Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Alí Nakhjavání, The Baha'i Covenant, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

T h e Bah á’í Co ve nant

Ali Nakhjavani

Shoghi Effendi has given us a penetrating observation about
the development of Bahá’í history. More than once in his
writings he explained that the pattern of growth in the Faith is
one of crises followed by victory. Such victory leads to greater
crises resulting in a still mightier victory. He referred to this
pattern of growth as part of the process of integration. The
crises always consist of attacks against the Faith both from
within and from without. Indeed, at times the external and the
internal elements of opposition work hand in hand with each
other. He also drew our attention to a simultaneous process of
disintegration in human affairs. While this second process is
destined, alas, to lead humanity to the depths of deterioration
and misery, the integrative process will lead to the triumph and
ascendancy of the Faith of Bahá’u’lláh throughout the world.
Christianity and Islam are two major religions whose
followers, based on the statements found in their scriptures,
have always aspired to conquer spiritually the population of the
entire planet. They have failed ever since the inception of their
faiths to achieve their goals. What guarantee do we Bahá’ís have
that the Bahá’í Faith will not follow the same path? Shoghi
Effendi has dealt with this question in his World Order Letters.
That which safeguards the realization of the promises of
Bahá’u’lláh is the Lesser Covenant. This is incorporated in clear
terms in the Law of Succession revealed in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas and
confirmed in the Kitáb-i-’Ahd, Bahá’u’lláh’s Will and Testament.
Such Lesser Covenants have existed in all past religions, but
were not laid out in explicit texts. It is in this Lesser Bahá’í
Covenant that is the guarantee against schism and
sectarianism. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá gives us this assurance: “So firm
and mighty is this Covenant that from the beginning of time
300 The Bahá’í Covenant

until the present day no religious Dispensation hath produced
its like.” (GPB 238) He also states: “It is indubitably clear that the
pivot of the Oneness of Mankind is nothing else but the power
of the Covenant…” (GPB 238) “The power of the Covenant is as
the heat of the sun which quickeneth and promoteth the
development of all created things on earth.” (GPB 239) After
referring to the “invincible strength” (GPB 295) and “energizing
power” (GPB 295) of the Covenant, Shoghi Effendi highlights two
specific functions the Covenant is designed to discharge:
• “To direct and canalize” the forces released by two
successive Manifestations in order to “ensure their
harmonious and continuous operation.” (GPB 237)
• To safeguard the “unity and integrity” of the Faith.
(GPB 295)

Two misconceptions about the Covenant exist. These
misconceptions are fomented by non-Bahá’í scholars who wish
to weaken the loyalty of the friends towards the covenant.
These need to be clarified. I will deal briefly with each one in the
light of the texts of our Faith.
• The first is that as long as one believes in the divinity
of Bahá’u’lláh, the Covenant is of secondary
importance, and can be set aside as a non-essential
part of the Bahá’í Revelation.
• The second is that the epoch of the Covenant was the
ministry of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, and therefore after the
passing of the Center of the Covenant this chapter in
the history of the Faith is closed.
Fi r s t M is c on c ept ion

In God Passes By Shoghi Effendi has explained that “the
excellent and priceless heritage” (GP 314) referred to in the first
sentence of the Kitáb-i-’Ahd is a reference to the Bahá’í
Covenant. The full text of the sentence reads as follows:
“Within the treasury of trust and resignation We have
bequeathed to Our heirs an excellent and priceless heritage.” (TB
219) Shoghi Effendi assures us that this heritage is the
Covenant, and that therefore we are all in one sense
Bahá’u’lláh’s heirs. A moment’s reflection will make it clear
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Eight 301

that if we accept the source legacy to be a Divine Source, we
cannot but accept the legacy itself. To do otherwise, would be
inconceivable. When one rejects a legacy, does it not indicate a
denial of one’s love towards the Bequeather?
The “Epistle to the Son of the Wolf” was the last
outstanding Tablet revealed by the Pen of Bahá’u’lláh. In this
epistle, Bahá’u’lláh states that in His Crimson Book He has
recorded a “word” which “is capable of fully disclosing that
force which is hid in men, nay, of redoubling its potency. ”
(ESW 32) In a letter written on his behalf by his secretary, Shoghi
Effendi has pointed out that what Bahá’u’lláh meant by the
“word” recorded in the Crimson Book was the power of the
Covenant. The Crimson Book is a reference to the book of His
Covenant, the passage above means that the power for unity
which the “Covenant possesses and radiates.” (LG 181) The
passage in the Kitáb-i-’Ahd confirming the potency of this
power is as follows: “A mighty force, a consummate power lieth
concealed in the world of being. Fix your gaze upon it and
upon its unifying influence and not upon the differences which
appear from it.” (TB 221) In these two brief sentences Bahá’u’lláh
is in effect telling us that the power of the covenant is
“concealed.” To me it means that one has to reflect on the
importance of this theme to uncover and grasp its importance.
Bahá’u’lláh is also telling us that the Covenant is like a double-
edged sword: it leads to unity, and it causes differences. We
must focus our minds and hearts on its unifying influence. The
Covenant is our legacy from Bahá’u’lláh Himself, and, as
‘Abdu’l-Bahá has stated, is the Pivot of the Oneness of
Mankind. How is it possible for us to regard it as a matter of
secondary importance?
Sec on d M is c onc ept i on

The second misconception has to do with the assumption
that the Covenant is outdated and obsolete. We must
remember that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, when commenting on His own
ministry, has written that this period was only the “morning of
the Covenant.” Thus if His Ministry was only the morning of
the Covenant, we still have a whole blissful day ahead of us, till
the end of the Dispensation. Two Tablets to this effect are
302 The Bahá’í Covenant

included in compilations of the Persian Tablets of the Master
(Muntakhabáti az Makátib-i-’Abdu’l-Bahá, vol. 5, pp. 165, 213)
Thus we see that the Covenant was not only for the twenty-
nine years of the Master’s Ministry, but was bequeathed by
Bahá’u’lláh to “posterity.” (GPB 239) It is in this light that we
could understand Bahá’u’lláh’s statement when He described
His Dispensation as “a Day which shall not be followed by
night. ” (GPB 245)
W ho i s a C oven a nt -Br ea ker ?

We should now have a quick look at Covenant-breaking to
see what our texts say on this subject, to understand what are
the reasons and motives that lead people to break the Covenant,
and why we must shun them. The law of Succession is one of
the most important ordinances revealed in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas
by Bahá’u’lláh. Bahá’u’lláh says that in connection with the
subject of endowments, the Supreme Authority in the Cause is
the Manifestation of God. After Him and in accordance with
His written covenant, specifically appointed “Aghsans” or
Branches of the sacred Lote Tree will be the Centres of the
Cause. After them, the focal point of the Covenant will be the
Universal House of Justice. (KA 42)
In this same Most Holy Book and in the very first sentences,
Bahá’u’lláh clearly stipulates that the acceptance of the
manifestation and adherence to the laws revealed by Him are
twin inseparable duties. One is not accepted without the other.
(KA 1) Thus any person who denies and disregards the links in
the chain of succession is regarded as a Covenant-breaker. The
decision as to who is considered a Covenant-breaker rests
always with the Authority or Central institution of the Cause
which acts as Head of the Faith, at any given time. As stated
earlier the Covenant leads to unity, as well as to differences.
Bahá’u’lláh advised us to ignore the differences and to fix our
gaze on the unifying power of the Covenant. The main body of
the Faith of God, we should be well assured, will remain united,
as has been designed by Almighty God to unify the world. The
Hand of the Cause, A.Q. Faizi, used to say that in past
Dispensations, when broken branches of the Tree of the Cause
were planted, they grew and thrived; but in this Cause, such
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Eight 303

broken branches, even if planted with care, are destined not to
grow, but to wither away, leaving the Tree of the Cause, a
single, matchless, and impregnable Entity. Thus we must be
certain that Covenant-breaking cannot and will not create a
breach or schism in the Cause.
W hy d o we s hu n C oven a n t -br ea ker s ?

As to why we should shun Covenant-breakers ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
gives the example of contagious diseases such as leprosy and
consumption. It is as simple as a scientific fact. Shoghi
Effendi has given this matter further clarification. Shoghi
Effendi described such crises as “blessings in disguise” and says
“when viewed in their proper perspective, each of them is an
agency for the purification and revitalization of the life of the
community” and “is a compelling evidence of the
indestructibility of its cohesive strength.” (GPB 61)
‘Abdu’l-Bahá describes Covenant-breakers as “mischief-
makers” who “seek leadership” (SWAB 214) and “promote
discord. ” (WT 9) Other motives mentioned by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
include “ambition, ” “envy, ” and “hate. ” (SWAB 163) He advises
us that such people are “sweet in words” and “appear as sheep”
yet inwardly they are “ravening wolves. ” (SWAB 315) In His Will
and Testament He warns us “no doubt every vain glorious one
that purposes dissension and discord will not openly declare
his evil purposes. ” (WT 12) Shoghi Effendi amplifies this subject
by adding other motives for Covenant-breaking. He describes
such persons as “self-seeking adventurers” driven by such
whims and inclinations as “unbounded presumption,” “abject
perfidy,” “delusion,” “malice,” and, ironically enough,
“incredible folly.” (TDH 65-66) “If a man cuts a cancer out of his
body to preserve his health and very life, no one would suggest
that for the sake of unity it would be reintroduced into the
healthy organism. On the contrary, what was once a part of
him has so radically changed as to have become a poison.” (LG
184) This does not mean that Covenant-breakers cannot be
reinstated. Indeed we are told to pray for them, because such
souls are not lost forever. They should be left, however, on their
own. If they repent and the Head of the Faith is convinced that
their repentance is sincere, they are joyously reinstated.
304 The Bahá’í Covenant

‘A bd u ’ l-Ba há’ s W i ll a nd Shoghi E ffen d i ’s P a ss i n g

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas (KA 42) does not seem to envisage that an
appointed Branch, that is, the Guardian of the Cause, would
co-exist with the Universal House of Justice. This would seem
to contradict with the first part of the Will and Testament of
‘Abdu’l-Bahá. However, Shoghi Effendi has stated that the
Master’s Will was a “supplement ” (WOB 19) to the Kitáb-i-Aqdas
and therefore could not “contradict” (WOB 4) the Most Holy
Book. When we study ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s Will and Testament, we
see that it is in three parts. Part one provides for the
Guardian’s participation in the Universal House of Justice as
its member, and indeed, as its “sacred Head.” Part two,
however, envisages a divinely guided House of Justice without
the presence and participation of the Guardian. Part three is
relatively brief and does not deal with this issue.
The question before us is this: How can the Will of the
Master be a “supplement” to, and in fact, “confirm” (WOB 19)
the Most Holy Book, and yet in of its parts appear to
contradict the Kitáb-i-Aqdas? This is both an obscure matter
and a mystery. This may well be why Shoghi Effendi kept telling
the friends in the East and the West, in several letters, that the
Will of the Master contained mysteries which they presently
could not understand. In His Will and Testament, the Master
has added that “obscure” (WT 20) matters in the Cause will arise,
and it devolves upon the Universal House of Justice to
elucidate them. In confirmation of this clause in ‘Abdu’l-
Bahá’s Will, Shoghi Effendi wrote in 1924: “We must trust to
time and the guidance of the God’s Universal House of Justice
to obtain a clearer and fuller understanding of its [‘Abdu’l-
Bahá’s will’s] provisions and implications.” (BA 62) The manner
in which the events unfolded in 1957 onwards, left certain facts
on the ground, which created a situation that was clearly in full
harmony with the text of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas. As Shoghi Effendi
had not appointed a successor, as Guardian and Authorized
Interpreter, there was automatically no co-existence between
any Appointed Branch and the Universal House of Justice.
After its election in 1963, the Universal House of Justice
gradually lifted the veil on some of the mysteries. In three
letters available to the friends in the compilation entitled
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Eight 305

Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1963-1986
(Letters numbers 5, 23, and 35), the Supreme Institution gave
its elucidations of this “obscure question.” (WT 20)
These three letters clearly demonstrate that the provisions of
the Kitáb-i-Aqdas are supreme, and obviously will remain
inviolable and immutable, that the Universal House of Justice
is independently and divinely guided by the Twin
Manifestations of this Revelation, and that the beloved
Guardian had even anticipated that the Universal House of
Justice be formed in 1963. Three secondary questions arise
which we need to address. They are:
1. Why did Shoghi Effendi refer to future Guardians?
2. Was he conscious of his imminent death and aware that
he would not live to see the formation of the Universal
House of Justice?
3. Why did the Guardian not write a Will and Testament?
Fu t u r e G u a rd ia n s ?

Regarding the first question and the reference of Shoghi
Effendi to future Guardians, we must remember that ‘Abdu’l-
Bahá had incorporated this possibility in the first part of His
Will. During Shoghi Effendi’s lifetime, there were living
Aghsans who could have been chosen by him, if, as stipulated in
the Will, he had decided that they were qualified for such a high
office. And even then, his appointment had to be ratified by
nine hands elected from the Body of the Hands of the Cause
worldwide. Only the Guardian was authorized to set this
process in motion. We could well conclude that by referring to
future Guardians, he was doing so in the context of the first
part of the Master’s Will.
Shoghi Effendi has given us a key to the resolution of this
quandary. He wrote that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá was following the same
pattern adopted by Bahá’u’lláh in His own Kitáb-i-’Ahd. He
indicated that Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá had used an
“identity of method” in the manner of succession. (WOB 4)
Bahá’u’lláh certainly knew that Mu˙ammad-`Alí would be
disloyal to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Rúhíyyih Khánum, in her Priceless
306 The Bahá’í Covenant

Pearl (pp. 11-12), tells us of an experience which a German
woman doctor had one day in the presence of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.
Her name was Dr. Fallscheer who was serving as a medical
doctor in the Master’s household and was present when a
young teenager entered the room and approached ‘Abdu’l-Bahá
very reverently. After the Master told him something quietly,
the teenager backed out with the same degree of respect and
reverence. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá then told Dr. Fallscheer that this young
boy was His Elisha. He then added that Bahá’u’lláh had told
Him that in the future He [‘Abdu’l-Bahá] would have to
appoint one of His own sons or grandsons to succeed Him.
Yet Bahá’u’lláh ostensibly appointed Mu˙ammad-`Alí, in His
Will, as the one to succeed ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. Is this not a mystery?
Was this designed by Bahá’u’lláh to protect ‘Abdu’l-Bahá?
Could He have done this to test the believers and at the same
time to put Mu˙ammad-`Alí to test?
Shoghi Effendi has clearly stated in his “Dispensation” that
‘Abdu’l-Bahá possessed “superhuman knowledge and
perfection.” (WOB 134) We must be sure, therefore, that
‘Abdu’l-Bahá must have known that the two brothers and five
male cousins of Shoghi Effendi, who were all Aghsans, would
not be faithful to Shoghi Effendi. Could He have included this
option in HIS Will possibly to keep these potential appointees
within the pale of the Faith? Did He have other purposes, as
Bahá’u’lláh might have? As we know, these seven Aghsans
disobeyed Shoghi Effendi through their own pride and folly and
disqualified themselves, by dropping out of the Faith just as
Mu˙ammad-`Alí had done before.
How t he t ext s on s u c c es s i on pr ove t o be a m a jor t es t ?

In the Kitáb-i-Iqán Bahá’u’lláh states: “From time
immemorial, even until eternity, the All-Mighty hath tried, and
will continue to try, His Servants, so that light may be
distinguished from darkness, truth from falsehood, right from
wrong, guidance from error, happiness from misery, and roses
from thorns. ” (KI 8) In the same book Bahá’u’lláh says that such
tests appear in “every season” (KI 53) or stage in the evolution of
each Dispensation. It is reasonable therefore to assume that
there are undoubtedly mysteries deposited in God’s Grand
Scheme of World Order. We might also draw a conclusion as
Lights of ‘Irfán Book Eight 307

stated earlier that ‘Abdu’l-Bahá had included the possibility of
future Guardians, in order to encourage His grandsons to
remain loyal and not break the Covenant.
W a s Shoghi E ffen di a wa r e of hi s i mm i n ent pa ss i n g?

Some light is shed on this issue in Violette’s “Tribute to
Amatu’l-Bahá.” Two incidents are recorded which help us to
understand this matter more clearly. In one case, towards the
end of his life, the Guardian asked Rúhíyyih Khánum what
would become of her, once he had gone. Of course, Rúhíyyih
Khánum was disturbed and shocked by the question. He then
proceeded to answer his own question, by saying that he
assumed that she would travel and encourage the friends. As we
all know, this is precisely what Amatu’l-Bahá did after the
election of the Universal House of Justice.
The second incident is when, during his last few days, in the
hotel in London, he told Amatu’l-Bahá that he did not want to go
back to Haifa and that she should go alone. As Shoghi Effendi had
just had a bad flu, Rúhíyyih Khánum thought that it was
because of his physical condition that he had said what he did.
Furthermore, on June 4, 1957 Shoghi Effendi wrote some five
months before his own passing that the “destiny” and
“security” of the Faith and the “spiritual health” of the Bahá’í
community have now to depend on close collaboration between
the Hands of the Cause and National Spiritual Assemblies.
(MBW 123) In his last message to the Bahá’í world, Shoghi
Effendi called for the appointment of a new Auxiliary Board
whose specific function would be the protection of the Faith.
In the same last general message he conferred upon the Hands
of the Cause the title of “Chief Stewards of Bahá’u’lláh’s
Embryonic World Commonwealth.” (MBW 126) It was on that
account that the Hands of the Cause were able to rally the
friends to complete faithfully the objectives of the Ten Year
Crusade. It is highly significant in this connection to recall
that in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas Bahá’u’lláh seems to have foreseen the
possibility of the termination of the line of the Appointed
Branches at a time when the Universal House of Justice was not
yet formed. During such an interregnum “the people of Bahá”
according to the Most Holy Book, who “speak not except by his
leave, ” (KA 42) would temporarily conduct the affairs of the
308 The Bahá’í Covenant

Cause, pending the establishment of the Universal House of
Justice. It is truly significant that Bahá’u’lláh so clearly
foreshadowed the future.
W hy did Shoghi E ffend i n ot writ e a Wi ll and T es tam ent ?

This very question was put to the House of Justice. Here is
its response: “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
wisdom and a sign of his infallible guidance?”
This statement clearly implies that not leaving a will in a
traditional way was a conscious act on the part of Shoghi
Effendi. As indicated above, Shoghi Effendi gave advice to
Rúhíyyih Khánum regarding her activities after his passing. Is
it conceivable that he who was the Guardian and Protector of
the Cause of God would think about the future of his wife, but
not consider the security of the Faith after his own passing?
The Hand of the Cause Tarázu’lláh Samandari, after the
passing of the Guardian, used to say that if Shoghi Effendi was
not sure about the security of the Cause of God after his death,
he would not have passed away at that time. How very
perceptive was this Hand of the Cause? Indeed Shoghi Effendi
had written that His “Dispensation” was to be considered as a
“supplement” (LDG 65) to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s Will and Testament.
He had actually told several Hands of the Cause and pilgrims
that his “Dispensation” should be considered by the friends as
his Will and testament. Furthermore, in his “Dispensation” he
has written that the Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá was a
“link” (WOB 143-144) joining the Heroic Age to the Formative
Age and similarly the link that will connect the Formative Age
to the Golden Age. In this light we can understand why Shoghi
Effendi described the Will and Testament of the Master as the
“Charter of a future world civilization.” (GPB 328)
Our minds should be assured that the Blessed Beauty is
watching over the fortunes of His precious Faith, and that the
Supreme Body that He has ordained for us is under His loving
care and protection. We are living in a day which, because of
the power of the Covenant, is a Day “which shall not be
followed by night.” (GPB 245)

Escolha um segundo texto para ler em paralelo — uma tradução, ou qualquer outro texto.