Comments of late have drifted, as they sometimes do here, into territory where the Bahá’ís are invoked as a rhetorical chess piece by people who know very little about them. We believe in free speech, and on this blog more than most, in authorial autonomy; contributors and commenters speak for themselves, and we are not in the business of policing opinion. But because the question of Palestine sits adjacent to much of what has been said, we thought it worth setting down what the actual position is.

One caveat first. When we write or administer here, we do not speak for our Faith in any official capacity. We are members of it. That is the limit of our standing.
The clearest statement of the Bahá’í position comes from the pen of the Beloved Guardian of the Faith, Shoghi Effendi, who in July 1947 was asked directly by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine to clarify the relationship of the Bahá’í community to the country and its political future. His reply, written from Haifa and reproduced in The Bahá’í World, Volume 11, is as close to a foundational text on this question as exists. We quote it at length, because paraphrase would not do it justice.
Letter to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine
On July 9, 1947, Shoghi Effendi received a letter from the chairman of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine requesting a statement on the relationship, which the Baha’i Faith has to Palestine and the Baha’i attitude toward any future changes in the status of the country. From Shoghi Effendi’s reply, the following paragraphs are quoted in The Baha’i World, Volume 11 (1946-1950), pp.43-44.1
HAIFA, ISRAEL—15 July 1947“The position of the Baha’is in this country is in a certain measure unique: Whereas Jerusalem is the spiritual center of Christendom it is not the administrative center of either the Church of Rome or any other Christian denomination. Likewise although it is regarded as the second most sacred shrine of Islam, the most Holy site of the Muhammadan Faith, and the center of its pilgrimages, are to be found in Arabia, not in Palestine. The Jews alone offer somewhat of a parallel to the attachment which the Baha’is have for this country, inasmuch as Jerusalem holds the remains of their Holy Temple and was the seat of both the religious and political institutions associated with their past history. But even their case differs in one respect from that of the Baha’is for it is in the soil of Palestine that the three central Figures of our Religion are buried and it is not only the center of Baha’i’ pilgrimages from all over the world but also the permanent seat of our Administrative Order, of which I have the honor to be the Head.”
“The Baha’i Faith is entirely nonpolitical and we neither take sides in the present tragic dispute going on over the future of the Holy Land and its people nor have we any statement to make or advice to give as to what the nature of the political future of this country should be. Our aim is the establishment of universal peace in this world and our desire to see justice prevail in every domain of human society, including the domain of politics. As many of the adherents of our Faith are of both Jewish and Moslem extraction, we have no prejudice towards either of these groups and are most anxious to reconcile them for their mutual good and for the good of the country.”
“What does concern us, however, in any decisions made affecting the future of Palestine, is that the fact be recognized by whoever exercises sovereignty over Haifa and Acre, that within this area exists the spiritual and administrative world center of a world Faith, and that the independence of that Faith, its right to manage its affairs from this source, the right of Baha’is from any and every country of the globe to visit it as pilgrims (enjoying the same privilege in this respect as Jews, Moslems and Christians do in regard to visiting Jerusalem), be acknowledged and permanently safeguarded.”
Three things are worth drawing out.

“The House of the Báb in Shíráz, one of the most holy sites in the Bahá’í world, was destroyed by Revolutionary Guardsmen in 1979 and later razed by the government” by Baha’i Media Bank.
First, the Bahá’í World Centre sits in Haifa and Akka, in present-day Israel, not by political choice but because that is where the three central Figures of the Faith (Bahá’u’lláh, the Báb, and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá) are buried. The siting is theological, not strategic. Bahá’u’lláh was exiled to Akka by the Ottomans as a prisoner of the Sublime Porte; the geography is a residue of nineteenth-century Persian and Ottoman statecraft, not twentieth-century Zionism.
Second, the Faith is officially and constitutionally non-partisan on the political future of the land. Shoghi Effendi was being asked, on the eve of partition, to take a side. He declined, explicitly, and on principle. That principle has not changed in the seventy-nine years since.
Third, what the Faith does ask for is institutional independence: the right of pilgrimage, the right to administer its world centre, the right of Bahá’ís of every nationality (Iranian, Jewish, Arab, Muslim, Christian) to access its holy places on the same footing as the Abrahamic faiths access Jerusalem. That is the only political ask, and it is procedural.

Clarification is not partisanship. It is simply the record.

Bahai are are HQ in Haifa Israel
Zionist Israel is not altruistic
They are not going to entertain a Shia sect without quid pro quo
The Iranian Bahais are Zionist Fourth column
The Bahai are not a Shia sect. They are an independent religion.
It is actually offensive to label an independent religion a sect of some other religion. You don’t like it (rightfully) when Buddhism is lumped in with Hinduism.
I’ve noticed you have some kind of a vendetta against the Bahai. This is counterproductive.
Thanks
I have been through civil war (10 years) Been thrown into prison a couple of times. Had a gun pointed at my head. Accused of being a terrorist because I was a Tamil
I managed to escape because I was a boozer and many friends in Armed Forces and Police.
I have no sympathy for Traitors and Collaborators
That’s interesting, I thought you were Sinhalese. Would definitely like to hear more about the Sri Lankan civil war.
Tamil, Sinhalese and Irish mix
A proper Sri Lankan mutt
I disagree politically with XTM on Palestine and also to some extent on Iran. That’s fine.
All I’m saying is that there is no need to go after his religion.
Personally, I’d prefer it if there was less criticism (of any religion) on BP. I didn’t like XTM’s comment about the “Satanic Verses”. The “Saffroniate” didn’t like my comments on idol worship.
Criticism of religion–if allowed– has to be done in a sensitive and academic manner. It’s honestly better to avoid the topic. This is of course just my opinion.
You haven’t being thru a civil war as a young adult. I have had cousins, uncles killed or tortured, (both side, Sinhalese and Tamil)
Of course, I haven’t had that lived experience.
I still think you could lay off of the Bahais. It’s counterproductive.
Honestly, if I were the admin of this blog and you went on like this about my religion (Islam) I would just ban you.
XTM is actually being generous.
we are happy with a binational state in Israel-Palestine.
a sort of mixed UK settlement for Iran (Monarchy + Theocracy) but we are rarely invested in ME politics when our focus is more India.
If by “binational state” you mean a secular democratic state with no special privileges for Jews than I agree.
I disagree with a constitutional monarchy for Iran. I’m not against the Islamic Republic as such. But then, I’m not Iranian.
For more on my position on Palestine, see the following (particularly for El Khawaja):
https://kabiraltaf.substack.com/p/citizen-strangers-palestinians-and
If by “binational state” you mean a secular democratic state with no special privileges for Jews than I agree.
For someone quick to condescend to others on their English, you sure don’t appear to be very particular about the language yourself.
we are happy with a binational state in Israel-Palestine.
We as in the official Bahai position
Or are you speaking for you self;
We wrote in the posts we don’t speak on behalf of our Faith. Our Faith’s position is clear in the post.
Slippery political answer
Kabir
Bahais, Sunnis and Shias are broadly one religion, with Allah as their God
Judaism, Catholics and Protestants are broadly one religion, with their God being the God of Abraham
Hinduism has many Gods.
Theravada Buddhism has no Gods (Agnostic). Buddha is teacher, long dead and no “powers”
Technically, Muslims also worship the God of Abraham. Muslims believe that Islam is a continuation of Judaism and Christianity. The Jews and Christians went astray so Allah had to send down a new divine scripture in order to correct their errors. Islam is the final revelation and is for all times and places.
The Bahai may have started out at as a Shia sect but they now consider themselves a separate religion. As XTM has mentioned, they don’t believe that prophethood ended after the Prophet Muhammad. Thus, by definition, they are not Muslim.
prophethood ended after the Prophet Muhammad. Thus, by definition, they are not Muslim.
Heretics
For us we want to be considered as non-Muslim; the Ahmadis try to stay inside the fold.
The issue with the Ahmadis is that they don’t believe in the finality of prophethood (at least one branch of them doesn’t). This is a core tenet of Islam.
If one doesn’t believe the Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet, one cannot really call themselves Muslim. The Ahmedis get in trouble in Pakistan because they are seen to be posing as Muslims.
Of course, I’m not defending the Pakistani state declaring them non-Muslim. I consistently believe it is not the place of the state to do so. This should be left to Allah to decide.
But their doctrine is problematic. Finality of prophethood is a non-negotiable part of Islam.
For us we want to be considered as non-Muslim; the
If Allah is your god you are a Muslim
Christian Arabs refer to God as Allah
Next you will be claiming Baháʼu’lláh is a Christian name.
Do you hate Muslims
Allah is just the arabic word for God – it’s the same God of Abraham. Even many Jews believe Muslims believe in the same God, they think of Christians as heretics cause of Jesus worship.
I wouldn’t say Bahais are Muslim and they consider themselves an entirely separate religion. There are also peripheral sects like the Ahmadis, Nation of Islam, and Alawis among others that many mainstream Muslims (Mostly Sunni and Shia) wouldn’t consider Muslim. I think the closest Bahai-Islam analog pair for Christianity would be Rastafarianism or Messianic Judaism, lots of overlapping beliefs but identify as different religions.
Also Muslims do believe in the God of Abraham, we just don’t think Jesus is God and the trinity doesn’t make sense to us, which is why many Jews even say Islam is theologically closer in many ways.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nZHT0yStEc
Erm the closest analogy for Christianity would be Islam..
But even then we consider our chapter to herald the new age.
When the Báb revealed his Mission; unbeknownst to all, the first telegraph (Morse Code) was sent in the East Coast stating:
“what has God wrought.”
The Abrahamic religions find fulfilment in the Bahá’í cycle.
We don’t necessarily know about the Dharmic Faiths per se.
A lot of Buddhism seems to worship the Buddha?
In Sri Lanka children worship their parents, elders as thanks for what they have done
Similarly Sri Lankans pay reverence to the Buddha as thanks for his teachings
It is worth mentioning that it was Muslim Ottomans who allowed the burial of the Iranian Bab and Baha’ullah in their empire and shrines built during their reign and that too in Muslim majority Palestine/Levant.
They actually didn’t allow it fwiw. Bahá’u’lláh was a Prisoner in the Ottoman Empire.
The Ottomans did in fact allow the burial and even facilitated it in spite of the fraught relations.
we hold no animus towards the Ottoman (but neither any gratitude, it would be unwarranted) but the Brits were more benevolent.
It’s not unwarranted at all, they did not have to host Iranians and more importantly the Palestinians didn’t either. I don’t know if there’s animosity towards Palestinians and their cause from the Bahai community but they do deserve respect and support not some veneer of strategic neutrality.
there is no animosity but again if you were to read the passage in the post; we are apolitical by nature.
the Palestinians have a right to return to their land, Israel has a right to exist. Israel and Palestine can find ways to co-exist; one does not nullify the other.
One can be proud of their faith but still thank the Ottoman empire and native Palestinians for allowing the settlement of Iranian Bahai and the burial and enshrinement of their spiritual leaders on their lands. That doesn’t erase the actions of the Khomeniest regime of Iran and the persecution of Bahais but I almost never see any gratitude expressed to the Palesitnian people nor any condemnation or even acknowledgement of the Nakba of 1948 that led to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their lands, including the towns of Haifa and Akka the same way you thanked the noble and ancient people of south India for welcoming Hindu Sindhi refugees from Pakistan during the partition (in one of your previous replies to me). The noble and ancient people of Palestine deserve just as much respect and acknowledgement.
The Ottoman & Qajar regimes were both fairly hostile.
The Ottomans being marginal less so doesn’t need to make usgrateful.”
They did allow the settlement of Bahais in their land though.
Acre was the Great Prison of the Empire.
Still Palestinian land, still under the Ottoman empire – also they did not have to host the Iranian Bahais at all, keeping them there was a favor to the Qajars when most parts of the world were a lot more unforgiving towards minorities and who they deemed as dissidents and “heretics”. Ultimately they did permit and facilitated the burials, to this day the holy sites of the Bahai remains on Palestinain land. You can acknowledge the Nakba and show gratitude to these noble and ancient peoples.
to provide full context; you were engaged in dog whistling with regards to South Indian hence why we insisted on the apologies.
we haven’t engaged in any dog whistling comments (To our knowledge) to have to apologise for anything?
For me what I feel more aggrieved about is the neutral or pro Israel stance that seems like disrespect and ingratitude towards Palestinians and some of the criticisms of the hijab and Islam – two major components of Palestinian Muslim identity just because of the atrocities committed by the Khomeinist regime. Even in America, I feel there’s a lot of misdirected hate towards Palestine by anti-regime Iranian protestors when I don’t think being pro-Palestinain doesn’t inherently mean one is anti Bahai or even pro Khomeini.
We wrote about the Hijab and explained our views on it.
The anti regime Iranians protestors in Diaspora are not Bahá’í- Diaspora politics is very very different ..
Pahlavists and Bahá’ís don’t overlap.
For instance we aren’t in favour of a “counter revolution” though we think a Constitutional Monarchy would benefit Iran. We think the UK is a very good model (Bishops sit in the House of Lords).
But as a rule we are not so political; we opine on it in BP because it’s just that India-Pakistan drives so much traffic. Islamicate Civilisation is a Supreme Culture but who stands to inherit it..
Also I don’t just mean gratefulness only to the Ottoman empire (who governed by the standards of their time) but more so to the Palestinian people who welcomed the Iranians in and were then ethnically cleansed by Zionists in the Nakba. To this day never met or heard a Palestinian Muslim ever say anything negative or derogatory about Bahais nor any calls to deport them – they pretty much accept them as part of any future Palestinian state.
we agree with the views expressed.
we don’t believe or accept in the dispossession of the indigenous Palestinian people from their native lands but then we also don’t believe the Punjab or Cyprus or any other land should be ethnically cleansed.
The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens
Can you do it unequivocally without the whataboutism at the end cause it feels insincere. We know your views on south Asia and the partition so mentioning that sort of feels like steering away from Palestine and giving a compromised acknowledgement.
yes we don’t like Partitions or Divisions furthermore why we don’t see identity as exclusive.
Human beings, like all lifeforms, have an inalienable right to freedom and prosperity..
Palestinians should be able to return to their homeland (so should the Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews). Right of Return for Palestinian Refugees is a core human right.
Where is the Whataboutism? One can support Palestine and support Israel.
We don’t condone any of the excesses in Israel especially its action in Gaza, which (most likely) constitutes genocide. Our understanding Genocide requires intent and we suspect that intent was there but it is now being fought in The Hague.
The Palestinians are a Noble people and the world has rallied to their cause.. a Free Palestine is inevitable.
By whataboutism I was referring to your mention of Punjab and Cyprus which I felt was unnecessary since your positions are clear on those.
Nevertheless, I appreciate your acknowledgement of Palestine and their genocide..
If you have notice the Iranian Bahai position of the Gaza Genocide and settlers has not being addressed
Cant afford to anger the hosts Zionist Israel which is still doing genocide
XTM has some dream world reality completely removed from reality
[…] X.T.M on The Bahá’í Position on Palestine: A Note for the Record […]
The silence meets the rape of Palestinians NY Times
The report is so bad Zionist Netanyahu “threatens” to sue NY Times.
Sound Familiar, threatens
The author Nicolas Kristof is a Jew
https://web.facebook.com/reel/1303470148427639
We condemn all and any acts of violence ..
Do the Bahais specifically condemn the Genocide in Gaza