February 27. On this date in 1929, Shoghi Effendi wrote a lengthy letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States and Canada, later published in "World Order of Bahá'u'lláh," wherein he stated "Not only will the present day Spiritual Assemblies be styled differently in future, but they will be enabled also to add to their present functions those powers, duties, and prerogatives necessitated by the recognition of the Faith of Bahá'u'lláh, not merely as one of the recognized religious systems of the world, but as the State Religion of an independent and Sovereign Power. And as the Bahá'í Faith permeates the masses of the peoples of East and West, and its truth is embraced by the majority of the peoples of a number of the Sovereign States of the world, will the Universal House of Justice attain the plenitude of its power, and exercise, as the supreme organ of the Bahá'í Commonwealth, all the rights, the duties, and responsibilities incumbent upon the world's future superstate."

February 27. On this date in 1929, Shoghi Effendi wrote a lengthy letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States and Canada, later published in World Order of Bahá'u'lláh.

It should be carefully borne in mind that the local as well as the international Houses of Justice have been expressly enjoined by the Kitáb-i-Aqdas; that the institution of the National Spiritual Assembly, as an intermediary body, and referred to in the Master’s Will as the “Secondary House of Justice,” has the express sanction of 'Abdu’l-Bahá; and that the method to be pursued for the election of the International and National Houses of Justice has been set forth by Him in His Will, as well as in a number of His Tablets. Moreover, the institutions of the local and national Funds, that are now the necessary adjuncts to all local and national spiritual assemblies, have not only been established by 'Abdu’l-Bahá in the Tablets He revealed to the Bahá’ís of the Orient, but their importance and necessity have been repeatedly emphasized by Him in His utterances and writings. The concentration of authority in the hands of the elected representatives of the believers; the necessity of the submission of every adherent of the Faith to the considered judgment of Bahá’í Assemblies; His preference for unanimity in decision; the decisive character of the majority vote; and even the desirability for the exercise of close supervision over all Bahá’í publications, have been sedulously instilled by 'Abdu’l-Bahá, as evidenced by His authenticated and widely-scattered Tablets. To accept His broad and humanitarian Teachings on one hand, and to reject and dismiss with neglectful indifference His more challenging and distinguishing precepts, would be an act of manifest disloyalty to that which He has cherished most in His life.
That the Spiritual Assemblies of today will be replaced in time by the Houses of Justice, and are to all intents and purposes identical and not separate bodies, is abundantly confirmed by 'Abdu’l-Bahá Himself. He has in fact in a Tablet addressed to the members of the first Chicago Spiritual Assembly, the first elected Bahá’í body instituted in the United States, referred to them as the members of the “House of Justice” for that city, and has thus with His own pen established beyond any doubt the identity of the present Bahá’í Spiritual Assemblies with the Houses of Justice referred to by Bahá’u’lláh. For reasons which are not difficult to discover, it has been found advisable to bestow upon the elected representatives of Bahá’í communities throughout the world the temporary appellation of Spiritual Assemblies, a term which, as the position and aims of the Bahá’í Faith are better understood and more fully recognized, will gradually be superseded by the permanent and more appropriate designation of House of Justice. Not only will the present-day Spiritual Assemblies be styled differently in future, but they will be enabled also to add to their present functions those powers, duties, and prerogatives necessitated by the recognition of the Faith of Bahá’u’lláh, not merely as one of the recognized religious systems of the world, but as the State Religion of an independent and Sovereign Power. And as the Bahá’í Faith permeates the masses of the peoples of East and West, and its truth is embraced by the majority of the peoples of a number of the Sovereign States of the world, will the Universal House of Justice attain the plenitude of its power, and exercise, as the supreme organ of the Bahá’í Commonwealth, all the rights, the duties, and responsibilities incumbent upon the world’s future super-state.
It must be pointed out, however, in this connection that, contrary to what has been confidently asserted, the establishment of the Supreme House of Justice is in no way dependent upon the adoption of the Bahá’í Faith by the mass of the peoples of the world, nor does it presuppose its acceptance by the majority of the inhabitants of any one country. In fact, 'Abdu’l-Bahá, Himself, in one of His earliest Tablets, contemplated the possibility of the formation of the Universal House of Justice in His own lifetime, and but for the unfavorable circumstances prevailing under the Turkish régime, would have, in all probability, taken the preliminary steps for its establishment. It will be evident, therefore, that given favorable circumstances, under which the Bahá’ís of Persia and of the adjoining countries under Soviet rule, may be enabled to elect their national representatives, in accordance with the guiding principles laid down in 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s writings, the only remaining obstacle in the way of the definite formation of the International House of Justice will have been removed. For upon the National Houses of Justice of the East and the West devolves the task, in conformity with the explicit provisions of the Will, of electing directly the members of the International House of Justice. Not until they are themselves fully representative of the rank and file of the believers in their respective countries, not until they have acquired the weight and the experience that will enable them to function vigorously in the organic life of the Cause, can they approach their sacred task, and provide the spiritual basis for the constitution of so august a body in the Bahá’í world.

February 26. On this date in 1986, a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States explained the stipulations for wedding ceremonies "when a Bahá'í is marrying a non-Bahá'í."

February 26. On this date in 1986, a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States explained the stipulations for wedding ceremonies "when a Bahá'í is marrying a non-Bahá'í."

1295. When a Bahá'í Marries a Non-Bahá'í Both Ceremonies Can Be Held in the Place of Worship of Another Religion, if Requested, and Provided that...
"In response to your email of 6 February 1986 we have been instructed by the Universal House of Justice to send you the following clarifications:
--- When two Bahá'ís are marrying, the wedding ceremony should not be held in the place of worship of another religion, nor should the forms of the marriage of other religions be added to the simple Bahá'í ceremony.
--- When a Bahá'í is marrying a non-Bahá'í, and the religious wedding ceremony of the non-Bahá'í partner is to be held in addition to the Bahá'í ceremony, both ceremonies may, if requested, be held in the place of worship of the other religion provided that:
--- Equal respect is accorded to both ceremonies. In other words, the Bahá'í ceremony, which is basically so simple, should not be regarded as a mere formal adjunct to the ceremony of the other religion.
--- The two ceremonies are clearly distinct. In other words, they should not be commingled into one combined ceremony."
(From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, February 26, 1986)

February 26. On this date in 1957, Shoghi Effendi wrote the Australian NSA "What is important now, is for the Temple to be built. Your Assembly should study what the Master said about the influence of the Temple in America. Just exactly the same influence will be manifest in Australia, when the Temple is built. Thus you will see, it is not the size, nor the beauty of the Temple which is important; rather what is important is the Temple itself."

February 26. On this date in 1957, Shoghi Effendi wrote the Australian NSA "What is important now, is for the Temple to be built. Your Assembly should study what the Master said about the influence of the Temple in America. Just exactly the same influence will be manifest in Australia, when the Temple is built.  Thus you will see, it is not the size, nor the beauty of the Temple which is important; rather what is important is the Temple itself."

26 February 1957
Mr. James Heggie: [National Spiritual Assembly]
Dear Bahá'í Brother:
The Beloved Guardian has directed me to write your Assembly with regard to the Temple design which has been received, and the proposed cost.
The Guardian is greatly pleased with the design as now prepared, and feels it is entirely satisfactory to proceed with it. The Dome is an improvement, and the ornamental treatment of the top of the pylons of the main floor a marked improvement.
The cost proposed in Mr. Brogan's letter of February 7th, is however, quite too high, for our present finances. The Guardian feels it must be built for a total of 120,000 Stirling Pounds. I take it this is somewhat more than 120,000 Australian Pounds.
The reduced cost may necessitate your reducing the size of the Building, but if that is done, it must be on exactly the same proportions as the design which you have sent, and which he now fully approves.
In Mr. Brogan's letter he mentions an external treatment of white aggregate cement, and the internal walls in colored cement. This may indicate he intends to apply a veneer on the outside of the reinforced concrete building, and a veneer also on the inside. This is what was done with the Temple in Wilmette, and is very expensive.
What is important now, is for the Temple to be built. Your Assembly should study what the Master said about the influence of the Temple in America. Just exactly the same influence will be manifest in Australia, when the Temple is built.
Thus you will see, it is not the size, nor the beauty of the Temple which is important; rather what is important is the Temple itself.
If you find Mr. Brogan did have in mind veneer treatment of the inside and outside; then you will also find a substantial saving, if you can construct the building, so the original reinforced concrete of the building, can be treated on the outside and given the color you wish, and on the inside by plastering on the cement. This is just a suggestion from my experience with the Temple in America, of which I was a Trustee for some 19 years.
The Guardian asks that you study the matter and then let him know, or let me know for him, what adjustments are necessary to bring the cost down to 120,000 Sterling Pounds.
Also perhaps for the beginning, you are planning on too much money, for the Gardening, paths, etc. Mr. Brogan speaks of a drive. Just what is this? The immediate approaches of the Temple should not have a drive up to the building.
The Guardian assures you of his prayers in your behalf. He sends his loving Greetings,
Faithfully yours, Leroy Ioas
P.S. If the size can be maintained, or nearly so, by a simpler treatment inside and out, that may be a good way to approach your cost studies.

February 25. On this date in 2019, the Bahá'í calendar marks the start of the intercalary days known as Ayyám-i-Há.

February 25. On this date in 2019, the Bahá'í calendar marks the start of the intercalary days known as Ayyám-i-Há.

A Muslim acquaintance pointed out, that Bahá'ís accept the Qur'an as the inerrant word of God (unlike the Bible), yet the Bahá'í calendar contradicts this verse in the Qur'an, 9:36...

The number of months with Allah has been twelve months by Allah's ordinance since the day He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four are known as forbidden [to fight in]; That is the straight usage, so do not wrong yourselves therein, and fight against the disbelievers collectively as they fight against you collectively. But know that Allah is with those who are righteous.

The pre-Islamic calendar utilized an intercalary month, a practice called Nasi', that was prohibited by Muhammad in his farewell sermon...

Certainly the Nasi' is an impious addition, which has led the infidels into error. One year they authorise the Nasi', another year they forbid it. They observe the divine precept with respect to the number of the sacred months, but in fact they profane that which God has declared to be inviolable, and sanctify that which God has declared to be profane. Assuredly time, in its revolution, has returned to such as it was at the creation of the heavens and the earth. In the eyes of God the number of the months is twelve. Among these twelve months four are sacred, namely, Rajab, which stands alone, and three others which are consecutive

February 25. On this date in 1976, the Universal House of Justice wrote a letter to a National Spiritual Assembly stating that "A Bahá'í deprived of his voting rights cannot be married in a Bahá'í marriage ceremony; a Bahá'í in good standing cannot marry a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights; the marriage of a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights does not fall within the jurisdiction of a Bahá'í administrative institution."

February 25. On this date in 1976, the Universal House of Justice wrote a letter to a National Spiritual Assembly stating that "A Bahá'í deprived of his voting rights cannot be married in a Bahá'í marriage ceremony; a Bahá'í in good standing cannot marry a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights; the marriage of a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights does not fall within the jurisdiction of a Bahá'í administrative institution."

199. No Bahá'í Marriage if One is Deprived of Voting Rights--A Bahá'í in Good Standing Cannot Marry One So Deprived
"A Bahá'í deprived of his voting rights cannot be married in a Bahá'í marriage ceremony; a Bahá'í in good standing cannot marry a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights; the marriage of a Bahá'í who has lost his voting rights does not fall within the jurisdiction of a Bahá'í administrative institution.
"In other words, Bahá'ís who have lost their voting rights cannot be constrained to Bahá'í administrative requirements although their consciences should lead them to act as closely to the standards and ordinances of Bahá'í life as possible."
(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice to a National Spiritual Assembly, February 25, 1976, cited by the International Teaching Center)

February 25. On this date in 1902, Corinne True wrote 'Abdu’l-Bahá about the exclusion of women from the Chicago Bahá’í governing body, noting that "many" felt it should be a "mixed board" because "women in America stand so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department." In his response 'Abdu’l-Bahá stated that while "in the sight of God, the conduct of women is the same as that of men" and there was "no difference" between the sexes, nevertheless the "House of Justice" had to consist only of men and that the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday."

February 25. On this date in 1902, Corinne True wrote 'Abdu’l-Bahá about the exclusion of women from the Chicago Bahá’í governing body, noting that "many" felt it should be a "mixed board" because "women in America stand so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department." In his response 'Abdu’l-Bahá stated that while "in the sight of God, the conduct of women is the same as that of men" and there was "no difference" between the sexes, nevertheless the "House of Justice" had to consist only of men and that the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday."

True accepted 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s ruling–which also affirmed the equality of the sexes–and poured her energy into the Chicago Bahá’í women’s organization, which 'Abdu’l-Bahá highly praised. For the next eight years Chicago had two parallel Bahá’í organizations, one confined to men, the other to women.

What follows is a brief historical background and context on the origin of the phrase the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday," in relation to the omission of women from Houses of Justices.

On March 16, 1901, the nascent Chicago Bahá'í community selected a ten-member Board of Council. Neither Ibrahim George Kheiralla nor any of his supporters were selected to serve on the Board. On May 15, 1901, the Chicago Bahá'ís elected a nine-man Board of Council for a term of five years. On May 20, 1901, the number of members on the Board of Council was raised to 12. On May 24, 1901, the name of the Chicago Board of Council was changed to the House of Justice.

One year later, on May 10, 1902, on the request of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, the all-male Chicago House of Justice changed its name to the House of Spirituality. The body remained all-male. The Chicago House of Spirituality was complemented by the Women’s Assembly of Teaching.
In 1909, at the first American Bahá'í National Convention in Chicago, Bahá'í Temple Unity was incorporated to hold title to the Temple property and to provide for its construction. Women are allowed to serve on this body. A constitution was framed and an Executive Board of the Bahá'í Temple Unity elected.

In 1922, on the instructions of Shoghi Effendi, Bahá'í Temple Unity was renamed the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States and Canada.

On February 25, 1902, Corinne True wrote 'Abdu’l-Bahá about the exclusion of women from the Chicago Bahá’í governing body, Chicago House of Justice, noting that "many" felt it should be a "mixed board" because "women in America stand so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department." In his response 'Abdu’l-Bahá stated that while "in the sight of God, the conduct of women is the same as that of men" and there was "no difference" between the sexes, nevertheless the "House of Justice" had to consist only of men and that the "reason will presently appear, even as the sun at midday." True accepted 'Abdu’l-Bahá’s ruling–which also affirmed the equality of the sexes–and poured her energy into the Chicago Bahá’í women’s organization, which 'Abdu’l-Bahá highly praised. For the next eight years Chicago had two parallel Bahá’í organizations, one confined to men, the other to women.

On November 30, 1930, Shoghi Effendi wrote "In fact Bahá’u’lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the Houses of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá’ís will eventually evolve."

Regarding the question raised in your letter, Shoghi Effendi believes that for the present the Movement, whether in the East or the West, should be dissociated entirely from politics. This was the explicit injunction of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. . . . Eventually, however, as you have rightly conceived it, the Movement will, as soon as it is fully developed and recognized, embrace both religious and political issues. In fact Bahá’u’lláh clearly states that affairs of state as well as religious questions are to be referred to the Houses of Justice into which the Assemblies of the Bahá’ís will eventually evolve."
(30 November 1930)

On October 5, 1950, Shoghi Effendi wrote that "the Assembly is a nascent House of Justice."

270. Assembly is a Nascent House of Justice--Individuals Toward Each Other Governed by Love, Unity, etc.
"...There is a tendency to mix up the functions of the Administration and try to apply it in individual relationships, which is abortive, because the Assembly is a nascent House of Justice and is supposed to administer, according to the Teachings, the affairs of the community. But individuals toward each other are governed by love, unity, forgiveness and a sin-covering eye. Once the friends grasp this they will get along much better, but they keep playing Spiritual Assembly to each other and expect the Assembly to behave like an individual...."
(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, October 5, 1950: Living the Life, p. 17)

When today's Local and National Spiritual Assemblies become local and national Houses of Justice, their membership will once again become exclusively male.

February 24. On this date in 1929, Douglas Martin was born in Ontario, Canada. A member of the Universal House of Justice from 1993 to 2005, he was a member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of Canada from 1960 to 1985, serving as its general secretary from 1965 to 1985. In 1985, he was appointed Director-general of the Bahá’í International Community's Office of Public Information at the Bahá’í World Centre in Haifa. He served in that capacity until 1993 when he was elected to the Universal House of Justice, where he served until 2005.

February 24. On this date in 1929, Douglas Martin was born in Ontario, Canada. A member of the Universal House of Justice from 1993 to 2005, he was a member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of Canada from 1960 to 1985, serving as its general secretary from 1965 to 1985. In 1985, he was appointed Director-general of the Bahá’í International Community's Office of Public Information at the Bahá’í World Centre in Haifa. He served in that capacity until 1993 when he was elected to the Universal House of Justice, where he served until 2005.

His career is typical for individuals in the Bahá’í hierarchy, whether in an elected office or in an appointed offce from which the higher elected officials invariably come from.
At all levels, including the LSAs, Bahá’í leaders are generally as authoritarian, if not more, than clergy from other religious faiths, which as Dale Husband points out, is one of the Four Ways to Create a Religion of Hypocrites:

1. State that religion no longer needs clergy……and replace them with leaders that are as authoritarian as the clergy ever was.
2. Claim that men and women should be equal……but then deny women membership in the all-powerful leadership council of the religion.
3. Condemn as heretics those who believe in your religion but dare to challenge the claims of your religion’s current leadership, while at the same time claiming to welcome as friends the followers of other religions.
4. Claim there is harmony between science and religion, but also claim that anything your leaders say is absolutely true, even if on topics science is expected to address. Any one of these makes a religion not worth following, but what do you do if you find a religion that has all four such contradictions

February 24. On this date in 1995, the International Teaching Centre addressed a letter to the Continental Board of Counsellors wherein it was stated "Participation by enemies of the Faith or members of Covenant-breaker groups may, indeed, occur in the dialogue on electronic forums. It is not advisable for the institutions of the Faith or its individual members to become directly involved in such discussion. It is neither wise nor possible to interfere with postings on public forums, but if it is observed that such activity is taking place on Bahá'í-only forums National Assemblies should be alerted so that they may provide appropriate advice to the administrator of the forum. The greatest protection to the Faith will not be through intervention on either open or closed electronic forums, but through ongoing deepening of the Bahá'í community in the Covenant and the history and Teachings of the Faith."

February 24. On this date in 1995, the International Teaching Centre addressed a letter to the Continental Board of Counsellors wherein it was stated "Participation by enemies of the Faith or members of Covenant-breaker groups may, indeed, occur in the dialogue on electronic forums. It is not advisable for the institutions of the Faith or its individual members to become directly involved in such discussion. It is neither wise nor possible to interfere with postings on public forums, but if it is observed that such activity is taking place on Bahá'í-only forums National Assemblies should be alerted so that they may provide appropriate advice to the administrator of the forum. The greatest protection to the Faith will not be through intervention on either open or closed electronic forums, but through ongoing deepening of the Bahá'í community in the Covenant and the history and Teachings of the Faith."

February 24. On this date in 2005, the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States filed a complaint with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center against the Second International Bahá'í Council on the use of the domain uhj.net. The complaint was denied on May 8, 2005.

 

February 24. On this date in 2005, the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States filed a complaint with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center against the Second International Bahá'í Council on the use of the domain uhj.net. The complaint was denied on May 8, 2005.

WIPO Domain Name Dispute: Case D2005-0214, "uhj.net"

2005-08-25

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States v. Second International Bahá'í Council

Case No. D2005-0214

1. The Parties
The Complainant is National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States, an Illinois not-for-profit corporation with an office in Evanston, Illinois, United States of America. Complainant is represented by Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
The Respondent is Second International Bahá'í Council, an entity with an address in Missoula, Montana, United States of America, represented by Neal Chase of Missoula, Montana, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name, <uhj.net>, is registered with iHoldings.com Inc., doing business as DotRegistrar.com.
3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on February 24, 2005. On February 25, 2005, the Center transmitted, by e-mail, to DotRegistrar.com a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On February 28, 2005, DotRegistrar.com transmitted to the Center, by e-mail, its verification, confirming that Respondent is listed as the registrant of the domain name, indicating that it had "locked" the domain name, confirming several details of its registration agreement, and providing the Center with contact information for the registrant. The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("Policy"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("Supplemental Rules").

In accordance with Rules 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on March 3, 2005. In accordance with Rule 5(a), the Response was due on March 23, 2005. The Response was filed with the Center on March 23, 2005.

The Center appointed Debra J. Stanek as the sole panelist in this matter on April 22, 2004. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence required by the Center to ensure compliance with Rule 7.

On April 1, 2005, Complainant submitted to the Center, by e-mail, a request to provide a reply, stating that Respondent's submission had made "several inaccurate and confusing statements" that "may need to be addressed."

Because Complainant had indicated that it had not sent a copy of its communication to Respondent, the Center forwarded the request to Respondent. On April 8, 2005, Respondent submitted to the Center, by e-mail, its opposition to the request.

4. Factual Background

The Bahá'í faith, to which both parties to this dispute claim to adhere, was founded in the mid-1800s.

According to Complainant, in 1963, members of the Complainant, along with members of other National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís around the world, created an institution called the "Universal House of Justice." The Universal House of Justice is apparently the highest authority of the Bahá'í faith and has its headquarters in Haifa, Israel.

Complainant owns a United States federal trademark registration, issued in 1965, for the mark THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE for publications. Complainant also claims to have used THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark in connection with "other religious activities" involving the Bahá'í faith.

According to the Respondent, the term "Universal House of Justice" is defined, in the will of the founder of the Bahá'í faith and other documents related to its establishment and institutions, as an entity whose president is a descendant of King David, the king of Israel during biblical times. Respondent claims to be a descendant of David and therefore the leader of the "true" Universal House of Justice for the Bahá'í faith.

Respondent registered the <uhj.net> domain name in 2000. Visitors to the "www.uhj.net" website are presented with a page that identifies the site as "The Official Website of the Universal House of Justice." The home page includes a photograph of a Bahá'í shrine located in Israel and a quotation to the effect that the president of the Universal House of Justice must be a descendant of King David and that such leadership distinguishes "the true UHJ from fakes, frauds, and imitations."

5. Parties' Contentions

A. Complainant

Complainant makes the following contentions:

Complainant has been authorized by the Universal House of Justice to serve as the highest authority for the Bahá'í faith in the United States. In addition, the Universal House of Justice has authorized Complainant, exclusively, to use the symbols of the Bahá'í faith in the United States.

The disputed domain name, <uhj.net>, is confusingly similar to Complainant's THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE trademark, which has been used extensively for many years. The acronym "uhj" used by Respondent is recognized and used by followers of the Bahá'í faith to refer to THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark.

Respondent is using "uhj" as an acronym for THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE trademark without the permission or consent of Complainant. The home page for <uhj.net> is identified as "The Official Website of the Universal House of Justice," depicts one of the holiest of Bahá'í shrines, and contains a link labeled "Click here to contact the UHJ" that leads visitors to an e-mail address that is not the address of Complainant or the Universal House of Justice in Israel.

Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. Respondent does not own trademark applications or registrations for the marks THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE or UHJ and is not known by either name. Instead, Respondent is using the domain name to divert those seeking Complainant's website and Respondent has caused actual confusion among followers of the Bahá'í faith.

Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith. Respondent has diverted those seeking the official website of the Bahá'í faith and used misleading designations to confuse followers of the Bahá'í faith and to disrupt Complainant's organization. Further, the content of Respondent's website is not in accord with the teachings of the Bahá'í faith.

B. Respondent

Respondent contends:

Pursuant to various documents, Respondent is the successor to property of the Bahá'í faith, including its intellectual property, because, among other things, he is a descendant of King David. Complainant does not have a right to use the name "The Universal House of Justice," or any Bahá'í property, intellectual or otherwise.

Complainant's registration of the mark THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE was in bad faith, done with the intention of hijacking Respondent's rights.

Respondent is using the domain name in good faith to promote itself as the true Universal House of Justice. Its website is intended to distinguish it from the Complainant; it explicitly refers to the fact that the "true UHJ" must have as its president a descendant of King David.

Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. For many years before notice of the dispute, Respondent prepared to use and used the name "Universal House of Justice" and "UHJ" for its legitimate religious, non-commercial purposes as the "true and legal" Universal House of Justice.

Respondent is making legitimate non-commercial, fair use of the domain name, without any intent of commercial gain or any attempt to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark at issue.

Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant and has no desire to confuse those who follow Complainant's teachings. The home page of Respondent's website discloses its views regarding the "true" Universal House of Justice, headed by a descendant of King David, and other "fakes, frauds, and imitations."

The domain name was not registered or acquired primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to Complainant. The domain name was not registered in order to prevent Complainant from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name and Respondent has not engaged in a pattern of such conduct.

Complainant is engaging in reverse domain name hijacking.

6. Discussion and Findings

A. Procedural Matters

As noted above, Complainant has requested an opportunity to submit a reply to respond to "inaccurate and confusing statements" in the Response. ¹ As an initial matter, neither the Rules nor the Supplementary Rules provide for the filing of a reply.

Although litigants and parties in arbitrations may have a right of reply under the rules of other forums, ICANN chose a different procedure for these proceedings that calls for only a Complaint and a Response. Among other things, this more truncated procedure allows for more rapid and cost effective resolution of domain name challenges. [citation omitted].

See Document Technologies, Inc. v. International Electronic Communications Inc. (WIPO Case No. D2000-0270). Rule 12 does, however, permit a panel to request further documents and statements. Such requests always involve balancing the provisions of Rule 10, which require a panel to ensure both that each party has a "fair opportunity" to present its case and that the proceeding take place with "due expedition."

The Panel is of the view that supplementary submissions are appropriate only in ‘exceptional' cases, such as where new, pertinent facts arose or new, relevant legal authority was reported after a party's submission. See Document Technologies, supra. To seek or accept supplemental submissions under other circumstances undercuts the purpose of the streamlined procedures established by ICANN.

Complainant's cited reason for its seeking to supplement its initial submission was that Respondent made "inaccurate and confusing statements" that "may need to be addressed." In the Panel's view, the cited reason does not fit within the limited circumstances under which supplementary submissions are appropriate.

B. Burden of Proof

In order to prevail, Complainant must prove:

(i) The <uhj.net> domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark; and

(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the <uhj.net> domain name; and

(iii) The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

Policy, paragraph 4(a). The Policy sets out four sets of circumstances that may evidence a Respondent's bad faith registration and use under Paragraph 4(a)(iii), see Policy, paragraph 4(b), as well as examples of circumstances that may evidence a Respondent's rights or legitimate interests in a domain name, see Policy, paragraph 4(c).

(1) Identical or Confusingly Similar

Complainant must establish that the disputed domain name is either identical or confusingly similar to its mark. For purposes of considering identity or confusing similarity, the ".net" top-level domain is not relevant.

Complainant's mark is THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE. Complainant does not argue that the <uhj.net> domain name is identical to its mark and it is not. Further, Complainant does not claim any trademark rights in "uhj" and has not identified any use by it of "uhj" in any manner, including to identify itself, its activities, the institution in Israel, or the activities of that institution. Complainant must, therefore, establish that the domain name is "confusingly similar" to its mark.

Neither the Policy nor the Rules expressly articulate a test for determining "confusing similarity" and other panels have applied different tests. Some have limited the test to determining the degree of resemblance of the domain name and mark at issue as to "sight, sound, and meaning." Others have considered the degree of resemblance along with factors such as the distinctiveness of the mark, how well-known the mark is, how long the mark has been used, and the nature of the goods and services with which the mark is used.

This Panel has previously concluded that only the degree of resemblance between the Complainant's mark and the disputed domain name should determine confusing similarity. See Columbia Insurance Company v. Pampered Gourmet, WIPO Case No. D2004-0649. As stated in Columbia Insurance, this is because paragraph 4(a) refers only to the identity or confusing similarity while paragraph 4(b)(iv), in contrast, expressly refers to "likelihood of confusion . . . as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement." Further, the Policy is intended to be international in scope, which suggests that -- absent express language -- a panel should be cautious about interpreting the Policy as incorporating a test that may not exist in a number of jurisdictions. See Bradford & Bingley Plc v. Registrant info@fashionID.com 987654321, WIPO Case No. D2002-0499.

Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark. For the reasons set out below, the Panel concludes that "uhj" does not resemble THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE in appearance, pronunciation, or meaning.

The disputed domain name incorporates only the initial letters of three of the five words that make up the mark -- "uhj" -- resulting in significant differences in appearance and pronunciation between the two. The acronym "uhj" has no inherent meaning. Acronyms, by their nature, may stand for more than one combination of words. Although Complainant has provided copies of e-mail messages that seem to suggest that some members of the Bahá'í faith use "uhj" as an abbreviation for the words "Universal House of Justice," the Panel finds that these messages do not establish that the acronym has the same meaning as the words.

First, the only evidence of Complainant's trademark rights is its federal registration for use of the mark in connection with publications. Yet the messages supplied by Complainant do not appear to use the acronym "UHJ" to refer to Complainant's THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE publications or mark. Instead, they appear to refer to the institution, the Universal House of Justice in Haifa, Israel (for example, requests for prayers, a request to visit shrines in Israel, etc.). Complainant has asserted that it uses THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark in connection with "other religious activities" involving the Bahá'í faith. However, Complainant has not provided any evidence of use of the mark in connection with those other activities. In the absence of any evidence, Complainant has not established common law rights in THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark in connection with those unspecified activities, rendering the e-mail messages ambiguous at best.

Second, all of the evidence consists of e-mail messages. The use of acronyms and abbreviations in such messages is common. The Panel is not convinced that this evidence supports a more widespread use and understanding that "UHJ" signifies Complainant's THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE pamphlets or Complainant.

Finally, relying on the understanding of members of the Bahá'í faith to establish the "meaning" of the acronym, is inconsistent with the test of confusing similarity that this Panel has adopted.

The decision in Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Council of the United States v. Alex Yip, WIPO Case No. D2004-0121, supports the Panel's conclusion. In that somewhat analogous case, the panel rejected an argument that the disputed domain name, < svdpusacouncil.org>, was confusingly similar to the registered mark, SOCIETY OF ST. VINCENT DE PAUL U.S.A. ST V DE P. The panel noted that "only a part of the registered mark is incorporated into the disputed domain name, and the ‘svdp' portion of the domain name shows up as ST V DE P in the registered mark." Here too, only a portion of the registered THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE mark is incorporated into the disputed domain name.

However, in St. Vincent de Paul, the complainant also contended that over the years, it had been known by the acronym "SVDP." The panel concluded that the acronym had acquired sufficient common law rights to merit protection because it appeared that the acronym had been "used by Complainant for many years to identify it and the charitable services provided by Complainant." In contrast here, there is no evidence that Complainant has ever, at any time, itself used "uhj" to identify itself or its services. Further, and as discussed above, the e-mail messages that Complainant has characterized as showing the use, by members of the Bahá'í faith, of the acronym to identify Complainant are ambiguous.

Complainant cites two decisions by other panels for the proposition that a domain name that is an acronym of a trademark is confusingly similar to the trademark. In Successful Money Management Seminars, Inc. v. Financial Services of California, Claim No. FA0006000095042 (National Arbitration Forum, July 31, 2000), the panel stated that <fssr.com> was confusingly similar to the FINANCIAL STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL RETIREMENT trademark, for which it was an acronym. However, in that case, the panel's observation was not necessary to the decision because the complainant owned a trademark registration for the mark FSSR and the Panel does not find it persuasive here.

In VeriSign, Inc. v. Michael Brook, WIPO Case No. D2000-1139, the panel concluded that various "vrsn" domain names were confusingly similar to the complainant's VERISIGN trademark. The Panel believes that it is more aptly described as an abbreviation of the mark.² This distinction is important because an abbreviated form of a trademark is more likely than an acronym to resemble a mark in sight, sound, and meaning. In any case, in the Panel's view, "vrsn" more closely resembles the mark VERISIGN than "uhj" resembles the mark THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE.

In addition, although Verisign did not use "vrsn" as a trademark, Verisign did use "VRSN" as the symbol under which shares of its stock were publicly traded. As noted above, Complainant has not made any comparable claim or presented any evidence showing that it uses "uhj" in any manner, much less as a mark or other type of identifier.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Panel finds that Complainant has not met its burden of establishing that Respondent's domain name is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights.

(2) Rights or Legitimate Interests

As noted above, a complainant must establish each of the three elements outlined in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy in order to prevail. In light of the conclusion that Complainant has not established the first element, it is not necessary to address the issue of Respondent's claim to have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.

(3) Registered and Used in Bad Faith

For the same reasons outlined above, it is not necessary to address the issue of bad faith.

(4) Reverse Domain Name Hijacking

Respondent asserts that Complainant is engaged in reverse domain name hijacking. Reverse domain name hijacking is defined in Rule 1 as "using the Policy in bad faith to attempt to deprive a registered domain-name holder of a domain name."

The Panel finds this case presented challenging issues (although not all are discussed in this decision). The Panel concludes that the Complaint was not an attempt at reverse domain name hijacking.

7. Decision

For all the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is denied.

---

Debra J. Stanek
Sole Panelist

Dated: May 8, 2005

---

¹ Complainant did not send a copy of its request directly to Respondent, apparently believing Respondent had a "religious objection" to communicating with it. While the Panel appreciates Complainant's sensitivity, it did not interpret the statement that Respondent had, consistent with Respondent's religious beliefs, ignored Complainant's cease and desist letter, to be an objection to receiving communications. Moreover, the Panel reminds Complainant of Rule 2(h): "Any communication by . . . a Party shall be copied to the other Party, the Panel and the Provider, as the case may be" (emphasis added).
² Compare Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 10th edition, s.v. "acronym" (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=acronym) (defining "acronym" as: "a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters") with Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, 10th edition, s.v. "abbreviation (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book =Dictionary&va=abbreviation) (defining "abbreviation" as: "2 : a shortened form of a written word or phrase used in place of the whole <amt is an abbreviation for amount>").

February 23. On this date in 1924, Shoghi Effendi addressed a letter "To the beloved of the Lord and the handmaids of the Merciful throughout America," later published in "Bahá'í Administration," addressing such issues as "The Plight of Mankind" and "The New World Order."

February 23. On this date in 1924, Shoghi Effendi addressed a letter "To the beloved of the Lord and the handmaids of the Merciful throughout America," later published in "Bahá'í Administration," addressing such issues as "The Plight of Mankind" and "The New World Order."



To the beloved of the Lord and the handmaids of the Merciful throughout America. My dear fellow-workers:  

I gather from various sources that the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh, in the course of its sure yet toilsome march towards the salvation of the world, has encountered of late further obstacles, which in the eyes of some appear to retard its progress and hinder its growth. I have learned with feelings of sadness and surprise that some vague sense of apprehension, a strange misconception of its immediate purpose and methods, is slowly gaining ground, steadily affecting its wholesome growth and vigorous development throughout the continent.
Though such signs should appear from time to time, and however unrepresentative they be of the vast and growing mass of its convinced and zealous supporters, the world over, what, I wonder, could have caused this uneasiness of mind? Are such misgivings possible, though on the part of but a few, in the face of the remarkable manifestations of so remarkable a movement? To what extent do they form a part of those mental tests and trials destined at various times by the Almighty to stir and reinvigorate the body of His Cause, and how far are they traceable to our imperfect state of understanding, to our weaknesses and failings?

Divine Destiny and Human Frailty

That the Cause of God should, in the days to come, witness many a challenging hour and pass through critical stages in preparation for the glories of its promised ascendancy in the new world has been, time and again, undeniably affirmed by our departed Master, and is abundantly proved to us all by its heroic past and turbulent history. And yet, if it is the lot of the chosen ones of God, the people of Bahá, to face adversity and suffer tribulation before achieving ultimate victory, are we to believe that whatever befalls us is divinely ordained, and in no wise the result of our faint-heartedness and negligence?
Surely now, if ever, is the time to turn our eyes inwardly, to bestir ourselves, to invoke the Most Great Name, and standing together, summon to our aid and support all the faith, the strength, and the courage that we shall need to meet our pressing obligations and discharge our trust.

The Plight of Mankind

The plight of mankind, the condition and circumstances under which we live and labor are truly disheartening, and the darkness of prejudice and ill-will enough to chill the stoutest heart. Disillusion and dismay are invading the hearts of peoples and nations, and the hope and vision of a united and regenerated humanity is growing dimmer and dimmer every day. Time-honored institutions, cherished ideals, and sacred traditions are suffering in these days of bewildering change, from the effects of the gravest onslaught, and the precious fruit of centuries of patient and earnest labor is faced with peril. Passions, supposed to have been curbed and subdued, are now burning fiercer than ever before, and the voice of peace and good-will seems drowned amid unceasing convulsions and turmoil. What, let us ask ourselves, should be our attitude as we stand under the all-seeing eye of our vigilant Master, gazing at a sad spectacle so utterly remote from the spirit which He breathed into the world? Are we to follow in the wake of the wayward and the despairing? Are we to allow our vision of so unique, so enduring, so precious a Cause to be clouded by the stain and dust of worldly happenings, which, no matter how glittering and far-reaching in their immediate effects, are but the fleeting shadows of an imperfect world? Are we to be carried away by the flood of hollow and conflicting ideas, or are we to stand, unsubdued and unblemished, upon the everlasting rock of God's Divine Instructions? Shall we not equip ourselves with a clear and full understanding of their purpose and implications for the age we live in, and with an unconquerable resolve arise to utilize them, intelligently and with scrupulous fidelity, for the enlightenment and the promotion of the good of all mankind?
Humanity, torn with dissension and burning with hate, is crying at this hour for a fuller measure of that love which is born of God, that love which in the last resort will prove the one solvent of its incalculable difficulties and problems. Is it not incumbent upon us, whose hearts are aglow with love for Him, to make still greater effort, to manifest that love in all its purity and power in our dealings with our fellow-men? May our love of our beloved Master, so ardent, so disinterested in all its aspects, find its true expression in love for our fellow-brethren and sisters in the faith as well as for all mankind. I assure you, dear friends, that progress in such matters as these is limitless and infinite, and that upon the extent of our achievements along this line will ultimately depend the success of our mission in life.

The New World Order

And as we make an effort to demonstrate that love to the world may we also clear our minds of any lingering trace of unhappy misunderstandings that might obscure our clear conception of the exact purpose and methods of this new world order, so challenging and complex, yet so consummate and wise. We are called upon by our beloved Master in His Will and Testament not only to adopt it unreservedly, but to unveil its merit to all the world. To attempt to estimate its full value, and grasp its exact significance after so short a time since its inception would be premature and presumptuous on our part. We must trust to time, and the guidance of God's Universal House of Justice, to obtain a clearer and fuller understanding of its provisions and implications. But one word of warning must be uttered in this connection. Let us be on our guard lest we measure too strictly the Divine Plan with the standard of men. I am not prepared to state that it agrees in principle or in method with the prevailing notions now uppermost in men's minds, nor that it should conform with those imperfect, precarious, and expedient measures feverishly resorted to by agitated humanity. Are we to doubt that the ways of God are not necessarily the ways of man? Is not faith but another word for implicit obedience, whole-hearted allegiance, uncompromising adherence to that which we believe is the revealed and express will of God, however perplexing it might first appear, however at variance with the shadowy views, the impotent doctrines, the crude theories, the idle imaginings, the fashionable conceptions of a transient and troublous age? If we are to falter or hesitate, if our love for Him should fail to direct us and keep us within His path, if we desert Divine and emphatic principles, what hope can we any more cherish for healing the ills and sicknesses of this world?
Pending the establishment of the Universal House of Justice, whose function it is to lay more definitely the broad lines that must guide the future activities and administration of the Movement, it is clearly our duty to strive to obtain as clear a view as possible of the manner in which to conduct the affairs of the Cause, and then arise with single-mindedness and determination to adopt and maintain it in all our activities and labors.

The Foundation of the House of Justice

The various Assemblies, local and national, constitute today the bedrock upon the strength of which the Universal House is in future to be firmly established and raised. Not until these function vigorously and harmoniously can the hope for the termination of this period of transition be realized. It devolves upon us whose dearest wish is to see the Cause enter upon that promised era of universal recognition and world achievements, to do all in our power to consolidate the foundations of these Assemblies, promoting at the same time a fuller understanding of their purpose and more harmonious cooperation for their maintenance and success.
Let us also remember that at the very root of the Cause lies the principle of the undoubted right of the individual to self-expression, his freedom to declare his conscience and set forth his views. If certain instructions of the Master are today particularly emphasized and scrupulously adhered to, let us be sure that they are but provisional measures designed to guard and protect the Cause in its present state of infancy and growth until the day when this tender and precious plant shall have sufficiently grown to be able to withstand the unwisdom of its friends and the attacks of its enemies.
Let us also bear in mind that the keynote of the Cause of God is not dictatorial authority but humble fellowship, not arbitrary power, but the spirit of frank and loving consultation. Nothing short of the spirit of a true Bahá'í can hope to reconcile the principles of mercy and justice, of freedom and submission, of the sanctity of the right of the individual and of self-surrender, of vigilance, discretion and prudence on the one hand, and fellowship, candor, and courage on the other.

Duties of Elected Representatives

The duties of those whom the friends have freely and conscientiously elected as their representatives are no less vital and binding than the obligations of those who have chosen them. Their function is not to dictate, but to consult, and consult not only among themselves, but as much as possible with the friends whom they represent. They must regard themselves in no other light but that of chosen instruments for a more efficient and dignified presentation of the Cause of God. They should never be led to suppose that they are the central ornaments of the body of the Cause, intrinsically superior to others in capacity or merit, and sole promoters of its teachings and principles. They should approach their task with extreme humility, and endeavor, by their open-mindedness, their high sense of justice and duty, their candor, their modesty, their entire devotion to the welfare and interests of the friends, the Cause, and humanity, to win, not only the confidence and the genuine support and respect of those whom they serve, but also their esteem and real affection. They must, at all times, avoid the spirit of exclusiveness, the atmosphere of secrecy, free themselves from a domineering attitude, and banish all forms of prejudice and passion from their deliberations. They should, within the limits of wise discretion, take the friends into their confidence, acquaint them with their plans, share with them their problems and anxieties, and seek their advice and counsel. And, when they are called upon to arrive at a certain decision, they should, after dispassionate, anxious and cordial consultation, turn to God in prayer, and with earnestness and conviction and courage record their vote and abide by the voice of the majority, which we are told by our Master to be the voice of truth, never to be challenged, and always to be whole-heartedly enforced. To this voice the friends must heartily respond, and regard it as the only means that can insure the protection and advancement of the Cause.

Election of Delegates

Again I earnestly appeal to every one of you, and renew my only request with all the ardor of my conviction, to make, before and during the coming Convention, yet another effort, this time more spontaneous and selfless than before, and endeavor to approach your task--the election of your delegates, as well as your national and local representatives--with that purity of spirit that can alone obtain our Beloved's most cherished desire. Let us recall His explicit and often-repeated assurances that every Assembly elected in that rarefied atmosphere of selflessness and detachment is, in truth, appointed of God, that its verdict is truly inspired, that one and all should submit to its decision unreservedly and with cheerfulness.
Let us first strive to fulfill these conditions, difficult yet essential, in our lives, so that, contented and assured, we may make of this new year of activity a year of abundant blessings, of unprecedented achievements.
May this dearest wish be fulfilled!
SHOGHI.
Haifa, Palestine,
February 23, 1924.

February 23. On this date in 1914, at the eve of World War I, 'Abdu'l-Bahá hosted Baron Edmond James de Rothschild, a member of the Rothschild banking family who was a leading advocate and financier of the Zionist movement, during one of his early trips to Palestine. This event was reported in "Star of the West" magazine.

 

A postcard with photos of Zionist leaders. Herzl and Herbert Samuel appear in center in Stars of David, linking them is the photo of Lord Balfour.


February 23. On this date in 1914, at the eve of World War I, 'Abdu'l-Bahá hosted Baron Edmond James de Rothschild, a member of the Rothschild banking family who was a leading advocate and financier of the Zionist movement, during one of his early trips to Palestine. This event was reported in "Star of the West" magazine.

On September 8, 1919, subsequent to the British occupation of Palestine, at a time when tens of thousands of Jewish settlers were arriving under the auspices of the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, an article in the "Star of the West" quoted 'Abdu'l-Bahá praising the Zionist movement, proclaiming that "There is too much talk today of what the Zionists are going to do here. There is no need of it. Let them come and do more and say less" and that "A Jewish government might come later."

On January 24, 1922, Shoghi Effendi received a letter from Herbert Samuel, the British High Commissioner for Palestine. The receipt of the letter is mentioned in [Amatu'l-Bahá Rúhíyyih Khánum]'s *The Priceless Pearl. As High Commissioner, Herbert Samuel was the first Jew to govern the historic land of Israel in 2,000 years, and his appointment was regarded by the Muslim-Christian Associations as the "first step in formation of Zionist national home in the midst of Arab people." Herbert Samuel welcomed the arrival of Jewish settlers under the auspices of the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association and recognised Hebrew as one of the three official languages of the Mandate territory

While Shoghi Effendi was thus occupied and was gathering his powers and beginning to write letters such as these to the Bahá'ís in different countries, he received the following letter from the High Commissioner for Palestine, Sir Herbert Samuel, dated 24 January 1922:

Dear Mr. Rabbani,
I have to acknowledge receipt of your letter of Jan. 16., and to thank you for the kind expression it contains. It would be unfortunate if the ever to be lamented death of Sir 'Abdu'l-Bahá were to interfere with the completion of your Oxford career, and I hope that may not be the case. I am much interested to learn of the measures that have been taken to provide for the stable organization of the Bahá'í Movement. Should you be at any time in Jerusalem in would be a pleasure to me to see you here.
Yours sincerely,
Herbert Samuel

On December 16, 1950, a little over a year after the international recognition of the State of Israel, the mansion at Mazra'a was leased from the Israeli government by the Bahá'í Administrative Order. Bahá'u'lláh lived there from 1877 until 1879, before moving to the Mansion at Bahjí.
The transaction is described in Baha'i News, no. 244, June 1951, p. 4

Masra'ih is a Moslem religious endowment, and it is consequently impossible, under existing laws in this country, for it to be sold. However, as the friends are aware, the Ministry of Religions, due to the direct intervention of the Minister himself, Rabbi Maimon, consented, in the face of considerable opposition, to deliver Masra'ih to the Baha'is as a Holy Place to be visited by Baha'i pilgrims. This means that we rent it from the Department of Moslem and Druze affairs in the Ministry of Religions. The head of this Department is also a Rabbi, Dr. Hirschberg. Recently he, his wife and party, visited all the Baha'i properties in Haifa and 'Akka, following upon a very pleasant tea party in the Western Pilgrim House with the members of the International Baha'i Council.

The mansion at Mazra'a would later be purchased by the Bahá'í Administrative Order from the Israeli government as reported in Messages from the Universal House of Justice 1968-1973, published 1976; Ridván Message 1973, p. 119

The Mansion of Mazra'ih, often referred to by the beloved Guardian as one of the "twin mansions" in which the Blessed Beauty resided after nine years within the walled prison-city of 'Akká, and dear to the hearts of the believers by reason of its associations with their Lord, has at last been purchased together with 24,000 square meters of land extending into the plain on its eastward side.

On November 12, 1952, a cablegram sent by Shoghi Effendi announced the "acquisition of vitally-needed property" of the Mansion of Bahji and the area around it from "the Development Authority of the State of Israel...The exchange of said property, including land and houses, was made possible by the precipitate flight of the former Arab owners."

Acquisition of Vitally-Needed Property
Announce to Bahá'í communities, East and West, on the joyous occasion of the hundred and thirty-fifth Anniversary of Bahá'u'lláh's Birthday, the successful termination of the protracted negotiations, initiated two years ago and culminating in the signature to the contract providing the eventual, formal transfer by the Development Authority of the State of Israel to the Palestine Branch of the American National Spiritual Assembly of the extensive, long-desired, vitally-needed property surrounding and safeguarding for posterity the Most Holy Tomb of the Founder of the Faith, as well as the adjoining Mansion.
The acquired area, raising Bahá'í holdings on the holy plain of &Akka from four thousand to one hundred and fifty-five thousand square meters, was exchanged against property donated by children of Zikrullah, grandchildren of Mírzá Muhammad Quli, Bahá'u'lláh's faithful half-brother and companion in exile.
This spontaneous offer contrasts with the shameful action of the family in the sale to non-Baha'is of the property in the neighborhood of the Jordan valley purchased through the instrumentality of `Abdu'l-Bahá during Bahá'u'lláh's lifetime, pursuant to His instructions and alluded to in His writings.
The forty acre property acquired in this single transaction almost equals the entire Bahá'í international endowments purchased in the course of sixty years in the vicinity of the Báb's Sepulcher on the slope of Mount Carmel.
The exchange of said property, including land and houses, was made possible by the precipitate flight of the former Arab owners, traditional supporters of the old Covenant-breakers and descendants of the notorious enemy of `Abdu'l-Bahá who placed his residence at the disposal of the Committee of Investigation.
The signature to the agreement signalized the commencement of large-scale landscaping, aiming at the beautification of the immediate precincts of the holiest spot in the entire Bahá'í world, itself the prelude to the eventual erection, as happened in the case of the Báb's Sepulcher, of a befitting Mausoleum enshrining the precious Dust of the Most Great Name.
Desire to acknowledge the indefatigable efforts exerted by both Larry Hautz and Leroy Ioas enabling the consummation of the initial stage of the enterprise destined to eclipse in its final phase the splendor and magnificence of the Báb's resting-place on Mount Carmel.
--Shoghi
[Cablegram, November 12, 1952] 

On January 21, 1949, Shoghi Effendi met with David Ben Gurion. In the chapter titled The Heart and Nerve Centre in her book The Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith, Amatu'l-Bahá Rúhíyyih Khánum describes this meeting...

In January 1949 Mr. Ben Gurion, the Prime Minister of the Provisional Government, came to Haifa on his first official visit and the Mayor naturally invited Shoghi Effendi to attend the reception being given in his honour by the Municipality. The dilemma was acute, for if the Guardian did not go, it would, with every reason, be taken as an affront to the new Government, and if he did go he would inevitably be submerged in a sea of people where any pretence at protocol would be swept away (this was indeed the case, as my father, Shoghi Effendi's representative, reported after he returned from this reception). The Guardian therefore decided that as he would not be attending, but was more than willing to show courtesy to the Prime Minister of the new State, he would call upon him in person. With great difficulty this was arranged through the good offices of the Mayor of Haifa, Shabatay Levy, as Mr. Ben Gurion's time in Haifa was very short and it was only two days before the first general election in the new State.
The interview took place on Friday evening, January 21st, in the private home the Prime Minister was staying in on Mt. Carmel and lasted about fifteen minutes. Ben Gurion enquired about the Faith and Shoghi Effendi's relation to it and asked if there was a book he could read; Shoghi Effendi answered his questions and assured him he would send him a copy of his own book God Passes By — which he later did, and which was acknowledged with thanks. Typical of the whole history of the Cause and the constant problems that beset it was a long article which appeared in the leading English-language newspaper on December 20, 1948, in which, in the most favourable terms, its teachings were set forth and the station of Shoghi Effendi as its World Head mentioned. On January 28, 1949, there appeared in the letter column of this paper a short and extraordinary statement, signed "Bahai U.N. Observer", which flatly refuted the article and asserted, "Mr. Rabbani is not the Guardian of the Bahai faith, nor its World Leader" and gave the New History Society in New York as a source of further information
As there was no such thing as a "Bahai U.N. Observer" this move was plainly inspired by the once-more hopeful band of old Covenant-breakers, who sought, at the outset of a new regime, to blacken Shoghi Effendi's reputation and divert attention from his station by referring to Ahmad Sohrab's rootless group in America. At a later date, when in 1952 the Covenant-breakers in Bahji brought their case in the local courts against Shoghi Effendi for the demolition of an old building near the Mansion of Bahá'u'lláh, Sohrab sought, unsuccessfully, to bring pressure on the Minister of Religious Affairs to discredit the Bahá'í claims. It was with attacks such as this, both open and covert, that the Guardian, on the threshold of a new phase in the development of the affairs of the Faith at its World Centre, once more had to content.
It had long been the desire of Shoghi Effendi to obtain control of the Mansion at Mazra'ih, where Bahá'u'lláh had first lived when He quitted once-for-all the walls of the prison-city of 'Akka. This property was a Muslim religious endowment and had now fallen vacant. It was planned by the government to turn it into a rest home for officials. All efforts, through the departments concerned, to procure this property were unavailing until Shoghi Effendi appealed directly to [Ben Gurion]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ben-Gurion), explaining its significance to the Bahá'ís and his desire to have it visited by pilgrims as a place so closely associated with Bahá'u'lláh. The Prime Minister himself then intervened in the matter and it was leased to the Bahá'ís as an historic site. Shoghi Effendi proudly informed the Bahá'í world, on December 16, 1950, that its keys had been delivered to us, by the Israeli authorities, after the lapse of more than fifty years.
The affairs of the Bahá'í Community, in matters concerning its day-to-day dealings with the government in connection with the work at the World Centre, had been placed under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Religious Affairs and was at first handled by the head of the Department that dealt with Muslim affairs. This Shoghi Effendi violently objected to as it implied the Faith was in some way identified with Islam. After much negotiation a letter was received from the Minister of Religious Affairs, dated December 13, 1953, addressed to "His Eminence, Shoghi Effendi Rabbani, World Head of the Bahá'í Faith" in which he said:

"...I am pleased to inform you of my decision to establish in our Ministry a separate Department for the Bahá'í Faith. I hope that this department will be of assistance to you in matters concerning the Bahá'í Centre in our State.
In the name of the Ministry of Religious Affairs of the State of Israel, I wish to assure Your Eminence that full protection will be given to the Holy Places as well as to the World Centre of the Bahá'í Faith."

The victory was all the more welcome, following as it did the previously mentioned court case against Shoghi Effendi brought on a technicality by the Covenant-breakers in connection with the demolition of a house adjoining the Shrine and Mansion of Bahá'u'lláh in Bahji. Never tired of seeking to publicly humiliate and discredit the Head of the Faith, be it 'Abdu'l-Bahá or the Guardian, they had had the temerity to summon Shoghi Effendi to appear in court as a witness. Once more, greatly concerned for the honour of the Cause at its World Centre, Shoghi Effendi appealed direct to the Prime Minister, sending as his representatives the President, Secretary-General and Member-at-Large of the International Bahá'í Council (whom he had summoned from Italy for this purpose) to Jerusalem on more than one visit to press the strategy he himself had devised. These representations were successful and on the grounds of its being a purely religious issue it was removed by Government from the jurisdiction of the civil courts. As soon as the plaintiffs found their plan to humiliate Shoghi Effendi had been forestalled, they were willing to settle the case by negotiation. That the authorities and the Bahá'í Community were equally pleased by this conclusion of the matter is shown in these letters written to the Guardian by members of the Prime Minister's staff — two men to whom the Faith owed much for their sympathetic efforts on its behalf at that time:

PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE Jerusalem, 19th May, 1952. His Eminence Shoghi Rabbani,
World Head of the Bahá'í Faith,
Haifa. Your Eminence, I am instructed to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 16th May addressed to the Prime Minister. As you are no doubt aware, the dispute between yourself as the World head of the Bahá'í Faith and members of the family of the founder of the Faith has found its solution and there is no need, therefore, to take any administrative action in order to solve the problem. May I express to you our gratitude for your wise and benevolent attitude taken in the dispute which enabled us to impose a just and, as we hope, a lasting solution on the dissident group? The Prime Minister assures you of his personal esteem and sends you his best wishes.
Yours sincerely,
S. Eynath
Legal Adviser

It is significant to note that they address Shoghi Effendi as "His Eminence", a title which, though still far below what his position merited, was the one that had been introduced in the earliest days of his ministry, but never really used by any officials until the formation of the Jewish State.
The cordial nature of the relations established between the Guardian and the officials of the State of Israel encouraged Shoghi Effendi to ascertain if the President would care to visit the Bahá'í Shrine in Haifa; when word was received that he would accept such an invitation, Shoghi Effendi formally invited him to do so and arrangements were made for the morning of April 26, 1954, at which time, the Director of the President's Office wrote to Shoghi Effendi, the President would "be pleased to pay you an official visit". Accordingly the President and his wife arrived at the home of the Master, attended by two officials, partook of light refreshment and were presented by the Guardian with a Persian album, painted with miniatures and bound in silver, containing some photographs of the Shrines, as a memento of their visit. The Presidential party, with Shoghi Effendi and those who accompanied him, then proceeded to the gardens on Mt. Carmel. It was the first time in the history of the Cause that the Head of an independent nation had ever made an official visit of this kind and it constituted another milestone in the development of the World Centre of the Faith. The President and his companions showed the greatest respect to the Shrine of the Bab, removing their shoes as we did, before entering it, the men keeping their hats on out of reverence as Jews for a holy place; it was a very moving moment to see President Ben Zvi standing beside Shoghi Effendi, the former with his European hat, the latter with his simple black fez, before the threshold. After a few words of explanation from Shoghi Effendi we all withdrew and walked about he gardens for a few minutes before saying good-bye in front of the Oriental Pilgrim House where the President's car was awaiting him.
On April 29th the President wrote personally to the Guardian: "I should like to express my thanks for your kind hospitality and for the interesting time I spent with you visiting the beautiful Gardens and remarkable Shrine... I do appreciate the friendship which the Bahá'í Community has for Israel and it is my sincere hope that we may all live to see the strengthening of amity between all peoples on earth." On May 5th the Guardian replied to this letter in equally warm terms: "...It was a great pleasure to meet Your Excellency and Mrs. Ben Zvi, and be able to show you one of our places of Bahá'í pilgrimage in Israel... If it suits your convenience, Mrs. Rabbani and I, accompanied by Mr. Ioas, would like to call upon Your Excellency and Mrs. Ben Zvi in Jerusalem..." The time for this return call was set for the afternoon of May 26th and we had tea and a pleasant conversation with the President and his wife, in her own way as much a personality as her husband and equally nice. In the interim between these two visits Shoghi Effendi had sent to the President some Bahá'í books which he had promised him and these had been acknowledged with the thanks of the President and the assurance that he would read them with great interest. Ever meticulous in all matters, Shoghi Effendi wrote on June 3rd to the President: "I wish to thank you and Mrs. Ben Zvi for your kind hospitality. Mrs. Rabbani and I enjoyed our visit with you very much, and I feel sure that this opportunity we have had of visiting with you our Bahá'í Holy Places and calling upon you in the capital of Israel has served to reinforce the bonds of affection and esteem which unite the Bahá'ís to the people and Government of Israel. With kind regards to you and Mrs. Ben Zvi..." Thus ended another memorable chapter in the process of winning recognition for the Faith at its World Centre.