# The Baha'i Covenant

*Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-18 — 1 clipping.*

---

> 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)
>
> — *The Baha'i Covenant (Used by permission of the curator)*