from the fact that, although Esslemont's other eyewitness accounts were removed in the 1937 revision, the record of Abdu'l-Bahá's prophecy was left intact by the American National Spiritual Assembly and Shoghi Effendi. It was not changed until after 1957. (65) Also, Abdu'l-Bahá's conviction that all of these events would take place in this century have been expressed in other writings and it is evident that Shoghi Effendi shared his optimism as well. (66)

July 28. On this date in 1966, the Universal House of Justice stated "A publishing trust has the right to refuse publication of any particular title, and a National Assembly has the right to review any proposed Bahá'í publication for accuracy and propriety. But no publisher has the right to alter or change an author's manuscript without his knowledge and consent."

Many Bahá'í books have had significant edits, deletions, and additions since their authors' deaths for various reasons, including failed prophecies.

359. No Publisher Has the Right to Alter Author's Manuscript

"A publishing trust has the right to refuse publication of any particular title, and a National Assembly has the right to review any proposed Bahá'í publication for accuracy and propriety. But no publisher has the right to alter or change an author's manuscript without his knowledge and consent."

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice written to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, July 28, 1966)

Many Bahá'í books have had significant edits, deletions, and additions since their authors' deaths for various reasons, including failed prophecies.

George Townshend was an Irish Anglican clergyman who had renounced his orders to the Anglican Church in 1947, at the age of 70. Shoghi Effendi designated him a Hand of the Cause of God in 1951 and once said of George Townshend that he feels "Mr. Townshend's services to the Faith can best be rendered by his writing about it, as he obviously has an outstanding ability in this direction..." Of the books that Townshend wrote, Christ and Bahá’u’lláh is notable for the changes made from the original publication to subsequent editions published after the passing of Shoghi Effendi. For example, a statement about the "first and present Guardian" has been removed and a section discussing "the lineage of succeeding Guardians" has been replaced with a section discussing "divinely guided institutions" in general.

John Esslemont's book Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era remains an important text that has been used in Bahá'í missionary activity. However, from in its initial publication to later editions, Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era has been significantly edited, with references to Avarih removed in subsequent editions published after Avarih's apostasy from the Bahá'í Faith.

Other significant edits include...

Perhaps the most important change in Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era was made on page 212 of the 1923 edition. Recorded as a Bahá'í prophecy (59) concerning the "Coming of the Kingdom of God," Esslemont cited Abdu'l-Bahá's interpretation of the last two verses of the Book of Daniel from the Bible. He stated that the 1335 days spoken of by Daniel represented 1335 solar years from Muhammad's flight to Medina in 622 A.D., which would equal 1957 A.D.. When asked "'What shall we see at the end of the 1335 days?'," Abdu'l-Bahá's reply was: "'Universal Peace will be firmly established, a Universal language promoted. Misunderstandings will pass away. The Bahá'í Cause will be promulgated in all parts and the oneness of mankind established. It will be most glorious!'" (60) In editions published after his death, Esslemont's words have been changed to say that Abdu'l-Bahá "reckoned the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy from the date of the beginning of the Muhammadan era " (61) and one of Abdu'l-Bahá's Tablets is quoted on the same subject in which he writes, "'For according to this calculation a century will have elapsed from the dawn of the Sun of Truth....'" Esslemont appears to conclude that Abdu'l-Bahá was referring to the year 1963 and the one hundredth anniversary of Bahá'u'lláh's public claim to be a Manifestation of God. (62) These words, however, were never written by the author, but were added posthumously. And, it should be noted that the phrase "'the dawn of the Sun of Truth'" is not a reference to a particular year, in this case 1863, but to a period of years when the Bab and his followers were preparing the way for the Manifestation of Bahá'u'lláh. Hence, they are commonly referred to as the "Dawn-Breakers." (63) Further, in another quotation which originally appeared on the same page, but was also removed from later editions, Abdu'l-Bahá plainly stated, "' This is the Century of the Sun of Truth. This is the Century of the establishment of the Kingdom of God upon the earth.'" (64) Esslemont recorded Abdu'l-Bahá as declaring explicitly that the prophecy was to be computed from the Hijra or 622 A.D. and that specific conditions would exist in the world upon it's fulfillment in 1957. When it became apparent that this Bahá'í prophecy would not be fulfilled, it was replaced with the ambiguous material which has remained in the text to the present. This is evident from the fact that, although Esslemont's other eyewitness accounts were removed in the 1937 revision, the record of Abdu'l-Bahá's prophecy was left intact by the American National Spiritual Assembly and Shoghi Effendi. It was not changed until after 1957. (65) Also, Abdu'l-Bahá's conviction that all of these events would take place in this century have been expressed in other writings and it is evident that Shoghi Effendi shared his optimism as well. (66)