Abstract
The concept of clergy in the Baha’i Faith presents a fundamental and significant challenge that unveils its organizational nature. Bahá’í Faith is considered a cult and an organizational structure, but in its advertisements, it insists on presenting itself in a way that makes people wrongly compare its features with those of divine religions, thus trusting the promotional materials of Bahá’í media or missionaries. This is because it immediately distorts one of the genuine and positive features of religion in its introduction and immediately replaces it with its own promotional brand.
One of the distinguishing features of the Baha’i Faith is the claim that clergy in the Baha’i Faith does not exist as a formal class! They say, “We do not have mullahs!” while the term and concept of clergy or mullah are based on rational grounds, whereas in the Bahá’í Faith, this concept is founded on imitation and bias.
If in Islam there are clergymen, in Judaism there are rabbis, and in Christianity, there are bishops and priests representing this concept, it is better to first clarify its origin. And if in the Bahá’í Faith, as an organizational structure, the existence of missionaries, continental counselors, and heads of baha’i assemblies symbolizes the blind obedience of Bahá’ís without question, the reason should be sought in the texts of Bahá’í leaders.
Therefore, this article examines four aspects of existence of a clergy class in the Bahá’í Faith:
- Referring a non-specialist to a specialist is a rational act; how does Bahá’í Faith follow or ignore this principle?
- What is the reason for Bahá’ís’ need for missionaries and this organizational structure?
- Why is Bahá’í Faith reluctant to present itself as law-oriented?
- Does the absence of specific clothing for missionaries mean the absence of a clergy in the Baha’i Faith? What evidence supports the existence of this class in Bahá’í Faith?
Introduction
The necessity for ordinary individuals to consult specialists in all fields is an accepted and rational matter. For example, a patient who knows nothing about medicine and its mysteries going to a doctor who has studied and specialized in the field for years is an obvious and accepted matter among all rational people. In today’s world, the move towards specialization has taken a more serious form. If in the past there were individuals who reached the highest possible level in many sciences during their time and were considered scientists in multiple fields, today, with the expansion and advancement of all sciences, such a matter no longer exists, and each person can be a specialist in one science or a branch of a science. Religious sciences are no exception to this rule.
Currently, the proponents of the Baha’i organization insist that there is no clerical class in the Baha’i community to serve as specialists and authorities on Baha’i teachings. Moreover, they consider this matter to be an advantage of the Baha’i Faith (Pamphlet of Answering Doubts, 226).
In this writing, on one hand, we will examine the validity of this claim, and on the other hand, we will answer these questions: What are the roots of such a claim in the Baha’i Faith? And is the absence of such a class in a society actually an advantage? Can this basis and foundation create a distinction between the Bahá’í organization and its comparison with divine religions? Because having specialist and clerical authorities in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism is an established indicator and the basis for implementing rulings. Therefore, we need to examine why the Bahá’í Faith does not introduce itself as a ruling-centric faith to its audience, considering that this subject is an honor and a brand.
Denial of the Existence of a Clergy in the Baha’i Faith
By reflecting on the claim that there are neither religious authorities nor clergy in the Baha’i Faith, many questions arise in the minds of researchers, including
Who teaches Bahá’í children, who attend moral education classes from an early age?
What is the status of the individuals who provide answers to the questions of Bahá’ís?
Can those who reach the age of maturity read the works of Bahá’í leaders themselves and derive religious laws from them?
What is the duty of those who want to study Baha’ism or those who are new to Baha’i Faith and are faced with difficult and contradictory sentences in Baha’i books and are unable to understand Baha’i teachings and its precepts and behavioral patterns by studying these books?
What is the status of the various Baha’i assemblies around the world that manage the affairs of Bahá’ís and address their doubts and questions? How do they justify the Ruhi classes, children’s classes, and Nasayem-e-Taiyid (Breezes of Confirmation) sessions conducted by Bahá’í tutors and teachers for audiences of children and teenagers? Who manages the promotional classes held weekly in various locations? To which class do members of the Bahá’í International Teaching Centre, responsible for promoting the Bahá’í Faith worldwide, belong? What are the Hands of the Cause of God, tasked with spreading the fragrance of divine teachings, nurturing souls, and providing education and guidance, referred to as? (Dr. Esslemont, Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 282)
Therefore, while the Bahá’í Faith outwardly claims to have no clergy and to not accept blind imitation in any matter, in practice, it also follows the aforementioned principle of “referring the non-expert to the expert.”
Perhaps there is no specific dress code for this class in Baha’i, but what is certain is that the Baha’i organization has certainly trained a class to propagate its faith and answer questions about Baha’i. In fact, they do not mention its name, but in practice, they have carried out its customs.
For example, when a Bahá’í teacher cannot answer a question, they say, “Let me ask and bring the answer.” Is referring to someone more specialized in a matter not indicative of the existence of a clergy class within the Bahá’í organization?
The appointment of a Group Leader in the Bahá’í promotional classes known as the Ruhi Plan demonstrates that the Bahá’í organization has entrusted its expansion to a specific group of Bahá’ís who have a deeper understanding of Bahá’í teachings. While they also utilize other Bahá’ís in their promotional activities, they acknowledge the existence of a specialized class to propagate Bahá’í teachings.
Introduction of the Clergy in the Baha’i Faith by its Leaders
We observe that prominent Bahá’í scholars, such as Ishráq Khávarí and Rúyaz Qadímí, have authored books like Ganjīniy-i Hudūd wa Aḥkām (The Treasure of Laws and Ordinances) and Golzár-e Ta’limát-e Bahá’í (The Garden of Bahá’í Teachings) to elaborate on what the Bahá’í Faith considers religious laws. Adhering to the contents of such books is, in essence, an act of imitation of these individuals, as they have studied and investigated the writings of the Báb, Bahá’u’lláh, `Abdu’l-Bahá, and Shoghi Effendi to compile Bahá’í laws and teachings.
It is evident that finding the Bahá’í laws independently is almost impossible for the ordinary members of the Bahá’í community, as they neither have access to all the sources nor the time and ability to study all the works of Bahá’í leaders. Therefore, they prefer to rely on the findings of Bahá’í specialists and follow the directives of Bahá’í leaders as compiled by individuals like Ishráq Khávarí or Rúyaz Qadímí, thereby effectively imitating them.
- The fourth chapter of the book Ganjīniy-i Hudūd wa Aḥkām (on the necessity of obeying the resolutions passed by the sacred spiritual assemblies before the establishment of the Universal House of Justice) indicates that Bahá’ís, before the establishment of the Universal House of Justice, were required to fully obey the commands of their local spiritual assembly. After the establishment of the Universal House of Justice, their obligation is clear: they must unquestioningly and even without understanding the reasons behind all its directives, follow them. This is, in essence, the concept of imitation.
- `Abdu’l-Bahá stated:
A teacher must rise with utmost purity and sanctity so that his pure breath may influence hearts and his essence of sincerity may become evident in the eyes of all. Yet teachers who have no crafts, trades, or businesses, and who are engaged in teaching day and night, must be cared for by the divine friends.” (Ishráq Khávarí, Ganjīniy-i Hudūd wa Aḥkām, p. 249).
Thus, the living expenses of Bahá’í teachers, who do not have any employment, are borne by Bahá’í followers. This definition and the nature of the position of Bahá’í teachers are somewhat similar to the clergy class in other divine religions.
In an introductory pamphlet of the Bahá’í Faith, certain phrases stand out, suggesting that the responsibilities typically associated with the clergy in the Baha’i Faith, are officially recognized and delegated to the local assembly. In reference to the local spiritual assembly, one such pamphlet states:
“This assembly is the closest organizational unit to Bahá’í individuals. As mentioned, Bahá’u’lláh in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas (1) refers to it as the local House of Justice, but it is currently known as the spiritual assembly. Since there is no class of priests or clergy in the Bahá’í Faith, the local assemblies take on and fulfill this class’s duties.”
`Abdu’l-Bahá, the second leader of the Bahá’í Faith, described the position of these assemblies as follows: “From them, fountains of life flow in every direction. They are considered the source of human advancement and progress at all times and under all conditions.”
Therefore, the responsibility for the spiritual growth of each community is entrusted to the assemblies. Spiritual growth in the Bahá’í administrative structure encompasses activities related to teaching and propagation, the education of children and adults, marriage, divorce, funeral ceremonies, and the holding of Nineteen-Day Feasts and holy days.
Shoghi Effendi, the third leader of the Bahá’í Faith, stated:
“The relationship of the friends with the local assembly must be like the relationship of a child with its parents.” (Ruzaneh-ha-ye Yad, p. 41).
Upon examining this statement, as acknowledged in Bahá’í promotional literature, it is clear that the duties of clergy are performed by local assemblies. So, why do Bahá’ís claim that they do not have clergy in the Baha’i Faith? Does merely changing the name solve the issue?
Shoghi Effendi further stated on the same page of Ruzaneh-ha-ye Yad:
“No Bahá’í individual should or can regard themselves as superior to the rank of the local assembly, and no excuse for disobedience to the directives of the assembly is acceptable.” (ibid).
It becomes evident that the claim of non-imitation and the absence of clergy in the Bahá’í Faith is fundamentally incorrect and invalid. It not only contradicts rational customs (and the principles of all divine religions that are based on both reason and revelation) but is also inconsistent with the actual practices observed within the Bahá’í Faith.
Conclusion
Considering the points discussed in this article, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1- The principle of referring to specialists in all fields of knowledge, including religious knowledge, is a universally accepted principle among rational individuals, and denying it would lead to questioning rational foundations.
2- In all previous divine religions, prophets and divine proofs trained individuals to convey their message to the general public, and in Islam, this practice is rooted in the explicit instructions of the Holy Qur’an.
3- Despite advocating the unity of religions and the commonalities of all previous faiths, the Bahá’í Faith cannot deny this fundamental principle of having individuals occupy the position of intellectual and religious reference for society.
4- Despite its claim of having no authorities or clergy in the Baha’i Faith for imitation, the Bahá’í administration explicitly trains individuals for this very purpose, and Bahá’ís also imitate these authorities in religious laws as well as personal and social matters.
5- The primary root of opposition to clergy and religious authorities in Bahá’u’lláh’s writings, such as The Book of Certitude (Kitáb-i-Íqán), lies in a deep resentment caused by the clarifications made by Shia clergy regarding the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh. These clarifications were not without consequences, and some Shia clergy were martyred by followers of the Báb.
Note:
1.Happy are ye, O ye the learned ones in Bahá. By the Lord! Ye are the billows of the Most Mighty Ocean, the stars of the firmament of Glory, the standards of triumph waving between earth and heaven. Ye are the manifestations of steadfastness amidst men and the daysprings of Divine Utterance to all that dwell on earth. Well is it with him that turneth unto you, and woe betide the froward.
(Kitáb-i-Aqdas (digital copy), p.81, paragraph 173)
2.please study here the Persian copy of this subject.
