Abdu’l-Baha appointed Shoghi Effendi clearly and in writing, to be the Guardian, and required all to obey him:

“…it is incumbent upon the Aghsán (Branches), the Afnán (Twigs) of the Sacred Lote-Tree, the Hands (pillars) of the Cause of God and the loved ones of the Abhá Beauty to turn unto Shoghi Effendi
”

As Shoghi Effendi comments,

“Unlike the Dispensation of Christ, unlike the Dispensation of Muhammad, [the Bahais] have before them in clear, in unequivocal and emphatic language, all the laws, the regulations, the principles, the institutions, the guidance, they require” … “in the matter of succession, … the followers of Bahá’u'lláh can summon to their aid such irrefutable evidences of Divine Guidance that none can resist, that none can belittle or ignore. Therein lies the distinguishing feature of the Bahá’í Revelation.”
(The World Order of Baha’u'llah, p. 21)

Because the Bahai scriptural texts are so clear, there’s not the slightest chance that anyone knowledgeable about the Bahai Faith will give the claims of Muhammad Ali a second thought. If the covenant was not specifically spelled out in authentic texts, some might no doubt heed your call.

What makes you think that I object to any feature of the Covenant? That is just not true. It was you who objected to Baha’u'llah not stating in clear language Muhammad Ali’s succession after Abdul-Baha. Do you also object to Baha’u'llah not stating in clear language the institution of Guardianship? If not why would you object to one and not the other?

He it was who, obsessed by the fear that he might not survive ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, had, the moment he had been assured by Him that all the honor he coveted would, in the course of time, be his, swiftly rejoined that he had no guarantee that he would outlive Him. He it was who, as testified by Mirza Badi’u'llah in his confession, written and published on the occasion of his repentance and his short-lived reconciliation with ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, had, while Bahá’u'lláh’s body was still awaiting interment, carried off, by a ruse, the two satchels containing his Father’s most precious documents, entrusted by Him, prior to His ascension, to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. He it was who, by an exceedingly adroit and simple forgery of a word recurring in some of the denunciatory passages addressed by the Supreme Pen to Mirza Yahya, and by other devices such as mutilation and interpolation, had succeeded in making them directly applicable to a Brother Whom he hated with such consuming passion. And lastly, it was this same Mirza Muhammad-’Ali who, as attested by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in His Will, had, with circumspection and guile, conspired to take His life, an intention indicated by the allusions made in a letter written by Shu’a'u’llah (Son of Mirza Muhammad-’Ali), the original of which was enclosed in that same Document by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá.
(Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, p. 249)

True, the Guardianship is not clearly stated in the Writings of Baha’u'llah; what is clearly stated is the authority of Abdu’l-Baha, and he then clearly mandated the institution of the Guardianship and laid down its rules and procedures, in his Will and Testament, beginning on page 11. That requires the Aghsan, including Muhammad Ali, to obey the Guardian.

It seems to me your objection to the Bahai Covenant is that it is too clear and specific, too much beyond any doubt or dispute.

WRT your point that Baha’u'llah did not say in clear language that Muhammad Ali was to succeed Abdul-Baha. This is based on your standard of clarity. Baha’u'llah does not mention the institution of the Guardianship in clear language in His writings. He mentions it by implication as Shoghi Effendi says.

O faithful loved ones of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá! The centre of sedition [Mirza Muhammad-Ali], the focus of rebellion — whose evil character and passions, even in the days of the Ancient Beauty, made him known for his stubborn perversity and his ambition to lead — began to put forward certain claims, gathered about him a pitiful band, raised up the ensign of self-glorification and self-love, and considered himself to be a partner in authority with none other than Him Who was the True One, until in the end the hand of the Lord’s omnipotence struck down his plans and hopes.

For a period of thirty years, he opposed the Centre of the Covenant and, to bring down His structure in ruins, did everything that lay in his power. This in spite of the fact that the divine Beauty had made His Covenant so strong, and appointed its Centre so explicitly, in writing, unmistakably, that He had left no room for any questions or doubts. In the Most Holy Book of Aqdas, which in this most excellent of all ages is the Mother Book, and embraces all, and again in the Kitáb-i-Ahdi,[The Book of My Covenant] the last revealed Tablet by the Tongue of knowledge and wisdom, which contains the final wishes of God — the people of Baha are directed with perfect clarity to turn their faces toward Him Whom God has purposed, and He is designated as the Interpreter of the Book, the Resolver of all complex and difficult questions, and the Centre of the Faith. Therein as well are the other Branches, the Afnan and the rest of the believers bidden to direct themselves unto that One so that all might face one and the same Centre, and all be bound thereto. Thus would the basic foundation of God’s Cause, which is unity, remain unassailable. Thus the root of heresy and rebellion would wither away, and just as in the days when He Who is the Truth was made manifest, so too in the day of His Covenant the light of unity would pervade all things, and put to flight the murk of disbelief and dualism and rebellion and opposition — and thus the tree of His holy Cause would grow and flourish, and the rich fruits borne by the holy Teachings would satisfy all needs and be sweet in the mouth of all mankind.

This fact of there being only one Centre and of turning unto a single holy Being is, in the Kingdom of His Cause, as the shaft or spindle of a millstone, and all the other laws and ordinances must needs revolve around this one. In the temple of God’s religion the Centre of the Cause can be likened to the heart, for upon it depends the life of the human body as one entity, as well as the relationships of its organs and their essential growth and vitality. In human society the Centre of the Cause can be compared to the sun, whose magnetic force controls the movements and orbits of the planets. The Centre of the Cause is also like the spine of a book, for by it the pages are all banded together into one book, and without the spine the papers would become loose and scattered.

Now each separate member of the community who is within the shelter of that blessed unity is, according to his rank and station, the recipient of grace; and that rank is respected and protected, in conformity with the verse: ‘Not one of us but hath his clearly designated station.’[Qur'án 37:164] Thus, in the body of man, the eye has a preordained station, one not belonging to some lesser members; and yet, should it once depart from the whole, and its connection with the centre be broken, then its membership in the body, and its very life, are ended, let alone its previous station and degree. Or should the eye be plucked from its place, torn out of the body, it would be deprived of life itself, how much less would it continue to enjoy the station that rightly belongs to the eye.

How strange! With reference to one who smokes opium, the Ancient Beauty, the Most Great Name, has said: ‘He is not of Me’, making no distinction here between one enjoying God’s special favour, and some other. If the smoking of opium, which is one of the secondary and lesser prohibitions, completely severs the smoker from membership in the community and from relationship to the Person of the Manifestation, then what must be the condition of him who refuses to acknowledge the Centre of the holy Covenant? In the words of Christ, ‘If thine eye cause thee to stumble, pluck it out … if thy hand offend thee, cut it off. [cf.Matthew 18:8-9; Mark 9:43-7.]

O would that they had contented themselves with their refusal to recognize that shining Being — with their failure to obey Him and to be lowly before Him. But no, they beat upon rebellion’s drum, and hoisted the flag of contumacy and spite, and blew the trumpet of calumnies across the world. In the hearts of the credulous they sowed seeds of disaffection, and inconstancy and opposition. They made common cause with the hostile, the biased, the mockers, who were arrayed against the Faith of the Blessed Beauty, flattering them and paying them bribes and holding out promises and hopes; they worked hand in glove with those occupying the seats of the judiciary, and those authorized to interpret the law and pronounce judgment, and those who sat on despots’ thrones, and with still others who were engaged in affairs remote from God’s; and by all manner of deceits and stratagems incited them to utterly extirpate the Covenant of Almighty God and the Centre of it. They even, with a liberal distribution of funds, hired assassins to shed the sacred blood of that Vicegerent of the Glorious Lord.

Could any just person imagine that such as these have any relationship or spiritual connection whatever with the Beauty of the One true God, or that they could be accounted as members of the Bahá’í community? Would not such as these be only plucked-out eyes and palsied hands?
(Bahiyyih Khanum, p. 134)

—-

This is one of the most interesting and valuable of Baha’i books, and it can be downloaded in Word or in PDF. http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/others.html Her letters are clear, profound, sweet on the palate of the heart, and irrefutable.

Brent

I understand it rather as saying that — if Muhammad Ali were to remain faithful to the Covenant of Baha’u'llah and serve the friends — history would eventually recognize his station. In Abdu’l-Baha’s own time, he (Abdu’l-Baha) had little honour or recognition, but as time goes by, it is increasingly recognised what a great man he way. This is normal, with true religious leaders:

“Muhammad, that wronged and oppressed Messenger of God. … His case had no remedy, … they would not withhold their hands from Him unless He should hide Himself beneath the depths of the earth, or take His flight unto heaven. Consider, how great is the change today! Behold, how many are the Sovereigns who bow the knee before His name! … (Baha’u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 109)

Muhammad too received the honour that was his due, in the course of time. So did Jesus. Those who tread the path of true virtue, cannot expect any recognition in their own life time. Their reward is acceptance in the eyes of God, and perhaps in the eyes of history.

It would not be common sense at all, if Baha’u'llah was to intend to appoint Muhammad Ali to succeed Abdu’l-Baha, first because that would mean that Abdu’l-Baha had his hands tied, and second because Baha’u'llah somehow forgot to say this in clear language, so he would be giving Muhammad Ali an appointment certain to be disputed. Considering how careful Baha’u'llah was in appointing Abdu’l-Baha in writing, so as to avoid the schism and uncertainty that have been the fate of other religions following the deaths of their founders, I think it’s wildly improbable that he intended to appoint Muhammad Ali but somehow forgot to put it in writing.

Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation of the Kitab-e Ahd, given at two points in God Passes By, is that it gave Muhammad Ali “the second-highest position within the ranks of the faithful.” (Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, p. 246) I know of no basis in the Bahai Writings for the idea that he was ever intended to head the community after Abdu’l-Baha.

“He (Muhammad Ali) it was who had the impudence and temerity to tell ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to His face that just as Umar had succeeded in usurping the successorship of the Prophet Muḥammad, he, too, felt himself able to do the same. He it was who, obsessed by the fear that he might not survive ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, had, the moment he had been assured by Him that all the honor he coveted would, in the course of time, be his, swiftly rejoined that he had no guarantee that he would outlive Him.”

Far from being allayed by the provisions of a Will [of Baha'u'llah] which had elevated him to the second-highest position within the ranks of the faithful, the fire of unquenchable animosity that glowed in the breast of Mirza Muhammad-’Ali burned even more fiercely as soon as he came to realize the full implications of that Document.
(Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By, 246-7)

The Will of Baha’u'llah contains no mention of any successor to Abdu’l-Baha. It gave him authority, which he used to create a new institution, that of the Guardianship, and to specify the relationship between the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice.