succession

The Question of the Succession of Authority in the Baha'i Religion since 1957: A comparative approach to understanding the arguments

by Michael McCarron

(last edited 10/30/2009, active document)

In the following I present a look at the majority and minority arguments in regards to the succession of the Baha'i religion from 1957 on. In summary, the religion was briefly torn apart by a question of succession in 1957 when the current leader Shoghi Effendi passed away on a sudden without leaving a clear successor to his leadership. This caused a period of upheavel in the Baha'i community with no clear guidance on what to do with the question of leadership a group of people known as the Hands of the Cause of God took over the leadership of the religion in Haifa, Israel where the vast-majority of Baha'is still hold their allegiance. A smaller group led by a dissident voice among the Hands of the Cause, Mason Remey, claimed that he was the rightful successor to the Guardian of the Cause and that the embryonic Universal House of Justice, the International Baha'i Council, was the rightful successor to Shoghi Effendi. This claim was rejected by all the other Hands of the Cause. Later several arguments were put forward establishing the claims of Mason Remey but by then after several misteps and confusion within his ranks his position was severely weakened. However, several small bands of independent Baha'i groups still maintain his claims as legitimate. This minority version of the succession question is presented along side the lengthy arguments of Brent Poirier of the International Baha'i Community, a majority Haifa aligned position. Poirier frames the debate between the opposing camps through several questions. The relevant questions have been culled from his writings on the Covenant (http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/) and put alongside the counter arguments of the minority community, those with independent loyalties to Mason Remey.

Must the Guardian of the Cause be a [Physical] Descendant of Baha'u'llah?

Majority Opinion

Minority Opinion

(Summary: There are Americans with no family relationship whatever, who have claimed to be the hereditary successor to the Founder of the Baha'i Faith, Who was Persian; and also claim to be the appointed Interpreter of its Holy Writ. Lacking knowledge of the languages in which the Baha'i Writings were revealed--Writings they claim to be the divinely-guided Interpreters of--they base their claim to the hereditary position on a mistaken understanding of an Arabic word. The effect of their grievous misinterpretation of the Baha'i Teachings would be to open up this hereditary position to any pretender with no familial relationship to the Prophet-Founder of the Baha'i Faith.)

During the ministries of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha they gave the title “Ghusn,” an Arabic word meaning “Branch” (plural Aghsan or Branches) to certain of the male descendants of the Manifestation of God, and to no one else. Abdu'l-Baha was designated the Ghusn-i-'Azam, The Most Mighty Branch. Mirza Muhammad-Ali was designated the Ghusn-i-Akbar, the Greater Branch. Mirza Mihdi was designated the Ghusn-i-Athar, the Purest Branch. Shoghi Effendi was designated the Ghusn-i-Mumtaz, the Chosen Branch. While not all of them had an individual designation, collectively all of the male descendants of the Manifestation of God were known as Aghsan, “Branches,” the plural of Ghusn. No one, absolutely no one else in the Baha'i world, was known as a “Ghusn” or counted among the “Aghsan.” This was, and remains, a matter of crystal clarity.

In various of His addresses and Tablets in the Persian tongue, Abdu'l-Baha expresses the general principle of the unity of humanity by stating that all human beings are leaves and branches of one tree. Unable to read the original languages they claim to be the infallible interpreters of, various claimants to the Guardianship have pointed out that since everyone is included in Abdu'l-Baha's designation of "fruits" and "branches" of one tree, everyone is eligible to be appointed as Guardian of the Cause! When they claim that since Shoghi Effendi stated that future translations of the Will and Testament should be based on his English translation of that Document, they attempt to use this to erase the requirement in the Will and Testament that the “hereditary office of Guardianship” can only be held by one who is a male descendant of Baha'u'llah. They attempt to confuse a matter that is not open to discussion. That is, when Abdu'l-Baha says in Persian that all human beings are branches, the word for “branches” is an entirely different word, conveying an entirely different concept, from the Arabic honorific “Ghusn” given to the male lineage of the Manifestation. Infallible interpreter, indeed!

As I mention above, the matter is not open to discussion. In a number of passages in his writings, Shoghi Effendi specifies that the Guardianship is a hereditary institution. For example, he writes that the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha “establishes the institution of the Guardianship as a hereditary office.” (God Passes By, p. 327; see also p. 328, and The World Order of Baha'u'llah, pp. 148, 153, 154)

This requirement is so clear that the effort to challenge it is laughable. This hereditary requirement is implicit in the provisions in the Most Holy Book for the “Branches” to serve as the Head of the Faith. In paragraph 121 of the Most Holy Book, Baha'u'llah directs the Baha'is to turn to “Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root,” and in paragraph 174 He appoints as the Interpreter of the Book “Him Who hath branched from this mighty Stock.” (Italics added). In another important passage, Paragraph 42 of the Most Holy Book, Baha'u'llah writes:

“Endowments dedicated to charity revert to God, the Revealer of Signs. None hath the right to dispose of them without leave from Him Who is the Dawning-place of Revelation. After Him, this authority shall pass to the Aghsan, and after them to the House of Justice...”

Just as Baha'u'llah had written in His own Will that He had chosen the Greater Branch “after” the Most Great Branch; He writes here that “after” the Manifestation, i.e. after he ascends from this world, the authority in the Faith will reside with the “Aghsan”, obviously the chosen, the line of appointed Branches. He then states that “after” the Aghsan—implying an end to the line of Chosen Branches, i.e. an end of the line of Guardians—the authority will pass to the Universal House of Justice. This passage clearly implies that the House of Justice would function in this world without one of the Chosen Aghsan as its sacred head.

The hereditary requirement is also demonstrated by the requirement of Abdu'l-Baha that Shoghi Effendi was to appoint as his successor the first-born of his "lineal descendants" or “another branch”—another ghusn—to succeed him. (The Will and Testament, pp. 11-12) Both require an appointment to be made from within the family of the Manifestation.

There was never any doubt that Shoghi Effendi could not designate anyone but a male descendant of Baha'u'llah as his successor Guardian. Shoghi Effendi's secretary wrote on his behalf,

"The term Afnan means literally small branch, and refers to the relatives of the Báb, both men and women. As the Báb's only son died while in infancy, the former had no direct descendants. The Afnan are, therefore, all indirectly related to the Báb. As to Aghsan, it also means branch. But is a bigger branch than Afnan. It refers to Bahá'u'lláh's descendants."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, September 25, 1934; Lights of Guidance, p. 470, #1548)

This letter expressly confirms Shoghi Effendi's statement that the Guardianship is a hereditary office, that could only be held by a descendant of Baha'u'llah. Some self-seeking souls, entirely unrelated to the family of the Manifestation of God, have tried to claim otherwise because they suppose themselves to be 'branches'. Likewise, to state that the spiritual requirements of the Guardianship are more important than the physical requirement to be a male descendant of Baha'u'llah, is entirely beside the point, and is merely to engage in sowing confusion.

As the Hands of the Cause of God wrote to the Baha'i world in October of 1960, after Mason Remey had claimed that the requirement of "branch" did not limit the potential successor to a male descendant of Baha'u'llah:

“The ordinary English usage of the word 'branch' has caused a great deal of confusion, whereas there is not a shadow of ambiguity in the Persian and Arabic texts. Because of ignorance of the Arabic and Persian languages and the use of these two terms in our Sacred Texts, spurious arguments have been put forth by those making the false claim that Shoghi Effendi could have appointed a successor other than a blood descendant of Bahá'u'lláh.”

(Ministry of the Custodians, p. 234)

This matter has been well settled for 50 years.

The main arguments of the Majority opinion are challenged by the Minority opinion on this topic through the following arguments:

1. Ghusn is applied to any family member of the Aghsan including adopted sons, such as Mason Remey

2. There is no disagreement about the hereditary nature of the institution of the Guardianship, the disagreement is about what constitutes being a branch (ghusn).

3. There is no disagreement about the endowments issue the disagreement is about what constitutes a valid Universal House of Justice, the minority community holds that a legitimate UHJ is one composed of a executive branch and a legislative branch, a Guardian and the members of the Council. The appointed permanent member and a group of elected members.

4. The issue of lineal descendants is answered within the Will and Testament itself, when defining 'lineal descendants' is understood to point to all the Aghsan and choosing another branch is understood the choosing of a non-physical adopted son as the other Branch.

These four points will now be elaborated upon. Although we could point to ample citations where sonship is extended to spiritual believers by Abdu'l-Baha such as the oft quoted passage relating to spiritual descendants and physical descendants there is no such need to even bring in such passages for the answer is actually contained within the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha but before we can address the issue of 'Ghusn' (Branch) we need to look into the fourth point, the issue of 'lineal descendants' for it informs the first point.

The issue of lineal descendants is addressed in the W&T of Abdu'l-Baha in the following paragraph 19, Section I of the W&T:

Thus, should the first-born (walid bikr) of the Guardian of the Cause of God not manifest (mazhar) in himself the truth of the words:--"The child is the secret essence of its sire," that is, should he not inherit of the spiritual within him (the Guardian of the Cause of God) and his glorious lineage (sharif a`raq) not be matched with a goodly character (bi-ahsan akhlaq), then must he, (the Guardian of the Cause of God) choose another branch (ghusn) to succeed him.

From the clear translation in English and referencing the original language of Persian of the W&T we can see some terms that need attentive reading. The first is the notion of the 'glorious lineage', which in the original language is 'sharif a'raq'. What is a 'glorious lineage'a'raq in islamic context: "A word commonly used to express the idea of ability to trace moral qualities back to one's noble ancestors is irq,

(pl. a'raq and 'uruq). Irq means root, origin of a man, and its plural a'raq signifies

ancestors of a man. Thus frequent expressions of a man's inheritance from noble

ancestors are found in phrases such as, "he has an hereditary share in generousness

or nobleness,"17 or "noble blood lifted him up to his ancestors."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4085034/S-M-R-Shabbar-The-Origins-Early-Development-Of-Shiaa-Islam . In Shi'ism this is known as tracing one's family connections back to an original ancestor. So by being a sayyid you are a sayyid with all other descendants of Muhammad. It is an inclusive term of all descendants of a common ancestor in this case those of Baha'u'llah, which is to say the Aghsan. It is inclusive of all aghsan (branches). The english definition of 'lineage' is:

Main Entry: 1lin·e·age

Pronunciation: \ˈli-nē-ij also ˈli-nij\

Function: noun

Date: 14th century

1 a : descent in a line from a common progenitor b : derivation

2 : a group of individuals tracing descent from a common ancestor; especially : such a group of persons whose common ancestor is regarded as its founder

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lineage

So from the clear english and referencing the Islamic conception of 'glorious lineage' we can clearly see that lineage includes all the physical descendants of Baha'u'llah, then the passage continues that if there are no physical descendants of Baha'u'llah to choose from to appoint to the Guardianship then another branch (ghusn) should be appointed, this other branch must mean a non-physical descendant of Baha'u'llah but could be one that is grafted in to use the Biblical terminology that Jesus used for drafting in gentiles into the family of Israel. Thus what we have is a clear representation that there are other branches and these branches are not from the bloodline of Baha'u'llah but may have been grafted in. Now we turn to the legal adoption of Mason Remey by Abdu'l-Baha and the attitude of Shoghi Effendi to Mason Remey. It is known now, after much confusion, that Abdu'l-Baha adopted Mason Remey see http://www.bupc.org/hair-and-blood.html for arguments in support of this . This is known by referencing the writings of Abdu'l-Baha where he calls Mason Remey "my true son". The giving of an heirloom to Mason Remey from the possessions of Abdu'l-Baha symbolizing a token of adoption by Ottoman law. The very attitude of Shoghi Effendi toward Mason Remey where Shoghi Effendi calls him his brother. So from the Minority position not only is there a linguistic argument there is also a historical argument based on the adoption of Mason Remey by Abdu'l-Baha. There are other instances of Abdu'l-Baha of calling a believer his son. However, none of those lived to see the establishment of the IBC under Shoghi Effendi.

The second and third points also are informed by the notion of ghusn and the interpretation of who qualifies to be a ghusn. For the second point the issue is not the hereditary nature of the Guardianship it is the definition of what a ghusn is and for the minority view point as established in the language and structure of the W&T a ghusn is a adopted son as well as a physical bloodline descendant. The third point is not a disagreement about the UHJ falling into the line of the authority of the Faith and accepting the endowments that is not even contested what is contested is what the composition of the Universal House of Justice is and for the minority community there can be no Universal House of Justice without a Guardian or his representative.

The Spiritual and Physical Requirements for the Guardian of the Cause of God?

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

In His Will and Testament, Abdu'l-Baha formally establishes the Institution of the Guardianship, and on page 11 of that document designates Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian of the Cause of God.

In a number of passages in his writings, Shoghi Effendi specifies that the Guardianship is a hereditary institution. For example, he writes that the Will and Testament "establishes the institution of the Guardianship as a hereditary office." (God Passes By, p. 327) This is in keeping with the statement of Abdu'l-Baha that Shoghi Effendi was to designate the first-born of his "lineal descendants" (The Will and Testament, p. 11) Abdu'l-Baha specifies certain spiritual qualities that must be possessed by the successor Guardian, and states that if the first-born son of Shoghi Effendi did not possess these qualities, then Shoghi Effendi must select another of Baha'u'llah's male descendants:

"Thus, should the first-born of the Guardian of the Cause of God ... not inherit of the spiritual within him (the Guardian of the Cause of God) and his glorious lineage not be matched with a goodly character, then must he, (the Guardian of the Cause of God) choose another branch to succeed him." (The Will and Testament, p. 12)

The Arabic word here translated as "branch" is ghusn, the plural of which is Aghsan. These words were not applied to anyone but the male descendants of Baha'u'llah. There was never any doubt that Shoghi Effendi could not designate anyone but a male descendant of Baha'u'llah as his successor Guardian. Shoghi Effendi himself wrote, through his secretary,

"The term Afnan means literally small branch, and refers to the relatives of the Báb, both men and women. As the Báb's only son died while in infancy, the former had no direct descendants. The Afnan are, therefore, all indirectly related to the Báb. As to Aghsan, it also means branch. But is a bigger branch than Afnan. It refers to Bahá'u'lláh's descendants."

(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, September 25, 1934; Lights of Guidance, p. 470, #1548)

This letter expressly confirms Shoghi Effendi's statement that the Guardianship is a hereditary office, that could only be held by a descendant of Baha'u'llah. Some self-seeking souls, entirely unrelated to the family of the Manifestation of God, have tried to claim that they hold the office of Guardianship. This is sheer sophistry. To hold this view is to entirely ignore the requirement that the Guardianship is a "hereditary office." Likewise, to state that the spiritual requirements of the Guardianship are more important than the physical requirement to be a male descendant of Baha'u'llah, is entirely without support in the Baha'i Writings, and is merely to engage in sowing confusion.

There actually is not a disagreement here with the term used his "lineal descendants" as was seen in the first question by simply referencing Islamic culture on the idea of a'raq and the english definition of 'lineage' again we see that this a a reference to all bloodline descendants from a common ancestor. We have seen that the other branch is not a 'bloodline' descendant by the defintion of the terminology used and the disjunctive 'another branch' be selected. The other branch can be an adopted son. The institution of the Guardianship remains an hereditary office albeit one with a branch grafted in.

It is noted that in Christianity, which Baha'u'llah recognizes as the first Messiah, Jesus Christ, Christ meaning to be anointed in the line of David, it is recorded in the New Testament that a branch can be grafted in:

18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: Romans 11:18-20

It appears with this in mind that `Abdu'l-Baha also made the same observations:

Consider! The Divine Gardener cuts off the dry or weak branch from the good tree and grafts to it, a branch from another tree. He both separates and unites. This is that which His Holiness Christ says: that from all the world they come and enter the Kingdom, and the children of the Kingdom shall be cast out. (cf. Matthew 8:11) Noah’s grandson, Canaan, was detested in the sight of Noah and others were accepted. The brothers of the Blessed Beauty detached themselves from Him, and the Blessed Beauty never met them. He said: “This is an eternal separation between you and Me.” All this was not because the Blessed Beauty was despotic; but because these persons, through their own actions and words deprived themselves from the bounties and bestowals of the Blessed Beauty. His Holiness Christ did not exercise despotism in the case of Judas Iscariot and His own brothers,—but they separated themselves. Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith, http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/c/BWF/bwf-128.html, accessed 10/9/2009

`Abdu'l-Baha' also delineates writing in Persian, that descendants, which we know is a synonym for Branches, are comprised of physical relations and spiritual relations, he wrote:

He is God! O thou remnant of that manifestation of the kindness of the Exalted Lord. It is said that the line (silsilah) of the descendants is divided into two types, one is the physical descendants, and the other is the spiritual descendants. One is born of water and clay, and the other is born of soul and heart. When the two gather, then it would become light upon light.

Abdu'l-Baha Ma'idih Asimani, vol. 5, p. 161:http://reference.bahai.org/fa/t/ab/MAS5/mas5-161.html#pg161, downloaded 11/8/2008

As can be seen from this passage, to be considered an Aghsan (Branch) one must have spiritual qualifications, when the physical descent is matched with spiritual qualifications it is "light upon light". The issue is interesting that `Abdu'l-Baha' suggests there are physical descendants and spiritual descendants. He states elsewhere that all believers are "Children of the Kingdom", "Today illumined and spiritual children are gathered in this meeting. They are the children of the Kingdom. The Kingdom of heaven is for such souls as these, for they are near to God." . We see here that `Abdu'l-Baha' extends the concept of Israelite to all believers, all Baha'is are all descendants of the Kingdom of God, the Davidic Throne line.

Abdu'l-Baha clarifies this writing on the two types of descendants:

There are two kinds of relationship - Physical and Spiritual Relationship. The highest and greatest is the Spiritual. The physical is of no importance. It is very good to possess both in each other....We are all of one family because we are under the shadow of the Blessed Perfection....Spiritual Relationship is the true Family-hood of God's children. (‘Abdu’l Baha, Ten Days in the Light of Acca, compiled by Grundy, 1907 Edition, p46-7) http://books.google.com/books?id=JBsYAAAAYAAJ&dq=Ten+Days+in+the+Light+of+Acca&printsec=

frontcover&source=bl&ots=HKUvnAa34u&sig=QSCkNjBgC8C4Udb-05Il68aa79U&hl=en&ei=e6zTSovZNY76sgPqkO3XCg&sa=X&oi=book_res

ult&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CA4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Abdu'l-Baha further delineates the relationship of spiritual descendants to their spiritual fathers:

63. O thou steadfast in the Covenant!

In reply to thy letter, I am obliged to be brief: Praise thou God that thou hast succeeded in becoming a teacher of young Bahá'ís, young trees of the Abhá Paradise....The spiritual father is greater than the physical one, for the latter bestoweth but this world's life, whereas the former endoweth his child with life everlasting. This is why, in the Law of God, teachers are listed among the heirs.

Now you in reality have acquired all these spiritual children free and gratis, and that is better than having physical children; for such children are not grateful to their fathers, since they feel that the father serveth them because he must and therefore no matter what he doeth for them, they pay it no mind. Spiritual children, however, are always appreciative of their father's loving kindness. This verily is out of the grace of thy Lord, the Beneficent.

('Abdu'l-Bahá, from a Tablet - translated from the Persian) http://bahai-library.com/?file=compilation_bahai_education.html accessed 10/9/2009

And:

You are all my children, my spiritual children. Spiritual children are dearer than physical children, for it is possible for physical children to turn away from the Spirit of God, but you are spiritual children and, therefore, you are most beloved. I wish for you progress in every degree of development. May God assist you. May you be surrounded by the beneficent light of His countenance, and may you attain maturity under His nurture and protection. You are all blessed. http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/PUP/pup-39.html The Promulgation of Universal Peace ‘Abdu’l-Bahá Source: US Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 1982 second edition Pages: 470

Not only does Abdu'l-Baha express that spiritual children have a real father-child relationship with their spiritual teachers he as well denotes them as "young trees" which is to say equivocally that they are branches from the spiritual father.

What did Shoghi Effendi mean by "Divorced from the Institution of Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be Mutilated?

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

“Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship, the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated. . .” What did Shoghi Effendi mean by this?

Shoghi Effendi makes this pronouncement in his great expository letter “The Dispensation of Baha'u'llah:”

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. (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 148; hereafter, “Paragraph A”)

What does Shoghi Effendi mean by this? Does he mean, if there is ever not a living Guardian, the World Order of Baha'u'llah will be mutilated and all these unthinkable things will happen? Is the World Order mutilated right now, because Shoghi Effendi was not able to name a successor Guardian, and the Universal House of Justice functions as the Head of the Faith without the presence of a Guardian? Faithfulness to the Writings requires that we strive to understand exactly what he meant.

The purpose of this posting is to strive to understand Shoghi Effendi's intent in Paragraph A. To do so we will review a certain unique language pattern Shoghi Effendi uses when speaking of the inter-relatedness of the component parts of the Faith. We will see that Shoghi Effendi's intent was something very different from describing the effects of the absence of a living Guardian.

The milieu in which Shoghi Effendi wrote about the Baha'i institutions

From the very beginning of Shoghi Effendi's ministry he provided emphatic and detailed instructions directing the Baha'is to establish local and national spiritual assemblies. In these letters (e.g., Baha'i Administration, p. 20 and pp. 34-43) he pointed out that his instructions regarding these institutions were “in accordance with the explicit text” of both the Most Holy Book (Ibid., p. 37) and the Master's Will and Testament (Ibid., p. 39). This explanation laid a foundation for his “World Order letters” (published as the book The World Order of Baha'u'llah) written several years later, in which he elaborated in more detail the foundations on which the institutions of the Baha'i Faith rest. He wrote these letters to assure the friends that the need for these institutions was not his own idea, but was rooted in the sacred Texts, and in furtherance of the direction set by both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.

The principle of “inseparability” set forth in the first two World Order Letters

In these first two World Order letters (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, pp. 3-26) Shoghi Effendi elucidates the foundations underlying the institution of the Guardianship, and the institution of the House of Justice at all levels—local, national and international. He introduces these letters (“The World Order of Baha'u'llah” and “The World Order of Baha'u'llah—Further Considerations” by stating that his purpose is to set forth the true precepts of the Cause, regarding the validity of these institutions that stand “inextricably interwoven with the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 3), that are “inseparably associated with the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 13) It will help us if we fix those phrases in our minds; these terms “inextricability” and “inseparability” are extremely important, and embody what the Universal House of Justice terms “the principle of inseparability” elaborated by Shoghi Effendi. (“The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice,” letter dated 27 May 1966, Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 35.9, page 86) Understanding this principle is key to understanding the Guardian's intent in Paragraph A.

The Baha'is were not expecting the Institution of Guardianship after the passing of Abdu'l-Baha

During the lifetime of Abdu'l-Baha, Abdu'l-Baha never spoke to the Baha'is about the institution of the Guardianship. He frequently stated that after Him, the Universal House of Justice would be organized and would be the Head of the Faith. Dr. Youness Afroukhteh gives several examples of this (e.g., Memories of Nine Years in Akka, pp. 169-172). Furthermore, the Universal House of Justice was the only institution mentioned in the Writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha during Their lifetimes to lead the Faith, and it was what the friends, worldwide, had every reason to anticipate would come into being soon after the passing of the Master. Shoghi Effendi told his wife and groups of pilgrims several times that he himself had no foreknowledge of the existence of the Institution of Guardianship, and at most thought that perhaps as the eldest grandson of Abdu'l-Baha, he might be asked to convene the gathering for the election of the Universal House of Justice. (The Priceless Pearl, p. 42) The very concept of the institution of the Guardianship was not addressed in the Writings of Baha'u'llah or those of Abdu'l-Baha until the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha was promulgated in 1922.

The purpose of the first two World Order letters

Shoghi Effendi had to correct this mindset in the Baha'i commmunity—the belief that there had to be a functioning Universal House of Justice with him to head the Faith, and also to provide satisfying answers to the “misgivings” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 3) and “apprehensions” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 15) in the Baha'i community about the legitimacy of the previously unheard-of institution of the Guardianship and about the local and national spiritual assemblies. In these World Order letters he set out to correct these misperceptions and banish these concerns once and for all. To this end Shoghi Effendi wrote,

“It should be remembered by every follower of the Cause that the system of Baha'i administration is not an innovation imposed arbitrarily upon the Baha'is of the world since the Master's passing” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 5).

This was what the “misgivings” and “apprehensions” were about—concerns that the Guardianship and the local and national assemblies were his or Abdu'l-Baha's innovation, and had not been part of Baha'u'llah's plan for His Faith. Shoghi Effendi explained that these institutions were a part of Baha'u'llah's plan from the beginning, and that the administrative institutions were as much a part of His plan as were the spiritual and humanitarian teachings of His Faith. To demonstrate “the essential unity that underlies the spiritual, the humanitarian, and the administrative principles” of the Faith, (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 4) Shoghi Effendi employs the concepts of inseparability and mutilation:

“... the system of Baha'i administration ... 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.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 5; “Paragraph B”)

When we understand what Shoghi Effendi means in Paragraph B by “mutilation of the body of the Cause” caused by “dissociation” or “separation” of the administrative teachings from the other principles of the Faith; we will clearly grasp what he means in Paragraph A by mutilation of the World Order of Baha'u'llah by “divorcing” the Guardianship from it. How would such a separation take place? Where would it take place? Would it be an outward occurrence in the Cause, an event? I suggest that he means that it would take place in one's own conception of the Cause of God, and in one's explanation of the Teachings. I suggest that he is saying that to treat these components of the Faith as “dissociated” from one another would be to hold a distorted—a mutilated—view of the Faith.

This ominous-sounding language in Paragraph B about the “extinction of the Faith itself,” equally as ominous as the language in Paragraph A, is not elaborating the consequences of an event that can occur in the Cause of God. Rather, this warning against “dissociation” and resulting “mutilation” is Shoghi Effendi's linguistic method to instill in the reader a proper understanding of the coherence of the component parts of the Faith. After reading Paragraph B the believers will never again make the mistake of viewing the administrative principles as dissociated from the rest of the Faith.

Understanding the Guardian's methodology in Paragraph B will help us to understand his statement in Paragraph A—that if the institution of Guardianship were to be seen as separate from the rest of Baha'u'llah's World Order, were to be wrenched from the original plan conceived by Baha'u'llah Himself and presented as an innovation unrelated to Him—such a distorted view would be a “mutilation”.

The essential unity of the Most Holy Book and the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha—Shoghi Effendi's caution to not “divorce” them from one another

In elaborating the foundations underlying the Guardianship, Shoghi Effendi had to address the fact that there was not a single word in the Most Holy Book expressly providing for the institution of the Guardianship; yet, he explained, Baha'u'llah had provided the motivating impulse for its establishment. Shoghi Effendi wanted the believers to understand that this institution originated with the Manifestation of God and is firmly rooted in His plan. To convey this, Shoghi Effendi first explained the intimate relationship between the Most Holy Book of Baha'u'llah and the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha. He describes the closeness of this relationship by stating that the Will of Abdu'l-Baha “confirms, supplements, and correlates the provisions of the Aqdas.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 18). He even describes these Writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as one Book, and Their last Wills as one Will:

“For nothing short of the explicit directions of their Book, and the surprisingly emphatic language with which they have clothed the provisions of their Will, could possibly safeguard the Faith for which they have both so gloriously labored all their lives.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 22)

Then, Shoghi Effendi again uses the term “divorced.” This word at one and the same time warns the believers not to view these Books as separate and incompatible, and conveys their essential unity and inseparability:

“It would, however, be helpful and instructive to bear in mind certain basic principles with reference to the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Baha, which, together with the Kitab-i-Aqdas, constitutes the chief depository wherein are enshrined those priceless elements of that Divine Civilization, the establishment of which is the primary mission of the Baha'i Faith. A study of the provisions of these sacred documents will reveal the close relationship that exists between them, as well as the identity of purpose and method which they inculcate. Far from regarding their specific provisions as incompatible and contradictory in spirit, every fair-minded inquirer will readily admit that they are not only complementary, but that they mutually confirm one another, and are inseparable parts of one complete unit. A comparison of their contents with the rest of Baha'i sacred Writings will similarly establish the conformity of whatever they contain with the spirit as well as the letter of the authenticated writings and sayings of Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha. In fact, he who reads the Aqdas with care and diligence will not find it hard to discover that the Most Holy Book itself anticipates in a number of passages the institutions which 'Abdu'l-Baha ordains in His Will. By leaving certain matters unspecified and unregulated in His Book of Laws, Baha'u'llah seems to have deliberately left a gap in the general scheme of Baha'i Dispensation, which the unequivocal provisions of the Master's Will have filled. To attempt to divorce the one from the other, to insinuate that the Teachings of Baha'u'llah have not been upheld, in their entirety and with absolute integrity, by what 'Abdu'l-Baha has revealed in His Will, is an unpardonable affront to the unswerving fidelity that has characterized the life and labors of our beloved Master.” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 4; “Paragraph C”)

This language in Paragraph C exhorting us to not “divorce” the “institutions Abdul-Baha ordains in His Will” from “the Teachings of Baha'u'llah” is in essence identical to his warnings in Paragraph A not to “divorce” the “institution of the Guardianship” from “the World Order of Baha'u'llah,” and in Paragraph B not to “dissociate” the teachings establishing the Baha'i institutions from the rest of the Teachings. Understanding the Guardian's method in Paragraph C will help us to clearly see what Shoghi Effendi wants us to understand from Paragraph A.

The methodology of Shoghi Effendi

There are several points to bring out, that will help to see the pattern of the Guardian's method and more clearly understand his intent. First, the Guardian, referring to the Kitab-i-Aqdas and the Master's Will, speaks of their “close relationship,” and of their “identity of purpose and method.” Later, we will see that he makes the same point in similar language when introducing Paragraph A—when writing about the relationship between the Universal House of Justice and the Guardianship. Secondly, he states that these Documents are not “incompatible” or “contradictory;” they are “complementary,” they “mutually confirm one another,” and they are “inseparable parts of one complete unit.” The Guardian again uses these same terms to describe the relationship between the House of Justice and the Guardianship, immediately prior to Paragraph A in the Dispensation. Finally, Shoghi Effendi says these Books should not be “divorced” from one another; and then he explains what he means by “divorce”:

“...to insinuate that the Teachings of Baha'u'llah have not been upheld, in their entirety and with absolute integrity, by what 'Abdu'l-Baha has revealed in His Will.”

This is what Shoghi Effendi is saying in Paragraph C; that it is wrong to believe that the institution of the Guardianship originated with Abdu'l-Baha or Shoghi Effendi acting on His own, avulsed from the purpose of Baha'u'llah: “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 Baha'is of the world since the Master's passing.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 5)

Rather, the institution of Guardianship was rooted in the Aqdas itself; and Abdu'l-Baha's formal establishment of the Guardianship was faithful to Baha'u'llah's design and carried out Baha'u'llah's purpose. Warning not to “divorce” them, and describing such a divorce as a “mutilation,” conveys this sense of closeness and embeds it deeply in the consciousness of the believers. Rather, the institutions established in the Master's Will and Testament must be viewed as a supplement to the Aqdas, as fully supportive of its provisions, and as completing Baha'u'llah's own design for His World Order which was clearly anticipated in the Most Holy Book.

The Institutions in the System established by Abdu'l-Baha must not be divorced from the teachings of Baha'u'llah

Believing that Abdu'l-Baha veers from the Most Holy Book is to wrench the institutions provided for in the Will from the design of Baha'u'llah—to “divorce” them from His World Order, and thus to “mutilate” His Cause:

The creative energies released by the Law of Bahá'u'lláh, permeating and evolving within the mind of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, have, by their very impact and close interaction, given birth to an Instrument which may be viewed as the Charter of the New World Order which is at once the glory and the promise of this most great Dispensation. The Will may thus be acclaimed as the inevitable offspring resulting from that mystic intercourse between Him Who communicated the generating influence of His divine Purpose and the One Who was its vehicle and chosen recipient. Being the Child of the Covenant -- the Heir of both the Originator and the Interpreter of the Law of God -- the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá can no more be divorced from Him Who supplied the original and motivating impulse than from the One Who ultimately conceived it. Bahá'u'lláh's inscrutable purpose, we must ever bear in mind, has been so thoroughly infused into the conduct of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, and their motives have been so closely wedded together, that the mere attempt to dissociate the teachings of the former from any system which the ideal Exemplar of those same teachings has established would amount to a repudiation of one of the most sacred and basic truths of the Faith. (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 144; “Paragraph D”)

The final sentence of Paragraph D is another key to understanding Paragraph A, another example of “the principle of inseparability” which is a conceptual tool Shoghi Effendi uses to clarify the understanding of the friends: “Baha'u'llah's inscrutable purpose, we must ever bear in mind, has been so thoroughly infused into the conduct of 'Abdu'l-Baha, and their motives have been so closely wedded together, that the mere attempt to dissociate the teachings of the former from any system which the ideal Exemplar of those same teachings has established would amount to a repudiation of one of the most sacred and basic truths of the Faith.” That is, to view the institutions in the “system” which Abdu'l-Baha has established in His Will and Testament as dissociated from Baha'u'llah's “purpose”, as an innovation not in the Mind and original design of Baha'u'llah, would be to divorce them from Baha'u'llah.

Warning not to mutilate the truth of the Cause

Another passage in the Guardian's writings which convincingly shows that what he means by “mutilation” is to distort the truth by not seeing the elements of the Cause in proper relation to one another, is in his Introduction to God Passes By. Here, Shoghi Effendi uses the same methodology and the same terminology to illustrate the principle of inseparability.

In his Introduction to God Passes By, his history of the first century of the Baha'i Era, he explains that the four periods of Baha'i history must be understood as “closely interrelated,” as “inseparable parts” of “one stupendous whole,” of “one indivisible” drama having “one common immutable Purpose.” To “isolate” any one of these periods from the others, to “dissociate” them from one another, would be to "mutilate" the “structure” 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. (God Passes By, pp. xiv-xv) (“Paragraph E”)

This passage, concerned with properly seeing the relationship between the inseparable parts of Baha'i history, is relevant to understanding the meaning of Paragraph A, which is concerned with properly seeing the relationship between the inseparable parts of Baha'u'llah's World Order. In both instances, to see them isolated or divorced from one another is to mutilate the truth.

The Institution of the Guardianship was clearly anticipated in the implications of the Most Holy Book

Now that Shoghi Effendi has firmly implanted in the mind of the reader that the Most Holy Book and the Master's Will are one inseparable unit, he demonstrates that the institution of the Guardianship originated with Baha'u'llah, not with Abdu'l-Baha. On page 214 of "God Passes By", Shoghi Effendi states that in the Most Holy Book Baha'u'llah "anticipates by implication the institution of Guardianship." He makes a similar statement in the “Dispensation” when he writes, “in the verses of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas the implications of which clearly anticipate the institution of the Guardianship.” can be discerned “the faint glimmerings” and “the earliest intimation of the nature and working of the Administrative Order which the Will of 'Abdu'l-Bahá was at a later time destined to proclaim and formally establish.” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 147)

The point of this statement is to show that even though the institution of the Guardianship was formally established by Abdu'l-Baha in the Will, it does not originate with Abdu'l-Baha. The institution of the Guardianship is anticipated in the Most Holy Book, it is an essential part of the design of Baha'u'llah Himself; and as we see in these other passages, it must not be “divorced” from Him.

“The Dispensation of Baha'u'llah”—The Twin Institutions of the Universal House of Justice and the Guardianship

Now that we understand the method and purpose of Shoghi Effendi, let us turn our attention to Paragraph A, in his monumental letter “The Dispensation of Baha'u'llah.” It clarifies our understanding to see that in speaking of the interrelationship between the twin institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice in Paragraph A, Shoghi Effendi uses the same methodology as he used in Paragraphs B, C, D and E.

One reason that Paragraph A concerning divorce of the institution of Guardianship is often misunderstood, is that it is presented in isolation. If we read it in context with the paragraph preceding it and the paragraph following it, we will see it in its true light:

It should be stated, at the very outset, in clear and unambiguous language, that these twin institutions of the Administrative Order of Baha'u'llah should be regarded as divine in origin, essential in their functions and complementary in their aim and purpose. Their common, their fundamental object is to insure the continuity of that divinely-appointed authority which flows from the Source of our Faith, to safeguard the unity of its followers and to maintain the integrity and flexibility of its teachings. Acting in conjunction with each other these two inseparable institutions administer its affairs, coordinate its activities, promote its interests, execute its laws and defend its subsidiary institutions. Severally, each operates within a clearly defined sphere of jurisdiction; each is equipped with its own attendant institutions -- instruments designed for the effective discharge of its particular responsibilities and duties. Each exercises, within the limitations imposed upon it, its powers, its authority, its rights and prerogatives. These are neither contradictory, nor detract in the slightest degree from the position which each of these institutions occupies. Far from being incompatible or mutually destructive, they supplement each other's authority and functions, and are permanently and fundamentally united in their aims. (“Paragraph F”)

Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as 'Abdu'l-Baha 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. (Paragraph G/ Paragraph A)

Severed from the no less essential institution of the Universal House of Justice this same System of the Will of 'Abdu'l-Baha 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. (“Paragraph H”) (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 148. Paragraph G and Paragraph A are the same paragraph; for the sake of consistency I will continue to refer to it as “Paragraph A.”)

Striking Similarity

Please observe the language Shoghi Effendi uses in these three interconnected paragraphs. The Universal House of Justice and the Guardianship are described as “complementary in their aim and purpose,” as “permanently and fundamentally united in their aims,” as sharing a “common object,” as not being “contradictory” or “incompatible,” that each supplements the “other's authority and functions,” that neither detracts “in the slightest degree” from the position which each occupies, and that we should see them as “inseparable institutions” and neither of them as “divorced” or “severed” from the World Order of Baha'u'llah. This is strikingly similar to the language he used in Paragraphs C and D describing the Kitab-i-Aqdas and the Will and Testament as sharing an “identity of purpose and method,” as not being “incompatible” or “contradictory in spirit,” as “inseparable parts of one complete unit” that they “mutually confirm one another,” and we should not “divorce” them from one another or from the World Order plan of Baha'u'llah. In fact, the Guardian is really saying the same thing in all of these paragraphs, though he is being more specific with reference to the Universal House of Justice in these latter paragraphs F, A and H.

Now, to examine Paragraph A one phrase at a time:

_______________

Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Baha'u'llah would be mutilated

With these words Shoghi Effendi is saying that the institution of the Guardianship is not an innovation that was conceived after Baha'u'llah—it is a creation of Baha'u'llah Himself. To view the Guardianship as divorced from His World Order, to wrench it from His plan, is to hold a mutilated view of the World Order of Baha'u'llah.

On the page previous to Paragraph A, Shoghi Effendi had made a statement that really summarizes these latter three paragraphs: “the nature of the relationships which, on the one hand, bind together these two fundamental organs of the Will of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and connect, on the other, each of them to the Author of the Faith and the Center of His Covenant. (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 147) He is summarizing those relationships in Paragraphs A and H.

______________

Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh would be . . . 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."

It is not my purpose to state that there is no loss to the Baha'i Faith because there is no living Guardian. The House of Justice has itself written, “we must never underestimate the grievous loss that the Faith has suffered.” (“Comments on the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice,” Letter to an individual dated 7 December 1969; Messages From the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, Paragraph 75.14, p. 159)

In Paragraph A, Shoghi Effendi is not laying out the losses to the Faith if there should come a time when there was not a living Guardian. He is laying out the losses to the Faith if there had never been an institution of Guardianship in Baha'u'llah's plan of World Order.

It is my understanding that he is saying that if Baha'u'llah had not provided for the institution of the Guardianship, His plan for World Order would have lacked a principle that is seen in all of the divine Dispensations.

Shoghi Effendi has explained that the Baha'i Faith: ". . . incorporates within its structure certain elements which are to be found in each of the three recognized forms of secular government, is devoid of the defects which each of them inherently possesses, and blends the salutary truths which each undoubtedly contains without vitiating in any way the integrity of the Divine verities on which it is essentially founded. The hereditary authority which the Guardian of the Administrative Order is called upon to exercise, and the right of the interpretation of the Holy Writ solely conferred upon him. . .” (Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, p. 326) These three forms of government are monarchy (government by one person), aristocracy (government by a select few), and commonwealth (government by the many). The hereditary institution of the Guardianship represents the element of a hereditary monarchy in the Baha'i system. Shoghi Effendi is stating in this passage of the Dispensation that if Baha'u'llah had not established the Guardianship, although the hereditary element is “invariably” a part of every Divine Dispensation, the Baha'i System would have been “permanently deprived” of this element.

This statement also shows that in Paragraph A Shoghi Effendi is speaking at the level of principle and not at the level of functioning—he states that this would deprive Baha'u'llah's World order of the “hereditary principle.”

_______________

Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered.

This is entirely consistent with this passage from the Master's Will and Testament: “The mighty stronghold shall remain impregnable and safe through obedience to him who is the Guardian of the Cause of God.” (The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 11)

However, maintenance of the integrity and stability of the Faith is no less a function of the Universal House of Justice. Shoghi Effendi wrote that the “institutions” (plural) established in the Most Holy Book safeguard the integrity of the Faith (God Passes By, p. 213). He also states that the common object of both the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice is “to maintain the integrity and flexibility of its teachings.” (Paragraph F). Shoghi Effendi protected the integrity and stability of the Faith for 36 years without the Universal House of Justice; and now the Universal House of Justice does so without the Guardian, and it uses his writings in exercising that function. However, the point of this statement in Paragraph A is that Baha'u'llah did establish both of these institutions, and that therefore His world order was not “without” the Guardianship.

An example of how Shoghi Effendi took effective measures to protect its integrity is, as he himself wrote, that he issued these World Order letters—and they and his other writings continue to protect the integrity of the Faith today: “I feel impelled, at the present stage of the evolution of the Bahá'í Revelation, to state candidly and without any reservation, whatever I regard may tend to insure the preservation of the integrity of the nascent institutions of the Faith.” (Shoghi Effendi, “The World Order of Baha'u'llah—Further Considerations,” WOB 16) Again, Shoghi Effendi's purpose in Paragraph A is to state that if there had never been provision for the institution of the Guardianship the stability of the fabric of the Faith would be gravely endangered.

“This challenge, so severe and insistent, and yet so glorious, faces no doubt primarily the individual believer on whom, in the last resort, depends the fate of the entire community. He it is who constitutes the warp and woof on which the quality and pattern of the whole fabric must depend. He it is who acts as one of the countless links in the mighty chain that now girdles the globe. He it is who serves as one of the multitude of bricks which support the structure and insure the stability of the administrative edifice now being raised in every part of the world.” (Shoghi Effendi, Citadel of Faith, p. 130)

_____________

Without such an institution . . . Its prestige would suffer

Obviously the Guardianship, representing an “organic connection” to the Manifestation of God, (Messages to America, p. 8) “enhances the prestige of that exalted Assembly.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 7). In like manner, Shoghi Effendi was well aware that the prestige of the Faith would be enhanced by bringing the Universal House of Justice into being to join him in conducting the affairs of the Faith:

“In these days the things that are regarded as the most imperative of all and upon which will depend the development of the Cause of God, the enhancement of its position and prestige and the promulgation of the laws of His Faith, are but two momentous tasks: first, to expedite preparations for the formation of the divinely ordained, the Supreme House of Justice; second, to complete the construction of the Temple in the United States.” (From a letter dated 27 November 1929 to the Bahá'ís of Persia, translated from the Persian; Compilation on Establishment of the Universal House of Justice, The Compilation of Compilations vol. I, p. 333)

As he wrote, these institutions “supplement each other's authority and functions.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 148)

_____________

Without such an institution . . . the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking

Shoghi Effendi may here be referring to the power of the Guardianship which he demonstrated when he described the great trends of the Faith, both in the past and in the future—to read both its history and the broad sweep of its future course, in the light of the Baha'i Scriptures. Shoghi Effendi exercised this function in a number of his writings. His history of the Faith's first century, God Passes By, as well as his letter “The Promised Day is Come” place in historical perspective the impact of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah on the first generations living during the Baha'i Era. His World Order letters, on the other hand, such as “The Goal of a New World Order,” provide a glimpse of the pattern of future society, the broad outlines of the stages the Faith will pass through, to establish the future Commonwealth of Baha'u'llah. Shoghi Effendi states (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 33 and p. 35) that these predictions are based upon his interpretations of the Writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha. If Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha had not created the institution of the Guardianship, we would not have such sweeping vistas of the steps that future generations must pass through, as these writings of the Guardian provide.

For example, in a letter dated August 12, 1941 Shoghi Effendi describes the potency of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah—how it has kept the Faith whole during the past, and that it would continue to do so through “present and future generations” up to the establishment of the Golden Age of the Faith. (Shoghi Effendi, Messages to America, pp. 49-52)

In this passage from Paragraph A, Shoghi Effendi may also be referring to the fact that if elected members were not re-elected, the Guardian, being a lifetime member, would ensure that at least one member of the Universal House of Justice would serve a long term. As Shoghi Effendi wrote in his first World Order letter, the institution of the Guardianship “assures the continuity” of the work of the Universal House of Justice. (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 8)

Mr. Ali Nakhjavani, who served as a member of the Universal House of Justice from its inception in 1963 until his retirement in 2003 has written on this subject:

In the 'Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh' Shoghi Effendi points out that one of his duties was to provide "the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its [the Faith's] elected representatives" (WOB 148). It is obvious that the reference here is to the elected members of Local Spiritual Assemblies, National Conventions, National Spiritual Assemblies, as well as of the Universal House of Justice. This function of the Guardianship was partly discharged when, under his guidance and direction, the Constitutions of Local and National Spiritual Assemblies were formulated and put into effect during his own ministry. What remained was to determine the boundaries of the work of the Universal House of Justice. The terms of the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá were superlative. He wrote: "Whatsoever they [the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice] decide is of God" (WT 11). He further added: "That which this body, [the elected members of the Universal House of Justice (WT 20)] whether unanimously or by a majority, doth carry, that is verily the Truth and the Purpose of God Himself" (WT 19). To complete his duty as Interpreter of these words in relation to the work of the Universal House of Justice, Shoghi Effendi wrote in his 'Dispensation' the following:

"The interpretation of the Guardian, functioning within his own sphere, is as authoritative and binding as the enactments of the International House of Justice, whose exclusive right and prerogative is to pronounce upon and deliver the final judgment on such laws and ordinances as Bahá'u'lláh has not expressly revealed. Neither can, nor will ever, infringe upon the sacred and prescribed domain of the other. Neither will seek to curtail the specific and undoubted authority with which both have been invested." (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 150)

It is highly significant that Shoghi Effendi, while defining his duty as Guardian to interpret what had been revealed, goes on to give the assurance to the Community, as well as to the world, that the Universal House of Justice, when elected, will never "infringe upon the sacred and prescribed domain" of interpretation, which is the exclusive right of the Guardianship. This assurance was fully realized and permanently set in place when the Universal House of Justice, in its Constitution wrote:

"The provenance, the authority, the duties, the sphere of action of the Universal House of Justice all derive from the Revealed Word of Bahá'u'lláh which, together with the interpretations and expositions of the Centre of the Covenant and the Guardian of the Cause… who, after 'Abdu'l-Bahá, is the sole authority in the interpretation of Bahá'í Scripture…constitute the binding terms of reference of the Universal House of Justice and are its bedrock foundation". (Constitution of the Universal House of Justice, p. 4)

(Ali Nakhjavani, "Some Thoughts on the Ministry of the Universal House of Justice" p. 4)

___________

Without such an institution . . . the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn.

As the Universal House of Justice--the Body, as Shoghi Effendi wrote (Baha'i Administration, p. 47), "to which, according to the Master's explicit instructions, all important and fundamental questions must be referred"--has explained, during his ministry Shoghi Effendi made a great number of such definitions:

However, quite apart from his function as a member and sacred head for life of the Universal House of Justice, the Guardian, functioning within his own sphere, had the right and duty "to define the sphere of the legislative action" of the Universal House of Justice. In other words, he had the authority to state whether a matter was or was not already covered by the Sacred Texts and therefore whether it was within the authority of the Universal House of Justice to legislate upon it. No other person, apart from the Guardian, has the right or authority to make such definitions. The question therefore arises: In the absence of the Guardian, is the Universal House of Justice in danger of straying outside its proper sphere and thus falling into error? Here we must remember three things: First, Shoghi Effendi, during the thirty-six years of his Guardianship, has already made innumerable such definitions, supplementing those made by 'Abdu'l-Baha and by Baha'u'llah Himself. As already announced to the friends, a careful study of the Writings and interpretations on any subject on which the House of Justice proposes to legislate always precedes its act of legislation. Second, the Universal House of Justice, itself assured of divine guidance, is well aware of the absence of the Guardian and will approach all matters of legislation only when certain of its sphere of jurisdiction, a sphere which the Guardian has confidently described as "clearly defined." Third, we must not forget the Guardian's written statement about these two Institutions: "Neither can, nor will ever, infringe upon the sacred and prescribed domain of the other." (Messages from The Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 35.6, p. 84)

Severed from the Universal House of Justice

The point is even easier to see in Paragraph H, which immediately follows Paragraph A: “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. . .” If “divorced” from the “institution of the Guardianship” is read to mean, “If there is ever not a living Guardian” then “severed” from the “institution of the Universal House of Justice” must be read the same way; and this is clearly an untenable reading, because the Universal House of Justice was not in existence when the Guardian wrote these words.

We can understand the Guardian's true intention when writing “divorced from the institution of the Guardianship” if we clearly grasp what he means by “severed from the no less essential institution of the Universal House of Justice.” Since the Universal House of Justice was not in being when Shoghi Effendi wrote this, either the Cause was at that time “severed” from the House of Justice and “paralyzed,” or he was communicating something entirely different.

We can confirm with certainty that Shoghi Effendi did not view the World Order of Baha'u'llah as “severed” from the Universal House of Justice even though it had not yet come into being. In Paragraph A he states that one of the effects of the Universal House being “severed” is that the “System” established by Abdu'l-Baha would be “paralyzed in its action.” Near the end of the Dispensation letter Shoghi Effendi “contrasts” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 154) the “vitality” of the institutions of the “vibrant body of the Faith of Baha'u'llah” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 155) with the “leaders” and “bewildered statesmen” of the nations who are “paralyzed in their action.”

No clearer statement could be made by Shoghi Effendi that the World Order of Baha'u'llah was not “paralyzed in its action,” and from this we know that he was not saying that the Cause was “severed” from the Universal House of Justice. Though he was functioning as the Head of the Faith without the other “twin pillar,” Shoghi Effendi describes the Baha'i System functioning without the “no less essential” institution of the Universal House of Justice as characterized by “vitality.” This should bring us great assurance about the intent of Shoghi Effendi in Paragraphs F, A and H.

Shoghi Effendi did not ever take the time to explain Paragraph H—never had to assure the friends that the Cause of God was not “severed” from the Universal House of Justice or “paralyzed in its action.” He did not do so because the point was clear; and we should understand Paragraph A in exactly the same way. The Cause was not then severed from the Universal House of Justice because Baha'u'llah had provided for it, and it is not now divorced from the institution of the Guardianship because Baha'u'llah provided for it.

Even though one of these twin pillars was entirely non-functioning throughout Shoghi Effendi's 36-year ministry, there was never hesitancy in his tone, never a sense that the World Order was in a weakened or impaired condition without the second source of divine guidance—the Universal House of Justice. We now see the same vigor and confidence, rooted in the same divine promise of infallible guidance, exhibited in all of the writings of the Universal House of Justice:

“. .. Shoghi Effendi repeatedly stressed the inseparability of these two institutions. Whereas he obviously envisaged their functioning together, it cannot logically be deduced from this that one is unable to function in the absence of the other. During the whole thirty-six years of his Guardianship Shoghi Effendi functioned without the Universal House of Justice. Now the Universal House of Justice must function without the Guardian, but the principle of inseparability remains.” (“The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice,” letter dated 27 May 1966; Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 35.9, pp. 86)

The Baha'is must cling firmly to the knowledge that the Cause is safely in God's hands, that the Covenant of Baha'u'llah is incorruptible and that they can have complete confidence in the ability of the Universal House of Justice to function "under the care and protection of the Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of His Holiness, the Exalted One"....

(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer dated 28 May 1975, included in the Compilation on the Covenant; The Compilation of Compilations Vol. I, p. 127)

The Universal House of Justice, which the Guardian said would be regarded by posterity as "the last refuge of a tottering civilization," is now, in the absence of the Guardian, the sole infallibly guided institution in the world to which all must turn, and on it rests the responsibility for ensuring the unity and progress of the Cause of God in accordance with the revealed Word. (Ibid., paragraph 35.17, p. 89)

It is this organic vitality of the Faith, so readily felt at the World Centre, whose exhilaration we wish every believer to share. (Ridvan Message 1967, Messages From the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 42.7, p. 101)

Above all, it must, with perfect faith in Bahá'u'lláh, proclaim His Cause and enforce His Law so that the Most Great Peace shall be firmly established in this world and the foundation of the Kingdom of God on earth shall be accomplished. (Ibid., paragraph 35.18, p. 89)

“. . . the vitality, the irresistible advance and socially creative power of the Cause of God, standing out in sharp contrast to the accelerating decline in the fortunes of the generality of mankind.” (Ibid, paragraph 394.10, p. 624)

“. . . the House of Justice is in a position to do everything necessary to establish the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh on this earth.” (“Election and Infallibility of the Universal House of Justice, letter dated 9 March 1965; Messages from The Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 23.20, p. 56)

Conclusion

Paragraph A is not a statement of what we have lost. It is a statement that elaborates the “nature of the relationships” between the Universal House of Justice and the Guardianship, and between each of these institutions and Baha'u'llah and His World Order. Divorcing them from one another or from Baha'u'llah and His World Order is the subject of this paragraph. Paragraph A is also a list of the interconnections between the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice. These explanations regarding the hereditary function of the Guardian, that he protects the integrity and stability of the Faith, enhances its prestige, provides for its continuity, and defines the legislative sphere of its elected representatives, are presented as demonstrations of the "principle of inseparability" introduced in the preceding paragraph of the Dispensation, Paragraph F. That is another way of saying that they cannot be divorced from one another. That is what that paragraph is about.

Without question, Paragraph A emphatically states the importance of the Guardianship. What it does not do is state that the Universal House of Justice cannot properly function without a living Guardian, nor state that the World Order would be "mutilated" without a living Guardian. What it does not do is to state that we are today "divorced" from the institution of the Guardianship.

The minority argument does not contend in anyway with the reading of the statement regarding divorce. The institution of the Guardianship is from Baha'u'llah that is the point, it is a divine directive. Poirier makes a clever logical argument:

If “divorced” from the “institution of the Guardianship” is read to mean, “If there is ever not a living Guardian” then “severed” from the “institution of the Universal House of Justice” must be read the same way; and this is clearly an untenable reading, because the Universal House of Justice was not in existence when the Guardian wrote these words.

This is an attempt at equivocation of the Universal House of Justice with the Guardianship when they are not equivocal. The Institution of the Guardianship is a essential part of the Institution of the Universal House of Justice. The Guardian is the head and guides the legislative process of the UHJ. They are both entrusted with guiding the community but only one in the W&T is written of as essential to the other part. The Guardian is essential to the functioning of the UHJ, the UHJ is not essential to the functioning of the Guardianship. Historically speaking the UHJ was intended to lead the faith in the event of the death of Abdu'l-Baha before Shoghi Effendi reached a mature age. as is noted in the second part of the W&T, that does not mean the UHJ supersedes the Guardianship. That is why in the clear language of the W&T the Guardian if he is not to sit on teh deliberations of the UHJ must appoint a representative to a function on his behalf. It is a misreading if you are trying to put the UHJ and teh Guardianship on teh same footing, they are twin pillars but one pillar cannot stand without the presencce of the Guardian if we read the W&T literally.

It [the UHJ] enacteth all ordinances and regulations that are not to be found in the explicit Holy Text. By this body all the difficult problems (masa'il [questions]) are to be resolved and the Guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head (rai'is) and the distinguished member for life of that body. Should he not attend in person its deliberations, he must appoint one to represent him (na'ib). Should any of the members commit a sin, injurious to the common weal, the Guardian of the Cause of God hath at his own discretion the right to expel him, whereupon the people must elect another one in his stead. This House of Justice enacteth the laws and the government enforceth them. The legislative body must reinforce the executive, the executive must aid and assist the legislative body so that through the close union and harmony of these two forces, the foundation of fairness and justice may become firm and strong, that all the regions of the world may become even as Paradise itself. Paragraph 26, Part I, Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha

The issue is not ther reading of such terms of divorce but the issue is the attempted equivocation and dismissal of the essential nature of the Guardianship to the Universal House of Justice. Which is established in the clear language of the W&T.

Observations on Shoghi Effendi Not Having Written a Last Will and Testament

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

While we cannot know for certain, perhaps we can reach some useful observations on why Shoghi Effendi chose to not write a last Will and Testament. We have a brief statement from the Universal House of Justice that points us in the right direction. We can also benefit from reviewing what Baha'u'llah requires to be included in a believer's last will and testament. Finally, we can derive some useful information by reflecting on the nature and contents of the Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah and that of Abdu'l-Baha.

The requirement to write a will

In the Most Holy Book Baha'u'llah writes:

Unto everyone hath been enjoined the writing of a will. The testator should head this document with the adornment of the Most Great Name, bear witness therein unto the oneness of God in the Dayspring of His Revelation, and make mention, as he may wish, of that which is praiseworthy, so that it may be a testimony for him in the kingdoms of Revelation and Creation and a treasure with his Lord, the Supreme Protector, the Faithful. (Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Aqdas, Paragraph 109, p. 59)

From this we see that a believer's last will and testament has both a spiritual and a physical function. The spiritual function is, as I understand it, to be a final statement of belief in the Manifestation of God, a sacred document having effect in both the physical and spiritual realms. Shoghi Effendi's secretary wrote on his behalf, The execution of the provisions of the will causes the spirit of the deceased to rejoice in the Abha Kingdom. (Written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, quoted in a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice, dated August 24, 1982, to a National Spiritual Assembly; cited in “Developing Distinctive Baha'i Communities,” a publication of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States).

In addition, the last will and testament is an appropriate document in which to make provision for the raising of one's children, the care of one's surviving relatives, disposition of one's assets, provisions for treatment and burial of the body after death, payment of debts, payment of any unpaid Huquq'llah, gifts to charity, deeds to be done on one's behalf, and the like. This is the type of will and testament that the believers are required by the provisions of the Most Holy Book to write, and this is one of the laws of the Aqdas that is presently binding on the believers. I will refer to this as a “believer's will.”

The Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah

It is useful to contrast a believer's will with Baha'u'llah's Last Will and Testament, the Kitab-i-`Ahd. Of this Document, Shoghi Effendi writes:

To direct and canalize these forces let loose by this Heaven-sent process, and to insure their harmonious and continuous operation after His ascension, an instrument divinely ordained, invested with indisputable authority, organically linked with the Author of the Revelation Himself, was clearly indispensable. That instrument Baha'u'llah had expressly provided through the institution of the Covenant, an institution which He had firmly established prior to His ascension. This same Covenant He had anticipated in His Kitab-i-Aqdas, had alluded to it as He bade His last farewell to the members of His family, who had been summoned to His bed-side, in the days immediately preceding His ascension, and had incorporated it in a special document which He designated as "the Book of My Covenant," and which He entrusted, during His last illness, to His eldest son 'Abdu'l-Baha. (Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, pp. 237-238)

Baha'u'llah's Will and Testament is concerned with the furtherance of His Cause. He makes the distinction clear between His Will and an ordinary will, from the outset. He begins His Last Will and Testament by informing us that it is not an ordinary Will that distributes one's material possessions:

Although the Realm of Glory hath none of the vanities of the world, yet within the treasury of trust and resignation We have bequeathed to Our heirs an excellent and priceless heritage. Earthly treasures We have not bequeathed, nor have We added such cares as they entail. (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 217)

Shoghi Effendi explains that the “excellent and priceless heritage” He bestows, is His Covenant. (God Passes By, p. 314). We can see this divine purpose in the central paragraph of His Will:

The Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsan, the Afnan and My Kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: 'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root'. The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [‘Abdu’l-Bahá]. (Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 221)

This is the purpose of Baha'u'llah's Will: Primarily, to designate His Successor, the One to Whom all of the believers should turn; and secondarily to give His last advice and admonitions. (Baha'u'llah addresses Abdu'l-Baha by the title He was then known by—Ghusn-i-Azam, the Most Mighty Branch. He assumed the title “Abdu'l-Baha,” literally “Servant of the Glory,” signifying Servant of Baha'u'llah, some years later.)

Shoghi Effendi makes this distinction between a believer's will—a will primarily concerned with personal and family matters—and the Will of the Head of the Faith, when he states that the Covenant-breakers viewed the Will of Baha'u'llah as primarily concerned with the private interests of Baha'u'llah's family whereas Abdu'l-Baha acclaimed it as a Covenant of world importance, pre-existent, peerless and unique in the history of all religions. (Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, p. 248)

And this is the point: The Will of the Head of the Faith is not a private document, it is a document “of world importance.” It is a document establishing the Divine Successorship—the Headship of the Baha'i Faith; and in my opinion, this may help us to understand why Shoghi Effendi was divinely guided to write no will and testament.

The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha

The contents of the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha bear a great similarity to the contents of the Kitab-i-`Ahd, and almost no similarity to that of a believer's will. He does make a statement of faith, but it is not a declaration of His own belief; rather, it sets forth what the Baha'is are to believe. He writes:

This is the foundation of the belief of the people of Baha (may my life be offered up for them): 'His Holiness, the Exalted One (the Bab), is the Manifestation of the Unity and Oneness of God and the Forerunner of the Ancient Beauty. His Holiness the Abha Beauty (may my life be a sacrifice for His steadfast friends) is the Supreme Manifestation of God and the Dayspring of His Most Divine Essence. All others are servants unto Him and do His bidding.' (The Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Baha, pp. 19-20)

There is no private aspect to Abdu'l-Baha's Will. It makes no reference to His personal possessions, or to their distribution. It does not make provision for His wife or His children, all of whom were adults; Shoghi Effendi saw to the needs of the Holy Mother until the end of her life. Abdu'l-Baha's Will bears almost no relation to the “testament” that Baha'u'llah directs every believer to write. The only significant parallel, is that it is a document intended to be carried out after His passing. As to the spiritual provisions of the Will, it is not the expression of faith of an individual believer; it is rather a command to the believers and the people of the world. It establishes the institutions to guide the Baha'i community, and describes the necessary civil international institutions to govern the world at large. It does not provide for payment of Huquq'u'llah or for contribution to the Baha'i Fund; Abdu'l-Baha (and Shoghi Effendi after Him) was the recipient of these resources, not the donor. My personal understanding is that Abdu'l-Baha did not write His Will because the law of the Aqdas required the writing of a “believer's will.” His Will and Testament is far, far greater in importance than a believer's will.

What would have been the character of the last Will and Testament of Shoghi Effendi?

The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha contained this instruction:

O ye beloved of the Lord! It is incumbent upon the Guardian of the Cause of God to appoint in his own life-time him that shall become his successor, that differences may not arise after his passing. He that is appointed must manifest in himself detachment from all worldly things, must be the essence of purity, must show in himself the fear of God, knowledge, wisdom and learning. Thus, should the first-born of the Guardian of the Cause of God not manifest in himself the truth of the words: -- 'The child is the secret essence of its sire,' that is, should he not inherit of the spiritual within him (the Guardian of the Cause of God) and his glorious lineage not be matched with a goodly character, then must he, (the Guardian of the Cause of God) choose another branch to succeed him. (The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 12)

The Guardian of the Cause is to appoint in his own life-time him that shall become his successor. Neither Baha'u'llah nor Abdu'l-Baha had made known the identity of Their Successors during Their lifetimes. They had appointed Their Successors during Their lifetimes, by specifying them in Their Wills, but had not made their identities known; this information was only promulgated after Their Ascensions. There is no provision directing the Guardian to make known the identity of the successor Guardian to the Baha'i community during his lifetime, nor is there a provision stating that his selection should be made in writing in his own last Will and Testament.

The Guardian of the Cause is directed to choose his successor, and to make the identity of his successor known to certain individuals during his own lifetime—the most distinguished believers in the world—the nine Hands of the Cause of God who work most closely with the Guardian:

The Hands of the Cause of God must elect from their own number nine persons that shall at all times be occupied in the important services in the work of the Guardian of the Cause of God. The election of these nine must be carried either unanimously or by majority from the company of the Hands of the Cause of God and these, whether unanimously or by a majority vote, must give their assent to the choice of the one whom the Guardian of the Cause of God hath chosen as his successor. This assent must be given in such wise as the assenting and dissenting voices may not be distinguished (i.e., secret ballot). (The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 12)

Putting all of this together, and making certain extrapolations, here is my personal understanding of how these provisions in the Master's Will might have been carried out had the circumstances allowed. The Guardian would select his successor, and, following the example of his Forbears, name him in writing in his own Will and Testament. He would then present his Will and Testament to the nine Hands of the Cause, who would familiarize themselves with the appearance of the Will, and give their assent to the Guardian's choice of successor. Perhaps they would all have countersigned the Will, confirming it as the Guardian's Will and Testament, and assenting to his choice of successor Guardian.

After the passing of the Guardian, these Hands would then present to the Universal House of Justice the Will and Testament of the Guardian. They would confirm that it was the same document that the Guardian had presented to them. The Universal House of Justice and the nine Hands would then present the new Guardian to the Baha'i world. These high officers who had been the closest persons to Shoghi Effendi, would be the first to turn to his successor Guardian. All of the Baha'is would be assured by this that the Guardian's will was authentic, and that that successor was the one who had actually been chosen by Shoghi Effendi. This is conjecture on my part, based on my understanding that Abdu'l-Baha put these provisions in His Will for unmistakable clarity, as safeguards to remove all doubt and place the successorship on an absolutely clear foundation. As He wrote in a passage quoted above, these provisions were so that differences would not arise.

The choice of successor had to be during “his own life-time” because the Master's Will required the Guardian to provide the identity of his successor to the nine Hands of the Cause for their assent. He would be of course available to them to personally verify the authenticity of his Will and his choice of successor; so that these Hands could, in turn, provide ironclad assurance to the Baha'i world when the time came, adding their personal testimony—these most trustworthy of all the believers in the world—to the written provisions in the Guardian's Will and Testament. During the lifetime of Shoghi Effendi he did not direct the Hands of the Cause to elect nine of their members to be involved in the important work of the Guardian; nor did he identify a successor Guardian, or show a Will and Testament to anyone.

Protection of the personal papers of Shoghi Effendi after his passing

Immediately upon the death of Shoghi Effendi, the Hands of the Cause of God secured the office and living quarters of Shoghi Effendi with iron bars and padlocks, and took other steps to insure that the personal papers of Shoghi Effendi would not be disturbed. Following Shoghi Effendi's funeral, the first Hands to return to the Holy Land opened the padlocked iron bars, entered the office of Shoghi Effendi, and placed seals on his safe and on his desk drawers. (Ministry of the Custodians, p. 26)

Four days later when all of the Hands who could travel had arrived in the Holy Land, nine Hands of the Cause entered the Guardian's quarters, verified that the seals were all intact and carefully searched the safe and the desk of Shoghi Effendi. They confirmed to their fellow Hands that he did not leave a Will and Testament. (Ministry of the Custodians, pp. 27-28)

Unanimous Proclamation of the Hands of the Cause of God stating that Shoghi Effendi designated no successor

The Hands of the Cause then held their First Conclave, in the Mansion of Bahji, at the conclusion of which they issued a number of documents. In their “Unanimous Proclamation” issued on November 25, 1957 the Hands of the Cause proclaimed that His Eminence the late Shoghi Effendi Rabbani, passed away in London (England) on the 4th of November, 1957, without having appointed his successor. This Proclamation was signed by all of the Hands of the Cause of God. (Ministry of the Custodians, pp. 28-30)

On the same date, November 25, 1957, the Hands of the Cause issued a Proclamation to the Baha'is of East and West, which contains this statement which is relevant to our subject:

On November 18th the Hands conducted a Memorial Meeting at Bahji, in the Haram-i-Aqdas surrounding the most sacred Shrine in the Bahá'í world, afterward entering the Holy Tomb itself and prostrating ourselves in utter humility at the Sacred Threshold.

On the following morning, November 19th, nine Hands of the Cause, selected from the Holy Land, and the several continents of East and West, with Amatu'l-Baha Ruhiyyih Khanum, broke the seals placed upon the beloved Guardian's safe and desk and made careful examination of their precious contents. These same Hands, rejoining the other Hands assembled in the Mansion of Baha'u'llah at Bahji, certified that Shoghi Effendi had left no Will and Testament. It was likewise certified that the beloved Guardian had left no heir. The Aghsan (branches) one and all are either dead or have been declared violators of the Covenant by the Guardian for their faithlessness to the Master's Will and Testament and their hostility to him named first Guardian in that sacred document.

The first effect of the realization that no successor to Shoghi Effendi could have been appointed by him was to plunge the Hands of the Cause into the very abyss of despair....(Ministry of the Custodians, pp. 35-36)

Please observe that all of the Hands of the Cause of God, including his widow Amatu'l-Baha Ruhiyyih Khanum, and including Charles Mason Remey, an American who later had the temerity to claim to be one of the Aghsan and Shoghi Effendi's hereditary successor, certified:

~That Shoghi Effendi left no will and testament

~That Shoghi Effendi left no heir

~That the Aghsan had all broken the Covenant

~That Shoghi Effendi could not have appointed a successor Guardian

As the Universal House of Justice has written:

Thus, as the Hands of the Cause stated in 1957, it is clear that there was no one he could have appointed in accordance with the provisions of the Will. To have made an appointment outside the clear and specific provisions of the Master's Will and Testament would have obviously been an impossible and unthinkable course of action for the Guardian, the divinely appointed upholder and defender of the Covenant.

("The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice," letter dated 27 May 1966, "Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986," paragraph 35.2, p. 83)

As provided in the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha (p. 12) Shoghi Effendi was to designate his eldest son as his successor for the hereditary office of the Guardianship. If his eldest son lacked the necessary qualifications, he was to select “another branch,” another of the Aghsan, the male lineage of Baha'u'llah, as his successor Guardian. As explained elsewhere on this site, the Guardianship was a hereditary office, and Shoghi Effendi could only choose his successor from among his sons or the other male descendants of Baha'u'llah. The male descendants of Baha'u'llah would have included Shoghi Effendi's brothers and male cousins, as well as the male descendants of the three half-brothers of Abdu'l-Baha. However, as the Hands certified, each and every one of them had broken the Covenant and had been expelled from the Faith by either Abdu'l-Baha or Shoghi Effendi. The subject of why the Aghsan were all expelled is addressed in Adib Taherzadeh's book “The Child of the Covenant” pp. 305-310, and in Chapter 32 of his book, “The Covenant of Baha'u'llah.”

Why didn't Shoghi Effendi write a last Will and Testament?

In my view, Shoghi Effendi did not write a will, because he had nothing to write in it. The heart of Baha'u'llah's Will was His designation of Abdu'l-Baha as His Successor. The heart of Abdu'l-Baha's Will was His designation of the twin institutions of the Universal House of Justice and the Guardian of the Cause as His Successors. Neither the Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah nor the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha contained the ordinary provisions for a believer's will, required by the Most Holy Book—it was beneath the station of these Documents. In my personal view, Their example shows that the Head of the Faith was not obligated to write a Will providing for distribution of His possessions. These Wills had a higher function as Documents of Succession. In the absence of a successor, Shoghi Effendi's could not write a will leaving his few worldly possessions—his garments to this person, his pens and map-making instruments to that person—it was unworthy of the station of the Will of the Head of the Faith. Since Shoghi Effendi could not designate a successor Guardian, he left no will.

A sign of his infallible guidance

The Universal House of Justice has written: The fact that Shoghi Effendi did not leave a will cannot be adduced as evidence of his failure to obey Bahá'u'lláh -- rather should we acknowledge that in his very silence there is a wisdom and a sign of his infallible guidance (“The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice,” letter dated 27 May 1966, Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 35.3, p. 84)

Shoghi Effendi was, in every area of his life, a very meticulous and consummately responsible man. How much more, when it came to the Cause of God—he put it first and above all else. He had no male heir to name as his successor. He was keenly aware that the spiritual extinction of the Aghsan meant that he could not designate “another branch” as his successor. He did not write a will, not because he forgot, not because he was too busy, not because, God forbid, he was disobedient to either the law of the Aqdas, or to the provision in the Master's Will to designate a successor Guardian. He was silent, as the House of Justice writes, because he was guided by God to be silent.

Shoghi Effendi was the infallible Interpreter of the Word of God. However, just as the infallibility of the Universal House of Justice extends to matters besides the enactment of legislation, the infallibility of the Guardian includes matters besides interpretation. Shoghi Effendi stated more than once that he was infallible in the protection of the Faith:

Just as the National Assembly has full jurisdiction over all its local Assemblies, the Guardian has full jurisdiction over all National Assemblies; he is not required to consult them, if he believes a certain decision is advisable in the interests of the Cause. He is the judge of the wisdom and advisability of the decisions made by these bodies, and not they of the wisdom and advisability of his decisions. A perusal of the Will and Testament makes this principle quite clear.

He is the Guardian of the Cause in the very fullness of that term, and the appointed interpreter of its teachings, and is guided in his decisions to do that which protects it and fosters its growth and highest interests.

(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian dated May 13, 1945, Letters from the Guardian to Australia and New Zealand, pp. 55-56)

The Guardian's infallibility covers interpretation of the Revealed Word and its application. Likewise any instructions he may issue having to do with the protection of the Faith, or its well being must be closely obeyed, as he is infallible in the protection of the Faith. He is assured the guidance of both Bahá'u'lláh and the Báb, as the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá clearly reveals. (From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer dated August 20, 1956; Lights of Guidance, p. 313, #1055)

The Guardian was infallibly guided in the protection of the Faith; and there is no matter more intimately connected with protection than what he himself terms “the all-important subject of the succession.” (God Passes By, p. 213) Shoghi Effendi was incapable of making a mistake in this area. Likewise, in my personal view, Shoghi Effendi did not direct the Hands of the Cause to elect nine of their members, because the most important work of these nine would have been to give their assent to the Guardian's choice of successor. Since he could not name a successor, it was not yet time for this body within the institution of the Hands to be brought into being.

After the passing of Shoghi Effendi, the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha continued to protect and guide the Cause of God. Pursuant to its provisions, the body termed by Shoghi Effendi 'that fountain-head of God's World Order,' the Universal House of Justice, was first elected in 1963.

As explained elsewhere on this site, the Universal House of Justice is not Shoghi Effendi's successor, nor the successor to the Hands of the Cause of God. The Universal House of Justice, to which all must turn (Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 26) is one of the twin successors of Abdu'l-Baha, named in the same Document that provided the authority for Shoghi Effendi to lead the Faith.

There being no successor to Shoghi Effendi as Guardian of the Cause of God, the Universal House of Justice is the Head of the Faith and its supreme institution, to which all must turn, and on it rests the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the unity and progress of the Cause of God. (The Constitution of The Universal House of Justice, p. 4)

The issue of the Will of Shoghi Effendi is actually not contested by the minority view. It is established that no will was written. What is disputed is that a successor must be named in a will. The W&T calls for the designated successor to be appointed within the lifetime of the Guardian. The inference3s to the poissible motivation of Shoghie Effendi not having written a will are not in keeping with what we know from the W&T. Poirier writes in conclusion to this question:

As explained elsewhere on this site, the Universal House of Justice is not Shoghi Effendi's successor, nor the successor to the Hands of the Cause of God. The Universal House of Justice, to which all must turn (Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 26) is one of the twin successors of Abdu'l-Baha, named in the same Document that provided the authority for Shoghi Effendi to lead the Faith.

There being no successor to Shoghi Effendi as Guardian of the Cause of God, the Universal House of Justice is the Head of the Faith and its supreme institution, to which all must turn, and on it rests the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the unity and progress of the Cause of God. (The Constitution of The Universal House of Justice, p. 4)

Poiriers argument is shaped by the limitations of the knowledge by which he is writing. It is based on an assumption that there is no Guardian therefore the UHJ is of equal stature to the Guardianship and that there are in fact two successors of co-equality to each other. When it is established in the language of the W&T that they are not co-equal one is dependent on the membership of the other to function, the UHJ is dependent on the Guardian. The Guardian is not dependent on the UHJ to function as the Guardianship did for 36 years without a UHJ to advise him.

The minority community also points out to the issue that the UHJ was in a process of being established by Shoghi Effendi during his lifetime and had appointed one to represent him on that assembly it's president, Mason Remey. It points out that although there was not a will there was a legacy and intent established by Shoghi Effendi in appointing who he did to be on the embryonic UHJ and Shoghi Effendi was following the plan of God when he was setting up the UHJ the way he was and that was a fullfillment of the Divine Decree. That was then disobeyed by the Hands of the Cause of God after the death of Shoghi Effendi.

Is the Universal House of Justice in the Line of Successorship?

Majority Opinon Minority Opinion

I have sometimes heard Baha'is say that Bahá'u'lláh designated His Successor `Abdu'l-Bahá by name and in writing, in His Will and Testament; and that in turn Abdu'l-Baha designated His successor Shoghi Effendi, by name and in writing, in His Will and Testament. Then after stating that Shoghi Effendi passed away without being able to name a successor and without leaving a will, there is a somewhat vague discussion of how the Hands of the Cause led the Faith for a time, and then they called for the election of the Universal House of Justice; and that the Universal House of Justice is now the Head of the Baha'i Faith, which we Baha'is believe to be infallible.

I suggest that this approach leaves much to be desired as it greatly understates the position of the Universal House of Justice; it does not squarely state just as with Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi, the Universal House of Justice is in the line of Successorship. As Shoghi Effendi writes, Bahá'u'lláh and Abdu'l-Baha have “in unequivocal and emphatic language, appointed those twin institutions of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship as their chosen Successors” (The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh, pp. 19-20).

The Covenant of Baha'u'llah

Let's review the line of Successorship. In the Most Holy Book (paragraph 121) Baha'u'llah establishes His Successor by saying to “turn” to“Him ... who hath branched” from Baha'u'llah, though He does not designate Him by name. Later, in His Will and Testament (Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 221) He identifies this Branch—Abdu'l-Baha, then known by the title The Most Mighty Branch—and directs the Baha'is to “turn to” Him. This language “turn to”, designates the Successorship; these simple words establish Abdu'l-Baha as the Center of His Covenant—the Center to Whom everyone must turn. In another Tablet, Baha'u'llah adds, “Whoso turneth towards Him hath turned towards God, and whoso turneth away from Him hath turned away from My beauty, hath repudiated My Proof, and transgressed against Me.” (Quoted in The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 135). This is Covenant language. Baha'u'llah names His Successor and implicitly promises that God will guide Him. He takes from the Baha'is a promise to turn to Him, and warns them of the consequences of turning away from Him; thus setting up both sides of the Covenant—God's promise, and humanity's promise.

The Covenant of Abdu'l-Baha

In His Will and Testament, p. 11, Abdu'l-Baha directs all of the Baha'is to “turn unto Shoghi Effendi.” This establishes Shoghi Effendi as Abdu'l-Baha's Successor. Abdu'l-Baha also writes, “He that obeyeth him not, hath not obeyed God; he that turneth away from him, hath turned away from God and he that denieth him, hath denied the True One.” (The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 25) So in Abdu'l-Baha's Will and Testament, we have a parallel to the provisions of Baha'u'llah's Covenant.

The Twin Covenants of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha

In fact, Shoghi Effendi has written of “the twin Covenants of Bahá’u’lláh and of ‘Abdu’l-Baha” (Citadel of Faith, p. 76) and that the believers “must ponder deeply over the significance and implications of the Covenants of Bahá'u'lláh and `Abdu'l-Bahá, for these form the hub of the Bahá'í wheel, so to speak, the point of unity and strength for all the believers all over the world. Without these Covenants the Divine Protection of God over this new world Faith would not exist. Obedience to these Covenants is the stronghold of all the Bahá'ís, everywhere." (The Light of Divine Guidance, Volume 2, p. 89.)

So when we speak of “the Baha'i Covenant,” what we really mean is what Shoghi Effendi terms “the Covenants of both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.” (Messages to Canada letter of 26 June 1956; Letters to Australia and New Zealand 1923-1957, p. 80; Messages to the Antipodes, p. 271) The Center to whom Baha'u'llah directed everyone to turn, was Abdu'l-Baha; and the Center to whom Abdu'l-Baha directed everyone to turn, was Shoghi Effendi. Or is that correct? While it is accurate to state that Shoghi Effendi was the Successor to Abdu'l-Baha, as we will now see, it is an incomplete statement, and is not the way Shoghi Effendi himself stated it.

Abdu'l-Baha's Successors

Through his secretary, Shoghi Effendi wrote of "the Covenant the Master made with the Bahá'ís that they should accept His administration after Him”. (Letter on behalf of Shoghi Effendi dated October 21, 1932; Bahá'í News #80, January, 1934, pp. 5-6)

So we see that “His administration” was Abdu'l-Baha's Successor—meaning the twin institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice. Where else does Shoghi Effendi say this? As quoted above, Shoghi Effendi wrote that “in unequivocal and emphatic language” Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha had appointed “those twin institutions of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship as their chosen Successors”. (The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh, pp. 19-20). Shoghi Effendi also wrote,

“Both in the administrative provisions of the Bahá'í Dispensation, and in the matter of succession, as embodied in the twin institutions of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship, the followers of Bahá'u'lláh can summon to their aid such irrefutable evidences of Divine Guidance that none can resist, that none can belittle or ignore.” (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 21)

Abdu'l-Baha appoints His twin successors

We see this appointment of both of these institutions in these words of Abdu'l-Baha, the closing words of His Last Will and Testament:

“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.”

(Will and Testament, p. 25)

We also see Covenant language in this admonition, which promises unfailing divine guidance through both Baha'u'llah (“The Abha Beauty”) and The Bab (“The Exalted One” ) to these twin institutions, and takes from the believers a Covenant to turn to them:

“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 the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). Whatsoever they decide is of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither obeyeth them, hath not obeyed God; whoso rebelleth against him and against them hath rebelled against God; whoso opposeth him hath opposed God; whoso contendeth with them hath contended with God; whoso disputeth with him hath disputed with God; whoso denieth him hath denied God; whoso disbelieveth in him hath disbelieved in God; whoso deviateth, separateth himself and turneth aside from him hath in truth deviated, separated himself and turned aside from God. May the wrath, the fierce indignation, the vengeance of God rest upon him!”

(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 11)

This strongly-worded and emphatic language warning the believers not to turn against the Guardian of the Cause or the Universal House of Justice—the very heart of Abdu'l-Baha's Covenant—is Covenant language that exactly parallels Baha'u'llah's admonition not to turn against Abdu'l-Baha, quoted above. It expresses what Shoghi Effendi stated are the “twin Covenants” of Baha'u'llah and of Abdu'l-Baha.

What is the Line of Succession in the Baha'i Faith?

I suggest that based on these statements in the Baha'i Writings, a more accurate statement of the line of Succession is: That Abdu'l-Baha is the immediate Successor to Baha'u'llah; and that the twin institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice are the Successors to both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.

The Universal House of Justice is not the Head of the Baha'i Faith because the Hands of the Cause decided it should be so. The House of Justice is the Head of the Faith to which all must turn because Abdu'l-Baha designated it in His Will; and because Shoghi Effendi made clear that along with the institution of the Guardianship, the Universal House of Justice is the Successor to both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha. The House of Justice is in the Line of Successorship. As we will see in another posting, Baha'u'llah provided the Universal House of Justice to be in the line of succession in His Most Holy Book.

The House of Justice has used this terminology in its own Constitution, writing that the Covenant “continues to fulfil its life-giving purpose through the agency of the Universal House of Justice whose fundamental object, as one of the twin successors of Bahá'u'lláh and `Abdu'l-Bahá, is to ensure the continuity of that divinely-appointed authority which flows from the Source of the Faith…”

(Constitution of the Universal House of Justice, p. 4)

The issue here is not whether the UHJ stands in the line of succession, both viewpoints agree on this point. The issue is the composition of what constitutes a valid Universal House of Justice. For the minority viewpoint as already mentioned the essentiality of a living Guardian is needed for the UHJ to function properly as explained in the written word of the leaders of the Faith from Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Bah and Shoghi Effendi. It is true that the UHJ was envisioned to lead the Faith at a future point, what is not true is that the UHJ can rightfully function absent the leadership of the hereditary principle of the Guardian.

Is there provision in the Baha'i Writings for the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly with only its elected membership?

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

In His Will and Testament, Abdu'l-Baha provides for the Universal House of Justice to function in two ways: With the Guardian or his representative, or with only its elected membership. Provision for this is not only in the Will and Testament; it is explicit in another Tablet written by Abdu'l-Baha. In both instances, Abdu'l-Baha was in mortal danger, and He arranged for the Universal House of Justice to be elected following His passing. At the time, Shoghi Effendi was a young boy, unable to assume his functions as Guardian of the Cause. Abdu'l-Baha provided for the House of Justice to be established and to function with only its elected members, and provided that it would be divinely guided when it did so.

As the Universal House of Justice has explained:

“At a time described by the Guardian as 'the darkest moments of His [the Master's] life, under 'Abdu'l-Hamid's regime, when He stood ready to be deported to the most inhospitable regions of Northern Africa,' and when even His life was threatened, `Abdu'l-Bahá wrote to Haji Mirza Taqi Afnan, the cousin of the Báb and chief builder of the 'Ishqabad Temple, commanding him to arrange for the election of the Universal House of Justice should the threats against the Master materialize. [The Will and Testament p. 20; The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 17] The second part of the Master's Will is also relevant to such a situation and should be studied by the friends.” (Messages From the Universal House of Justice 1963 to 1986, paragraph 23.15, p. 53)

In this Tablet, written during the boyhood of Shoghi Effendi, Abdu'l-Baha directs the relatives of the Bab together with the Hands of the Cause of God to carry out the provisions of His Will and Testament and arrange for the election of the Universal House of Justice.

In like manner in the Second Part of His Will and Testament, written when His life was in imminent peril, He directed that the Universal House of Justice should be established:

“O dearly beloved friends! I am now in very great danger and the hope of even an hour's life is lost to me. I am thus constrained to write these lines for the protection of the Cause of God, the preservation of His Law, the safeguarding of His Word and the safety of His Teachings.” (The Will and Testament, p. 19)

In that same paragraph of His Will He explains that the Universal House of Justice is to be elected; and He promises that the decisions of its members – its elected members – are “the truth and purpose of God Himself.”

He writes:

“Unto the Most Holy Book every one must turn, and all that is not expressly recorded therein must be referred to the Universal House of Justice. That which this body, whether unanimously or by a majority doth carry, that is verily the truth and the purpose of God Himself. Whoso doth deviate therefrom is verily of them that love discord, hath shown forth malice, and turned away from the Lord of the Covenant. By this House is meant that Universal House of Justice which is to be elected from all countries, that is from those parts in the East and West where the loved ones are to be found, after the manner of the customary elections in Western countries such as those of England.

“It is incumbent upon these members (of the Universal House of Justice) to gather in a certain place and deliberate upon all problems which have caused difference, questions that are obscure and matters that are not expressly recorded in the Book. Whatsoever they decide has the same effect as the Text itself.”

(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, pp. 19-20)

Please note that after stating that “By this House is meant that Universal House of Justice which is to be elected,” He directs that “these members”, i.e. the elected members, are to convene and deliberate. He does not, in this Second Part of His Will, written when His death was imminent, mention the Institution of the Guardianship, or Shoghi Effendi, who was then a boy of 11. In this way, Abdu'l-Baha provides for the Universal House of Justice to function as the Head of the Faith, infallibly, without the presence of the Guardian. I have gone into this in more detail here.

Poirier here makes some historical arguments for the Universal House of Justice functioning on it's own. However there are two problems with this argument. Both historical situations still had a living Guardian in existence. The first instance, Abdu'l-Baha was still alive, the UHJ was to assist him if he was in fact exiled. We know from his Will and Testament that even if he were not alive, the child Shoghi Effendi is still appointed the Guardian. The second historical occurence mentioned occurs in the Second Part of the Will and Testament as mentioned by Poirier Abdu'l-Baha thought his life to be under imminent threat, again the Guardianship is still intact but in the form of the child Shoghi Effendi who would become it's head upon maturity. This directive was in fact superseded by the Third part of the Will and Testament which reinstates the structure of the first part of the Will and Testament to turn onto the Guardian of the Cause of God. The develpment of the UHJ was long desired by both Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi however there is no indication that the UHJ was ever intended to function seperate from the Guardianship whether as a temporary leader of the community if needed when Shoghi was a child, or as a successor to the leadership of the Faith. There is no line of succession of the UHJ absent the integral functioning of the Guardian of the Cause.

Is the Universal House of Justice Authorized to Function without the Presence of the Guardian as its "Sacred Head"

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

In His Will, Abdu'l-Baha directed the Baha'is to “turn to” Shoghi Effendi (pp. 11, 26) and the Universal House of Justice (pp. 19, 26), and warned that anyone who turned away from either of them was turning away from God Himself (p. 11). He also provides that the Guardian of the Cause was to serve as “the sacred head and the distinguished member for life” of that Body.

From the time immediately following the passing of `Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi was presented as the Head of the Universal House of Justice. His photograph was published in Star of the West in January 1922, captioned “Guardian of the Baha'i Cause and Head of the House of Justice.”

Likewise, in March of 1922 Shoghi Effendi wrote a letter in which he stated “'Abdu'l-Bahá in his testament has appointed me to be the head of the universal council which is to be duly elected by national councils representative of the followers of Bahá'u'lláh in different countries..." (Quoted in The Priceless Pearl, p. 49)

From the beginning, Shoghi Effendi anticipated that the two institutions would function together, as Abdu'l-Baha provided in the First Part of His Will. However, it became apparent to Shoghi Effendi that conditions in the Baha'i community would not permit this, and he was divinely guided to postpone its election. As he wrote in 1923:

“With these Assemblies, local as well as national, harmoniously, vigorously, and efficiently functioning throughout the Bahá'í world, the only means for the establishment of the Supreme House of Justice will have been secured. And when this Supreme Body will have been properly established, it will have to consider afresh the whole situation, and lay down the principle which shall direct, so long as it deems advisable, the affairs of the Cause.”

(Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration, p. 40)

Please note: He states that the Universal House of Justice must be “properly” established. Though the Will had provided that he would serve as a member of, and the Head of, the Universal House of Justice, he could not, and would not, allow it to be established other than as required by the spirit and meaning of the Will. He made this point again in a letter he wrote in 1929:

“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.” (The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 7)

Does anyone question that this decision of his was divinely guided? And yet, it meant that he functioned alone, not as Head of the House of Justice, as provided in the Will. It is significant that Shoghi Effendi states that while he is postponing the election of the House of Justice this is not renunciation of the terms of the Will, but rather is faithfulness to its provisions—this is the only way of remaining “in conformity with the explicit provisions of the Will.”

Although the Will anticipates these institutions functioning together, and does not expressly state that the Guardian could function alone and without the elected membership of the Universal House of Justice, no faithful Baha'i would claim that Shoghi Effendi was anything but scrupulously faithful to the Will, or that in the absence of the Universal House of Justice he lacked the divine guidance to carry out his function as Head of the Faith. In like manner, circumstances within the Cause have now made it impossible for the Universal House of Justice to function with the Guardian of the Cause present in its deliberations. When Shoghi Effendi functioned without the Universal House of Justice, he had no input at all from that divine institution, which had not yet been brought into being. Now, although the Guardian of the Cause is not present in its deliberations, the Universal House of Justice has a vast body of Shoghi Effendi's written guidance. Even a cursory glance at any of the instruments of divine guidance flowing from the Universal House of Justice shows how utterly and faithfully it relies on the Institution of the Guardianship.

An analogy to the carrying out of the provisions of the Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah is apposite. In The Book of the Covenant, Baha'u'llah provided for Abdu'l-Baha, then known as The Most Mighty Branch, to serve as Head of the Faith after Him, and to be succeeded by His younger half-brother, Mirza Muhammad-`Ali, known as “The Greater Branch.” The provisions for the successorship in the Faith in Baha'u'llah's Will and Testament are:

“The Will of the divine Testator is this: It is incumbent upon the Aghsan, the Afnan and My Kindred to turn, one and all, their faces towards the Most Mighty Branch. Consider that which We have revealed in Our Most Holy Book: 'When the ocean of My presence hath ebbed and the Book of My Revelation is ended, turn your faces toward Him Whom God hath purposed, Who hath branched from this Ancient Root.' The object of this sacred verse is none other except the Most Mighty Branch [Abdu'l-Bahá]. Thus have We graciously revealed unto you Our potent Will, and I am verily the Gracious, the All-Powerful. Verily God hath ordained the station of the Greater Branch [Muhammad Ali] to be beneath that of the Most Great Branch [Abdu'l-Bahá]. He is in truth the Ordainer, the All-Wise. We have chosen 'the Greater' after 'the Most Great', as decreed by Him Who is the All-Knowing, the All-Informed.”

(The Kitab-i-`Ahd,Tablets of Baha'u'llah, pp. 221-222)

Baha'u'llah designates the Greater Branch to serve as the Head of the Faith “after” the Most Great Branch. However, circumstances prevented this. Mirza Muhammad-`Ali broke the Covenant, so this provision of the Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah never came into being.

Shoghi Effendi speaks of the Covenants of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as "twin Covenants", and Their Wills as one Will. After the Ascension of Abdu'l-Baha, these two Documents were found wrapped together as one, among Abdu'l-Baha's possessions.

By analogy, Abdu'l-Baha directed Shoghi Effendi to designate a successor Guardian—either his eldest son, or another Branch from among the male descendants of Baha'u'llah. Because Covenant-breaking had infected every male in the holy family, Shoghi Effendi, remaining scrupulously faithful to every provision of the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, was unable to make such an appointment. The fact that Mirza Muhammad-`Ali had been faithless to the Will and Testament of Baha'u'llah, did not mean that his not serving as the Head of the Faith after Abdu'l-Baha was a breach of the provisions of Baha'u'llah's Covenant. When describing the violations of the Covenant of Baha'u'llah by Mirza Muhammad-`Ali, Abdu'l-Baha did not expressly say, "This provision of the Kitab-i-`Ahd is no longer operative," nor did He explain how a provision made by Baha'u'llah Himself could remain unfulfilled. He explained that Mirza Muhammad-`Ali had broken the Covenant, and that in accordance with another Tablet of Baha'u'llah, Mirza Muhammad-`Ali had been cast out of the Cause. He states that this was consistent with the exact Text and required by faithfulness to the Covenant of Baha'u'llah:

"Now, that the true Faith of God may be shielded and protected, His Law guarded and preserved and His Cause remain safe and secure, it is incumbent upon everyone to hold fast unto the Text of the clear and firmly established blessed verse, revealed about him."

(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 5)

The "clear and firmly established blessed verse" was from a different Tablet of Baha'u'llah.

In like manner, the fact that all of the surviving Aghsan had broken the Covenant, resulting in Shoghi Effendi's inability to name a successor Guardian—a fact attested to by all of the Hands of the Cause including Mason Remey—did not mean that the absence of a successor Guardian was a breach of the provisions Abdu'l-Baha's Covenant. It was not lack of faithfulness, but strict adherence to the provisions of the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, that led Shoghi Effendi to not appoint a successor Guardian. In both instances, regarding the carrying out of the provisions of successorship in the Will of Baha'u'llah and that of Abdu'l-Baha, it was the faithlessness of the Aghsan that led to this circumstance.

And, in both instances, the successor who thereafter led the Faith was divinely guided. Instead of Mirza Muhammad-Ali, Shoghi Effendi led the Faith for 36 years; and without the presence of a successor Guardian, the Universal House of Justice has led the Faith for 46 years as of this writing.

Shoghi Effendi emphasized the centrality of both of these divinely-ordained institutions, describing the Institution of Guardianship as the "head cornerstone" of the Administrative Order, and the Universal House of Justice as the "apex" of the Administrative Order, as its "dome, the final unit crowning the entire edifice." He emphasized the greatness of the Institution of the Guardianship, referring to it as "the pivot of Abdu'l-Baha's Will and Testament," and the Universal House of Justice as "that central pivot of the people of Baha." (Letter dated 30 October 1924 to the Spiritual Assembly of Tihran, translated from Persian; Baha'i World Vol. XIV, p. 436; Compilation on Establishment of the Universal House of Justice)

These Spiritual Assemblies have been primarily constituted to carry out these affairs, and secondly to lay a perfect and strong foundation for the establishment of the divine and Universal House of Justice. When that central pivot of the people of Baha shall be effectively, majestically and firmly established, a new era will dawn, heavenly bounties and graces will pour out from that Source, and the all-encompassing promises will be fulfilled. (Ibid.)

Just as Shoghi Effendi had to serve his entire 36-year ministry without the benefit of the "dome" of the Administrative Order, the presence of the "no less essential institution" of the Universal House of Justice; the Universal House of Justice must now function without the presence of the Guardian of the Cause as its “sacred head,” and there is provision in the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha for it to do so. He spoke of these institutions as "inseparable" at that time, even before the Universal House of Justice came into being; and it is no less true of these "twin institutions" today. In neither situation, however, is the Master's promise of the divine guidance flowing from both the Bab and Baha'u'llah to these sacred institutions, affected, as each of these institutions is independently promised that guidance; and both of them have demonstrated, by their spirit and by their deeds, that they receive it.

As the body Shoghi Effendi spoke of as "the divinely ordained, the Supreme House of Justice" has written:

“Whereas he obviously envisaged their functioning together, it cannot logically be deduced from this that one is unable to function in the absence of the other. During the whole thirty-six years of his Guardianship Shoghi Effendi functioned without the Universal House of Justice. Now the Universal House of Justice must function without the Guardian, but the principle of inseparability remains. The Guardianship does not lose its significance nor position in the Order of Bahá'u'lláh merely because there is no living Guardian. We must guard against two extremes: one is to argue that because there is no Guardian all that was written about the Guardianship and its position in the Bahá'í World Order is a dead letter and was unimportant; the other is to be so overwhelmed by the significance of the Guardianship as to underestimate the strength of the Covenant, or to be tempted to compromise with the clear texts in order to find somehow, in some way, a Guardian."

("The Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice," letter dated 27 May 1966, Messages from The Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, Paragraph 35.9, p. 87)

"The fact that Shoghi Effendi did not leave a will cannot be adduced as evidence of his failure to obey Bahá'u'lláh -- rather should we acknowledge that in his very silence there is a wisdom and a sign of his infallible guidance. We should ponder deeply the writings that we have, and seek to understand the multitudinous significances that they contain. Do not forget that Shoghi Effendi said two things were necessary for a growing understanding of the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh: the passage of time and the guidance of the Universal House of Justice."

(From a letter dated 27 May 1966, Messages from The Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, Paragraph 35.3, p. 84)

Again in this section Poirier relies on the equivocation argument that there are twin institutions of equal weight he wrote:

Just as Shoghi Effendi had to serve his entire 36-year ministry without the benefit of the "dome" of the Administrative Order, the presence of the "no less essential institution" of the Universal House of Justice; the Universal House of Justice must now function without the presence of the Guardian of the Cause as its “sacred head,” and there is provision in the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha for it to do so. He spoke of these institutions as "inseparable" at that time, even before the Universal House of Justice came into being; and it is no less true of these "twin institutions" today. In neither situation, however, is the Master's promise of the divine guidance flowing from both the Bab and Baha'u'llah to these sacred institutions, affected, as each of these institutions is independently promised that guidance; and both of them have demonstrated, by their spirit and by their deeds, that they receive it.

He is arguing that infallibility is conferred independently on each. Which is true, but this is where the disagreement is the majority defintion of the Univesal House of Justice is different from the minority definition of the Universal House of Justice because the minority position holds that the UHJ is composed of an executive, the Guardian of the Cause, and a legislative elected body. Not as the majority position is argueing hat the UHJ is just a legislative body, that the Guardian is seperate from the UHJ in it's composition which is not according to the explicit text of the W&T.

What was the Authority of the Hands of the Cause of God to Lead the Baha'i Faith?

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

What authority did the Hands of the Cause have, to lead the Baha'i Faith?

Shoghi Effendi had referred to `Abdu'l-Bahá as the "Executive" of Bahá’u’lláh's authority (God Passes By, p. 245), an authority which was exercised by `Abdu'l-Bahá both during Bahá’u’lláh's lifetime, and after His ascension. Likewise, he wrote that the Hands of the Cause possessed "Executive authority," an authority they faithfully exercised throughout their ministry:

"The Hands of the Cause will have executive authority in so far as they carry out the work of the Guardian." (From a letter on behalf of the Guardian dated 31 March 1949, The Light of Divine Guidance, Volume 2, p. 82)

The Hands were faithful to the instructions and to the Plan established by Shoghi Effendi, which they carried out.

The matter of the authority exercised by the Hands during their leadership of the Baha'i Faith (1957-1963) is fully explained in a letter of the Universal House of Justice found here, from which an excerpt follows.

Brent

__________________

The letter which you quote, written on behalf of the Guardian on 31 March 1949, some two years before the formal appointment of the Hands of the Cause, stated that "The Hands of the Cause will have executive authority in so far as they carry out the work of the Guardian." On 4 June 1957, some six years after the appointment of the first contingent of Hands of the Cause, and but four months before his passing, the Guardian referred to the "TWIN FUNCTIONS PROTECTING PROPAGATING FAITH BAHA'U'LLAH" invested in the Institution of the Hands of the Cause by "VIRTUE AUTHORITY CONFERRED TESTAMENT CENTRE COVENANT", and stated: "TO ITS NEWLY ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY ASSIST NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLIES BAHA'I WORLD SPECIFIC PURPOSE EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTING WORLD SPIRITUAL CRUSADE PRIMARY OBLIGATION WATCH OVER ENSURE PROTECTION BAHA'I WORLD COMMUNITY IN CLOSE COLLABORATION THESE SAME NATIONAL ASSEMBLIES NOW ADDED."

Although the authority to expel Covenant-breakers had been conferred upon the Hands of the Cause in the Will and Testament, the Guardian had reserved the exercise of this authority to himself during his lifetime. In his last message to the Baha'i world in October 1957, when he appointed the last contingent of Hands, he characterized them as "the Chief Stewards of Baha'u'llah's embryonic World Commonwealth, who have been invested by the unerring Pen of the Centre of His Covenant with the dual function of guarding over the security, and of ensuring the propagation, if His Father's Faith." He referred further to "their sacred responsibility as protectors of the Faith", designating them "high-ranking officers of a fast evolving world Administrative Order" and members of "one of the cardinal and pivotal institutions" of the Faith.

Equipped with such powers, and having been elevated to such a high position, the Hands of the Cause concluded that, among all the then existing institutions of the Faith, it was upon them, as Chief Stewards, that the responsibility for directing the affairs of the Cause rested pending the election of the Universal House of Justice.

The body of the Hands of the Cause, at their first conclave, constituted a group of nine Hands to act as an executive nucleus and "conduct and protect the affairs of the Faith from its World Centre" ["The Ministry of the Custodians," p. 39] and "carry on from this Centre the provisions of the World Baha'i Crusade". ["The Ministry of the Custodians," p. 31.] These nine Hands were designated "The Custodians of the Baha'i Faith" and, following legal advice, they immediately asked the twenty-six National Spiritual Assemblies operating at that time throughout the Baha'i world to pass resolutions confirming their support of the Custodians, and to send letters to the World Centre pledging their allegiance. The text of the letters received are all published on pages 41 to 50 of "The Ministry of the Custodians."

It was on such a strong foundation of doctrinal and legal authority that the Hands of the Cause, and the nucleus of nine Custodians in the Holy Land, could bring the World Crusade of the beloved Guardian to its consummation, protect the Faith from the divisive effects of Mason Remey's unfounded claim to the Guardianship, and call for the election of the Universal House of Justice in 1963.

Poirier here makes an argument for the acceptance of the authority of the Hands of the Cause of God to lead the Faith after the death of Shoghi Effendi. THis is a pivotal disagreement between the two positions. With the minority arguing that the Hands never had that authority because in the W&T they are delegated to follow the guidance of the living Guardian not to act on their own without a Guardian. The minority community also points to the historical fact that the Baha'i institution that was already being developed as the Center of the Cause was that of the embryonic Universal House of Justice, the International Baha'i Council, which the minority argues was the true center of the Faith after the passing of Shoghi Effendi. The Hands, who as defined by the text of the W&T Authority exists at a subsidiary level then that of the Center of the Cause are noted by Poirier:

"The Hands of the Cause will have executive authority in so far as they carry out the work of the Guardian." On 4 June 1957, some six years after the appointment of the first contingent of Hands of the Cause, and but four months before his passing, the Guardian referred to the "TWIN FUNCTIONS PROTECTING PROPAGATING FAITH BAHA'U'LLAH" invested in the Institution of the Hands of the Cause by "VIRTUE AUTHORITY CONFERRED TESTAMENT CENTRE COVENANT", and stated: "TO ITS NEWLY ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY ASSIST NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLIES BAHA'I WORLD SPECIFIC PURPOSE EFFECTIVELY PROSECUTING WORLD SPIRITUAL CRUSADE PRIMARY OBLIGATION WATCH OVER ENSURE PROTECTION BAHA'I WORLD COMMUNITY IN CLOSE COLLABORATION THESE SAME NATIONAL ASSEMBLIES NOW ADDED."

This comment does not give the Hands any executive authority outside the direct guidance of the living Guardian. For it says so, "carry out the work of the Guardian". Even in the delegation of their roles was to assist in teaching, educating, as is directed in the W&T. There is no mention of occurence of the Hands being given any leadership position in the Faith in the sense of the Center of the Cause. As stated several times by Poirier the UHJ was in the line of succession, there is no agrument there both are in agreement there. However, now we are to accept all of a sudden ignore the embryonic UHJ and accept the authority of the Hands, which cannot be shown to be an instrument of equivocation to the Center of the Cause for they were structurally subservient to the true Center of the Cause, the Guardian of the Cause.

Poierier further quotes as argumentation:

." He referred further to "their sacred responsibility as protectors of the Faith", designating them "high-ranking officers of a fast evolving world Administrative Order" and members of "one of the cardinal and pivotal institutions" of the Faith

This does not establish their authority to be the leaders of the Faith either. It does however confirm their role according to the W&T to be helpers of the Guardian.

The Universal House of Justice is the Marja and is AUthorized to Receive and Disburse the Huquq'u'llah, the Right of God

Majority Opinion Minority Opinion

A number of the functions of the Head of the Faith were shared – could be properly exercised by either the Universal House of Justice or the Guardian of the Cause. The Huququ'llah, or Right of God, is one of those.

The Huququ'llah, or Right of God, is offered through the Head of the Faith at any particular time. There was no specific provision made by Baha'u'llah that after Him the Right of God should be paid through `Abdu'l-Baha; He simply designated Abdu'l-Baha as the "marja'", an Arabic term meaning the Center to Whom all must turn, and the Right of God was paid through Him.

Abdu'l-Baha used this term, marja', in His Will and Testament to refer to both of His Successors, the twin Institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice:

"... he is the sign of God, the chosen branch, the Guardian of the Cause of God, he unto whom all the Aghsan, the Afnan, the Hands of the Cause of God and His loved ones must turn." (Will and Testament, p. 11, italics added)

By this House is meant the Universal House of Justice, that is, in all countries a secondary House of Justice must be instituted, and these secondary Houses of Justice must elect the members of the Universal one. Unto this body all things must be referred. (Will and Testament, p. 14, italics added)

In a highly significant Tablet to Jinab-i-Natiq-i-Ardistani, dated 15 Dhi'l-Qa'dih 1338, (i.e. about one year before His Ascension) Abdu'l-Baha states that the Universal House of Justice is the marja'. Although the letter to Abdu'l-Baha from Jinab-i-Natiq-i-Ardistani has not survived, it appears that the Islamic Tradition to which Abdu'l-Baha refers is the one from the Prophet Muhammad concerning His Book and His Family, quoted in paragraph 222 of the Book of Certitude, and discussed here.

The transliteration from the Persian of the relevant portion of this Tablet is as follows:

"Hadith-i-ki su'al nimudih budid ta'alluq bi kawr-i-Furqan dasht ta taklif-i-nas ma'lum gardad. Dar in Kawr-i- A'zam Baytu'l-'Adl Marja' Unchih ra ki Baytu'l-'Adl hukm farmayad taklif-i- nas hamun-ast ." (Provided by an individual believer, emphasis added)

The Universal House of Justice has approved the following translation of this portion of the Tablet of Abdu'l-Baha:

"The tradition concerning which thou didst inquire pertaineth to the Dispensation of the Qu’ran and expresseth that which was incumbent upon the people at that time. In this most great Dispensation, the House of Justice is the body unto which all must turn: whatsoever the House of Justice should ordain, the same is incumbent upon the people." (Emphasis added)

Based upon the provision in a Tablet of Abdu'l-Baha that the Huququ'llah is to be paid to the marja', and His express statement in this Tablet that the Universal House of Justice is the marja', the Universal House of Justice determined that it was authorized to receive and administer the Right of God.

This is similar to the fact that throughout his 36 year ministry, Shoghi Effendi carried out many functions which the Guardianship shared with the Universal House of Justice, that the House of Justice would itself have performed if it had been in existence. For example, the Institution of the Hands of the Cause was originally established in the Will and Testament as a subsidiary institution under the Guardianship; and the local and national assemblies would be guided by the Universal House of Justice. In the absence of a Universal House of Justice, Shoghi Effendi infallibly guided the assemblies. In the absence of a living Guardian, certain of the functions of the Guardianship which are shared functions, are now carried out by the Universal House of Justice.

Again Poirier argues in this section the equivocation argument that the Universal House of Justice is equal to the Guardianship. It is disecting the notion of the Universal House of Justice into two seperate halves an executive, the Guardan, and the legislative, the Universal House of Justice. When it is established that the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha delineates that the Guardian is a member of the UHJ, not seperate from it. The Guardian is the head for life of the body of the UHJ. It is a whole not seperate halves. Poirier quotes as argumention:

"The tradition concerning which thou didst inquire pertaineth to the Dispensation of the Qu’ran and expresseth that which was incumbent upon the people at that time. In this most great Dispensation, the House of Justice is the body unto which all must turn: whatsoever the House of Justice should ordain, the same is incumbent upon the people." (Emphasis added)

There is no disagreement here so this does not actually add any new information to the argument. The question is the composition of the Universal House of Justice, not it's status. For the minority community there can be no UHJ wihtout a executive Guardian.

Poirier concludes:

In the absence of a living Guardian, certain of the functions of the Guardianship which are shared functions, are now carried out by the Universal House of Justice.

The problem with this argument is that the so-called shared functions do not really exist in this way, because of the essentiality of the Guardian to the composition of the Universal House of Justice. What would be shared is not shared from the source of it's instrumentality, the Guardianship, there can be no authoritative interpretation without the guidance of a Guardian according to the Will and Testament. The chain of authority does end in the UHJ but that UHJ must have a Guardian if we are to take the language of the W&T at face value.

What does Abdu'l-Baha mean, that the "Executive must Aid and Assist the Legislative Body"

Majority Opinion Minority Opinoin

Does the verse in Abdu'l-Baha's Will stating that the “Executive” must aid and assist the “Legislative” body, mean that the Universal House of Justice can only function with the presence of the Guardian? This passage from Abdu'l-Baha's Will and Testament contains the verse in question:

“And now, concerning the House of Justice which God hath ordained as the source of all good and freed from all error, it must be elected by universal suffrage, that is, by the believers. Its members must be manifestations of the fear of God and daysprings of knowledge and understanding, must be steadfast in God's faith and the well-wishers of all mankind. By this House is meant the Universal House of Justice, that is, in all countries a secondary House of Justice must be instituted, and these secondary Houses of Justice must elect the members of the Universal one. Unto this body all things must be referred. It enacteth all ordinances and regulations that are not to be found in the explicit Holy Text. By this body all the difficult problems are to be resolved and the Guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head and the distinguished member for life of that body. Should he not attend in person its deliberations, he must appoint one to represent him. Should any of the members commit a sin, injurious to the common weal, the Guardian of the Cause of God hath at his own discretion the right to expel him, whereupon the people must elect another one in his stead. This House of Justice enacteth the laws and the government enforceth them. The legislative body must reinforce the executive, the executive must aid and assist the legislative body so that through the close union and harmony of these two forces, the foundation of fairness and justice may become firm and strong, that all the regions of the world may become even as Paradise itself."

(The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, pp. 14-15)

What does Abdu'l-Baha mean by the following portion of that passage:

“This House of Justice enacteth the laws and the government enforceth them. The legislative body must reinvorce the executive, the executive must aid and assist the legislative body so that through the close union and harmony of these two forces, the foundation of fairness and justice may become firm and strong, that all the regions of the world may become even as Paradise itself.”

Shoghi Effendi has interpreted this same passage:

"Regarding your questions: By 'Government', on page 210 of the 'Bahá'í World' Vol. VI, is meant the executive body which will enforce the laws when the Bahá'í Faith has reached the point when it is recognized and accepted entirely by any particular nation.” (From a letter dated April 18, 1941 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer; Lights of Guidance, 2nd edition, p. 483, #1604)

The average reader, since Abdu'l-Baha has just been speaking about the relationship between the Guardian and the House of Justice, might assume that the subject of the relationship between the “executive” and the “legislative” concerns these same two institutions. However, the infallible interpreter of the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha has explained otherwise; he has, in the above letter, explained that the “executive” mentioned in the Will is an entirely different institution from the institution of the Guardianship. He does so in another passage as well:

"As regards the International Executive referred to by the Guardian in his 'Goal of a New World Order' it should be noted that this statement refers by no means to the Bahá'í Commonwealth of the future, but simply to that world government which will herald the advent and lead to the final establishment of the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh. The formation of this International Executive, which corresponds to the executive head or board in present-day national governments, is but a step leading to the Bahá'í world government of the future, and hence should not be identified with either the institution of the Guardianship or that of the International House of Justice." (From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to two believers dated March 17, 1934; Lights of Guidance, p. 320, #1077; also published in the Compilation on Peace, The Compilation of Compilations Volume II, p. 193, #1621)

That is, although Abdu'l-Baha was earlier in the paragraph speaking of the relationship between two Baha'i institutions—the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice—in the passage in question He was speaking of the relationship between the Universal House of Justice and the national and international civil institutions that will come into being in the future. Shoghi Effendi mentions the international institutions—a legislative body, an tribunal, and an executive—in his letter, “The Goal of a New World Order,” found at page 40 of The World Order of Baha'u'llah. Shoghi Effendi, in the March 1934 letter quoted above, explains that the international executive is not the Baha'i institution of the Guardianship. In the 1941 letter quoted above, he states that the passage from the Will and Testament is addressing the relationship between the Universal House of Justice and the national executive that will also be established in every country, and again we can see now that in the Will, Abdu'l-Baha was not referring to the institution of Guardianship as the "executive."

In the light of these letters from Shoghi Effendi, we can see that the passage in the Will about the executive and the legislative is not stating that the Universal House of Justice can only function when the Guardian or his representative is present. As explained here and here, the Universal House of Justice is fully empowered in the Baha'i Writings to function with only its elected membership, and it receives its promised divine guidance as it so functions.

The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha is not only concerned with internal matters in the Baha'i Faith; it addresses the needs of the outer world, and as Shoghi Effendi has explained, adumbrates the relationship between the Universal House of Justice and the international institutions of a gradually-unifying world society that will precede the final flowering of civilization—the World Order of Baha'u'llah, the Kingdom of God on earth. And as the divinely-guided Universal House of Justice has written, it “is in a position to do everything necessary to establish the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh on this earth.” (“Election and infallibility of the Universal House of Justice,” letter dated 9 March 1965, Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986, paragraph 23.20, p. 56)

There is no real disputation here with this reading of the text and substantiation with textual citations from the writings of Shoghi Effendi. However, there is the very real textuality of the W&T of Abdu'l-Baha which shows us what the Universal House of Justice shall be comprised of:

and these secondary Houses of Justice must elect the members of the Universal one. [persian paragraph 16] Unto this body all things must be referred. It enacteth all ordinances and regulations that are not to be found in the explicit Holy Text. By this body all the difficult problems (masa'il [questions]) are to be resolved and the Guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head (rai'is) and the distinguished member for life of that body. Should he not attend in person its deliberations, he must appoint one to represent him (na'ib). Should any of the members commit a sin, injurious to the common weal, the Guardian of the Cause of God hath at his own discretion the right to expel him, whereupon the people must elect another one in his stead.

Therein is the source of the neccesity of the executive guidance. The UHJ must be held with either a representative or the Guardian in attendance, this is clearly stated in the W&T.