“'Abdu'l-Bahá does not permit adverse criticism of individuals by name in discussion among the friends” - 23 September 1975

You ask in your letter for guidance on the implications of the prohibitions on backbiting and more specifically whether, in moments of anger or depression, the believer is permitted to turn to his friends to unburden his soul and discuss his problem in human relations. Normally, it is possible to describe the situation surrounding a problem and seek help and advice in resolving it, without necessarily mentioning names. The individual believer should seek to do this, whether he is consulting a friend, Bahá'í or non-Bahá'í, or whether the friend is consulting him.

'Abdu'l-Bahá does not permit adverse criticism of individuals by name in discussion among the friends, even if the one criticizing believes that he is doing so to protect the interests of the Cause. If the situation is of such gravity as to endanger the interests of the Faith, the complaint, as your National Spiritual Assembly has indicated, should be submitted to the Local Spiritual Assembly, or as you state to a representative of the institution of the Counsellors, for consideration and action. In such cases, of course, the name of the person or persons involved will have to be mentioned. 

- The Universal House of Justice  (From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, September 23, 1975; compilation: ‘Lights of Guidance’)

Military or paramilitary service - 14 September 1975

Whenever circumstances of military or paramilitary service arise the Bahá'í friends should do their utmost to avoid taking part. If, however, they are compelled to do so they should then do everything possible to ensure that they are engaged only in non-combatant services. When the question of National Service, such as you describe in Guyana, includes training in skills and professions useful to mankind, such as agriculture, the friends may certainly volunteer for such services, provided they are definitely assured that their training will not subject them alter to call up for military service in combatant roles.

If compelled to enter training of a military kind the friends should endeavour to be assigned to such non-combatant activities as stretcher bearing, the medical corps, administrative duties, and other essential departments of military organizations which would not involve them directly in the taking of life.

It is therefore for your National Spiritual Assembly to decide whether the National Service programme in Guyana is a permissible occupation for Bahá'í youth, and if so whether on a voluntary basis, or if under compulsion, what steps can be taken to enable Bahá'í youth to serve as non-combatants. 

- The Universal House of Justice  (From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assembly of Guyana, Surinam and French Guiana, September 14, 1975; compilation: ‘Lights of Guidance’)

The ”provision in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas regarding inheritance, in which the eldest son receives preferential treatment” - July 24, 1975

You mention the provision in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas regarding inheritance, in which the eldest son receives preferential treatment. As you no doubt know, the duty of making a will is enjoined upon all Bahá’ís, and in such a will a believer is free to bequeath his or her property in whatever way he or she wishes (see note 25 on page 60 of the Synopsis and Codification). Every system of law, however, needs to make provision for the disposal of a person’s property if he or she dies without having made a will, and it is in cases of intestacy that the specific provisions stated in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas are applied. These provisions give expression to the law of primogeniture, which, as ‘Abdu’l‑Bahá has stated, has invariably been upheld by the Law of God. In a Tablet to a follower of the Faith in Persia He wrote: “In all the Divine Dispensations the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright.” With the distinctions given to the eldest son, however, go concomitant duties. For example, with respect to the law of inheritance ‘Abdu’l‑Bahá has explained in one of His Tablets that the eldest son has the responsibility to take into consideration the needs of the other heirs. Similar considerations no doubt apply to the provisions that, in intestacy, limit the shares due to half-brothers and half-sisters of the deceased on his or her mother’s side; they will, of course, be due to receive inheritance from their own father’s estate. 

- The Universal House of Justice  (From a letter dated 24 July 1975 to an individual believer; The Compilation of Compilations, vol. II, Women)

Divorce and wife’s personal property - July 24, 1975

Your statement that “Gifts to a wife are included in the man’s property to be given away after his death” is incorrect. It is clear from the passage in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas that certain things that a husband buys for his wife are intended to be for the general household and certain are intended to be the wife’s personal property. These latter, that is to say the wife’s used clothing and gifts which have been made to her, are not included in the husband’s property. 

- The Universal House of Justice  (From a letter dated 24 July 1975 to an individual believer; The Compilation of Compilations, vol. II, Women)