Heterodox Baha’is Loses Court Cases Against Orthodox Baha’is

Oh you didn’t know that the word “Baha’i” is trademarked?

Seriously. It is.

I wish I was making this up.

It was registered by the US NSA with the US trademark office on March 11, 1952 (Registration #556,004). Look it up if you don’t believe me.

So is the “Greatest Name” symbol (in Arabic calligraphic script). But wait, you ask, shouldn’t Mishkin-Qalam own the trademark to that? or at least his descendents? A spokesperson for the US NSA helpfully replies: Shut up.

No word as of yet if the US NSA has patented the postures within the Baha’i long obligatory prayer. But just to be sure, I would suggest you not bend down to pick up anything off the ground for the foreseeable future as that may constitute a dilution of the NSA’s reputation.

Anyway, getting back to our story, it turns out the judge back then was high on a groovy mixture of pot and LSD so he sided with the US NSA. Well, to be fair, I have no evidence that the judge was tripping on a cloud 8 miles high… other than the roach clip that was later found by the janitor under his chair and the fact that he went along with the trademarking of “Baha’i”.

Think about it.

He gave exclusive legal ownership of the adjective… the very word that describes a religious organization. (Who owns the trademark for “Christian” or “Jew” by the way? Someone look that up between tokes.) I think if that judge was presented with the trademarking of “chair” or “tree” or “hair” he would have gone along as well. When you’re baked… you’re baked.

Which brings us up to the present day. More accurately, November 2006 – when the present US NSA filed a motion to hold the Orthodox Baha’i group in contempt for not abiding by the 1966 judgement.

You see, they were publishing content online which used the trademark and distinctive words, phrases and markings that the 1966 court ruling said they couldn’t be using.

The defense of the Orthodox Baha’i group was that there was no privity (look it up) between them and the Mason Remey organization to which the previous ruling was bound upon. The US NSA argued that they were one and the same organization, just with a different name.

So they went back and forth:

Are not. Are too. Are not. Are too.

Except the lawyers used more complex words to justify their hefty bills at the end.

The result? The judge (from now on called Amy) just like a parent, after patiently listening to the intricately nuanced arguments for more than a year, finally got tired and sent them all to their respective rooms for a time out. No, I’m just kidding.

Amy, being a sensible woman, free of all narcotic and hallucinogenic compounds ruled as follows:

… there was a significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group’s faith, and that the PNBC’s membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result … the PNBC have not violated the injunction.

PNBC stands for Provisional National Baha’i Council – it is one of the many acronym soups that you’ll find within the legal documents of the case.

View this document on Scribd

I am not a legal expert by any means and I hope that some who are will step forward to offer their wisdom… however, it seems to me that the NSA weighed their options and chose to attempt to enforce the 1966 ruling on the Orthodox Baha’is because they estimated that a new legal proceeding would have less chance of winning.

Read the rest of this entry »


Sir Abbas Effendi the first Covenant Breaker after passing of Baha’u’llah

abdu'l-baha

Abdul Baha The Spiritually Ex-Communicated Guardian

As all my fellow Baha’i friends are aware of law of Ex-communication now a days it is threat from Baha’i administration whosoever try to raise his voice on any miss-administration or miss-handling of Huqoqulah or any objection or question which our beloved Universal House of justice fails in reply we get a warning of weapon of ex-communication. My Independent Investigation of Truth has reveal the fact that the first covenant breaker was Sir Abbas Effendi who has disobeyed his father Baha’u’llah and contradicted his teachings and promoted himself in many station and disrespecting Aghsan (lineage of Baha’u’llah) and ex-communicating entire family members of Mahde Uliya (wife of Baha’u’llah) for sure by this he is spiritually ex-communicated and he was epic center of covenant breaker in dispensation of Baha’u’llah.

Here I am bringing few pages of a loyal Baha’i and companion of Baha’u’llah Mirza Jawad Qazvini who has witness rise and spread of Baha’i faith, he has written a book as his memories

“Brief History of Behaullah The founder of Beha’i Religion”  By Mirza Jawad Qazvini, author was with Baha’u’llah in 1862-63 in Baghdad; was arrested in Tabriz in 1867 but let go with a fine; went to Edirne midway through 1867; went to Akka with Baha’u’llah and spent the rest of his life there. A partial translation is available in “Material for the study of Babi religion” by the noted Historian Edward Browne translation is under the title “Epitome of Mirza Jawad of Qazvini” the original book is in Arabic I would like to bring few pages of his memories from Page 62-67

From Page 62-67

Part of Baha’u’llah’s Testament Held Back by Sir Abbas Effendi

The first difference which happened after the death of His Holiness our Great Master Baha’u’llah within this Community was that ‘Abbas Effendi concealed some part of the book of [Baha’u’llah’s] Testament entitled “the Book of my Testament, which book was given to him by Baha’u’llah in his own holy writing. The detail of this is that on the ninth day after the Ascension [i.e. the death of Baha’u’llah] ‘Abbas Effendi chose nine persons from amongst the Companions, one of whom was the author [of this book] and disclosed to them this document, concealing, however, a portion of it with a blue leaf [of paper] without any reason or justification, and gave it to them that they might enjoy the blessing of its perusal. One of them, named Aqa Riza of Shiraz, read it at a sign from him down to the place concealed by the blue leaf, whereupon ‘Abbas Effendi said to the persons above mentioned, “Verily a portion of this book is concealed for a good reason, because the time doth not admit of its full disclosure.” On the afternoon of that day Majdu’d-Din Effendi read it again, by command of (Abbas Effendi, in the Holy Place, before a company of the Aghsan (sons of Baha’u’llah), Afnan (kinsmen of the Bab), Muhajirin (Exiles), Mujawirin (settlers in ‘Akka) and Musafarin (temporary visitors), down to the afore-mentioned passage, as narrated above.

Read the rest of this entry »