or to deny the facts against such testimony, can only offer some excuses
in extenuation. Bahiah Khanum[520] reduces the number of Bahais who made
the attack on the Azalis to three, asserts that their intention was to
threaten death and frighten but not to kill them, that but two Azalis
were killed and also one of the Bahais, that the provocation was that
the Azalis had slandered Baha Ullah, forged letters in his name, which
incited the Government against him and were threatening to kill him, and
further that Baha was not cognizant of their intention. But Professor
Browne shows that Baha regarded the murder with some complacency at
least,[521] and refers to it in the "Kitab-ul-Akdas," saying, "God hath
taken away him who led you astray," viz.: Haji Sayid Mohammed, one of
the murdered men, who was Azal's chief supporter. He also confirms the
fact that Abbas Effendi interceded for the murderers and secured their
freedom from adequate punishment. Just as Brigham Young[522] condoned
and secured immunity from punishment, if he did not justify or instigate
the crimes of his sect. Bahiah Khanum herself shows us that the
murderers acted for the religion, and not from any private or personal
motives; in other words, committed "religious assassination," after the
traditional oriental custom.
The same is shown and more facts brought out in the defense made by
Mohammed Jawad Gasvini.[523] He writes that the three persons mentioned
above published tracts which were calculated to excite the populace
against Baha and his adherents. One, Nasir Abbas of Bagdad, came from
Beirut to kill them but was enjoined by Baha not to do so. Then "Some
believers organized a secret meeting to put an end to these evil doers.
The author was among them and was of their opinion." Baha again
restrained them, so the author avers. But, he continues, "The following
seven persons secretly determined to put out of the way the aforesaid
intriguers" (here follow their names and occupations). "These seven
began to consort with the intriguers very cordially, pretending that
they were in accord with them and with their belief, and continued to
do so for some time. But one afternoon they entered their residence,
which was situated opposite the residence of the governor of the city of
Acca, and there they killed the said Sayid Mohammed, and Aga Jan, and
Mirza Riza Kuli. This took place in the year 1288 A. H., _i. e._, 1870
A. D. When the Government heard of the tragedy it arrested the said
seven and arrested all the followers of Baha Ullah who were in Acca."
All, including Baha Ullah, Abbas Effendi and the other brothers were
imprisoned. Baha was released after three days, after being interrogated
by the court. Sixteen of the Bahais were confined in prison for six
months and the seven for terms of seven to fifteen years, afterwards
reduced by one-third. Thus twenty-three out of about forty male
believers were found guilty of the assassinations or of complicity in
the plot.
4. Various and _sundry other assassinations for the faith_. According to
the Azali historian, these murders were followed by many others. Certain
disciples separated themselves from Baha. Of these some fled from
Acca,[524] "but the Khayyat Bashi (chief tailor) and Haji Ibrahim were
assassinated in the caravanserai of the corn-sellers and buried in
quicklime under the platform. Another, Haji Jaffar, importunately
pressed his claim for a debt of 1,200 pounds which Baha owed him. (I
wonder whether it was incurred to meet the 'enormous bribe.') Thereupon
Baha's amanuensis, Mirza Aga Jan Kashani, instructed a disciple, Ali of
Kasvin, to slay the old man and throw his body out of the window of the
upper room which he occupied in the caravanserai." It was then reported
"that he had cast himself out and died, yielding up his life to the
Beloved." "All the prominent supporters of Subh-i-Azal, who withstood
Baha, were marked out for death,[525] and in Bagdad, Mullah Rajab Ali
Kahir and his brother Haji Mirza Ahmad, Haji Mirza Mohammed Riza and
several others fell one by one by the knife or the bullet of the
assassin." The following others are specified with the place and name of
the assassin,[526] "Aga Sayid Ali the Arab, one of the original 'Letters
of the Living,' was killed in Tabriz by Mirza Mustapha of Nirak; and Aga
Ali Mohammed by Abdul Karim; Haji Aga of Tabriz met a like fate, as did
Haji Mirza Ahmad, the brother of the historian Haji Mirza Jani.[527]
Another, whose faith had grown cold, was Aga Mohammed Ali of Ispahan,
who was residing at Constantinople.[528] Mirza Abul Kasim was sent from
Acca with instructions to "bleed that block of heedlessness whose blood
is in excess." He robbed his victim of L350, with part of which he
bought and sent goods to Acca. Another instance was Mirza Asad Ullah
"Deyyan," who claimed to be a "Manifestation."[529] "Mirza Husain Ali
(Baha), after a protracted discussion with him, instructed his servant,
Mirza Mohammed of Mezanderan, to slay him, which was accordingly done."
Count Gobineau confirms this account.[530] Concerning these crimes we
have also the independent testimony of Subh-i-Azal, who mentioned most
of these instances by name and added several others. Azal said to
Captain Young, a British officer in Cyprus,[531] "About twenty of my
followers were killed by the Bahais." He confirmed it in an autograph
letter to Professor Browne, saying, "They (_i. e._, the Bahais)
unsheathed the sword of hatred and wrought what they would. They cruelly
put to death the remnant of my friends who stood firm." In the "New
History"[532] Professor Browne names over the list of those
assassinated, and adds, "Of the more prominent Azalis, Sayid Javad, of
Kerbela (or Kirman), seems to have been almost the only one who long
survived what the Azalis call 'The direful Disorder.'" In Kirman,
Professor Browne said to the Bahais,[533] "From a statement of one of
your own party, it appears that your friends at Acca, who complain so
much of the bigotry, intolerance and ferocious antagonism of the
Mohammedans, and who are always talking about 'consorting with men of
every faith with spirituality and fragrance,' could find no better
argument than the dagger of the assassin wherewith to convince the
unfortunate Azalis."
5. The conduct of the primitive Babis and their leaders, and _their
attitude towards the taking of life_,[534] has a bearing on the question
of the conduct of the Bahais, for up to the time of the residence at
Adrianople they were identical. The history of the Babis is a bloody
one. The "first bloodshed which took place in Persia (in connection with
the Babi movement) was the murder of a Shiah Mujtihid by one or more
Babis." It was a "religious assassination." The circumstances were as
follows,[535] When the Bab, as captive, passed through Kasvin, _en
route_ for Maku, he wrote a letter asking succour from Haji Mohammed
Taki, an orthodox Mujtihid, who was the father-in-law of the celebrated
Kurrat-ul-Ayn. "The Haji tore the letter into fragments, and made some
unseemly remarks." When this was reported to the Bab, he said, "Was
there no one to smite him on the mouth?" The Bahai historian (1880)
continues, "Wherefore the Lord brought it to pass that he was smitten in
the mouth with a spear head that he might no more speak insolently."
Shortly afterwards a certain Babi,[536] named Salih, hearing the
Mujtihid curse and revile Sheikh Ahmad, the teacher of the Bab, entered
the mosque and slew him at the pulpit. The Bahai historian continues,
"This was the consequence of the Haji's conduct to the Bab, and
agreeable to the tradition of the Imams, 'whosoever curseth us ... is
an infidel,' and so he deemed it incumbent on himself to slay him."
A variation of this story is found in a work by an American Bahai, Mary
H. Ford, called "The Oriental Rose."[537] She narrates that
Kurrat-ul-Ayn heard the Mujtihid cursing the Bab, and gazing upon him
she exclaimed, "How unfortunate you are! For I see your mouth filled
with blood!" "The following morning, as he was crossing the threshold of
the mosque, he was struck upon the mouth by the lance of a hidden
assailant. The attack was followed up by five or six other assassins,
who beat the life out of his mangled body." "The strange insight of
Kurrat-ul-Ayn had foreseen it." "The assassination removed a serious
obstacle from her pathway."
From these narratives, both from the pens of "Friends," it is evident
that the Bab and Kurrat-ul-Ayn each spoke words which were direct
instigations and incitements to their fanatical followers to commit
murder. The chief murderer fled and "joined himself to the people of
God" at Sheikh Tabarsi. Disregarding his crime, they welcomed him to
their ranks as a "follower of God, and he attained to martyrdom."[538]
We can admire the courage and devotion of the Babis, but certainly their
hatred and fanaticism carry them on to retaliation and revenge which are
far from pure religion. Witness their deeds! Farrukh Khan, a prisoner of
war, was first skinned alive and then roasted,[539] and twenty-two
prisoners of war were put to death at the same time, at Zanjan. At
Sheikh Tabarsi, by order of Janab-i-Kuddus, His Excellency the Holy, the
enemies slain in battle were decapitated and their heads set on posts
around the ramparts.[540]
The attempt to assassinate Nasr-i-Din Shah (1852) shows also the
murderous spirit of the Babis. From seven to twelve[541] Babis were
engaged in the plot, and four of them started out to take part in the
assault. It was not, as is commonly represented by Bahais, the act of an
unbalanced, weak-minded individual, but the revengeful plot of a number.
The spirit of vengeance was very strong within them. Of this we have a
witness from a very unexpected quarter, namely, the celebrated Bahai
apologist, Mirza Abul Fazl. He writes,[542] "Numerous historical and
tangible evidences can be furnished to prove that it was the pen of Baha
Ullah which protected from death his own enemies, such as Subh-i-Azal,
Nasr-i-Din Shah and certain great doctors and divines. Otherwise the
Babis _would not have allowed a single one of these people to have
escaped alive_." He certainly must include Bahais, for the Babis would
not have desired to kill Subh-i-Azal. But the assertion of M. Abul Fazl,
that Baha was as the "Prince of Peace" among a lot of untrained, untamed
disciples, will not stand investigation. For Baha's history shows the
contrary.
6. _Baha also commends suicide for his sake._ It is narrated by Abdul
Baha[543] that rather than be separated in exile from Baha, "Haji Jafar
was moved to lamentation, and with his own hand cut his throat." Baha,
in the Lawh-i-Raiz, alluded to this event, saying, "One from amongst the
Friends sacrificed himself for myself and _cut his throat with his own
hand for the love of God_. This is such that we have not heard from
former ages. This is that which God hath set apart for this
dispensation." Another disciple attempted suicide about the same
time.[544] This "old and faithful follower seized a knife and
exclaiming, 'If I must be separated from my Lord, I will go and join my
God,' cut his throat. With the aid of a physician, his life was saved.
Again when the ship bearing the exiles reached Haifa, Abdul Ghaffar,
finding himself to be separated from his Lord, determined to sacrifice
his life, and threw himself into the sea from the steamer, exclaiming,
'O Baha! O Baha!'" The sailors rescued him.[545] This tendency to
suicide reveals an astonishing degree of fanaticism among the Bahais.
But suicide is so rare among the Persian Shiahs that these reports
arouse suspicion and call for further investigation. I was informed of
one person whom the Bahais at Acca reported as a suicide, but who in
reality had been murdered by them. Of another, named Haji Mirza Riza,
who would have written a history favourable to Azal, the latter wrote to
Professor Browne that "they (the Bahais) sought to slay him, and at
length gave out that, on the first night of his imprisonment, he had
bound a cord about his throat and destroyed himself and so became a
martyr."[546] The celebrated Nabil, Bahai poet and historian, is
reported to have committed suicide by throwing himself into the sea,
shortly after the death of Baha Ullah. "He could stay on earth no
longer--he loved and yearned so for Baha Ullah."[547] As this same Nabil
had himself claimed to be the Manifestation,[548] it was very convenient
that he should make away with himself at that time, instead of renewing
his pretensions.
These instances of suicide are cited as proofs of the truth of the
religion by M. Mohammed Husain Shirazi, who says,[549] "More faithful
and devoted (than the early Christians), some martyrs of our day have
killed themselves with their own hands out of devotion to their Lord
Baha." Again Baha sent Badi, the messenger, to the Shah, with the
"Epistle" from Acca, assuring him beforehand that he was going to
death.[550] The letter could easily have been sent through one of the
foreign consulates without sacrifice of life.
Doctor Jessup says:[551] "They teach unscrupulous persecution of those
obnoxious to them. I had a friend, a learned Mohammedan of Bagdad,
called Ibrahim Effendi, of scholarly bearing, refined and courteous--a
brother of the wife of Abbas Effendi. His father, a wealthy man, died
when he was young and his uncle determined to bring him up as a Babite
(Bahai). But the boy refused to accept it. His uncle then robbed him of
his property," and threatened him. He fled and came to Beirut. He
professed Christianity and was baptized at Alexandria, Egypt. While at
Beirut, "he went down to Acca to visit. One night he found that his life
was in great danger if he stayed through the night and he escaped to
Beirut in great terror."[552]
7. _Psychological attestation of the accusation_ against the Bahais, of
assassination, is seen in their doctrine of the power and prerogative of
the "Manifestation," and the inference made by the Bahais from that
doctrine. This is set forth in the Tablet of Ishrakat,[553] "Verily He
(Baha) hath come from the Heaven of the Unseen, and with Him the
standard of 'He doeth whatsoever He willeth,' and the hosts of power and
authority. As to all else save Him: It is incumbent upon them to cling
unto that which he hath commanded." "Woe unto those who denied and
turned away from Him." "The Most Great Infallibility" is applied only
to one (the Manifestation), whose station is sanctified above commands
or prohibitions. He is proof against error. Verily if he declares heaven
to be earth, right to be left, or south to be north, it is true, and
there is no doubt of it." "No one has a right to oppose him, or to say,
'Why or wherefore'; and he who disputes Him is verily of the opposers."
"He doeth whatsoever he willeth, and commandeth whatsoever he desireth."
In like manner Abdul Baha states the authority of the
Manifestation,[554] "He is not under the shadow of the former laws.
Whatever he performs is an upright action. No believer has any right to
criticize." "If some people do not understand the hidden secret of one
of his commands or actions, they ought not to oppose it."
These principles are boldly interpreted and applied by the Bahais to the
subject under discussion. Sayid Kamil, a Bahai of Shiraz, said to
Professor Browne[555] with a look of supreme surprise, "You surely
cannot pretend to deny that a prophet, who is an incarnation of the
Universal Intelligence, has a right to inflict death, openly or
_secretly_, on those who stubbornly opposed him. A prophet is no more to
be blamed for removing an obdurate opponent that a surgeon for an
amputation of a gangrenous limb." This opinion prevailed among the
Bahais. At Yezd they said,[556] "A divine messenger has as much right to
kill and compel as a surgeon to amputate." The Bahai missionaries
maintained[557] that, "A prophet has a right to slay if he knows it
necessary; if he sees that the slaughter of a few will prevent many from
going astray, he is justified in commanding such slaughter. No one can
question his right to destroy the bodies of a few that the souls of many
may live." A Bahai acquaintance of Doctor Frame, of Resht, told him[558]
"without any appearance of shame, that he paid so much to have a
persecutor removed."
8. In connection with all the above facts, it must be kept in mind that
"_religious assassination has been freely practiced since the beginning
of Islam_, and that the prophet Mohammed gave it the sanction of his
example on numerous occasions." Professor Browne,[559] who thus
emphasizes this fact, and gives instances from the Moslem biographies of
Mohammed, points out its bearing on our judgment regarding the
assassinations alleged against the Bahais, and concludes, "In Asia a
different standard of morality prevails in this matter." Certain facts
regarding the Imams revealed in the dark annals of Islam show what
historical precedents the Babis and Bahais had back of them. Consider
the deaths of the twelve Imams. Ali was[560] assassinated with a dagger,
Husain killed after battle, nine other Imams were _poisoned_, and the
last one mysteriously disappeared.
To sum up. Our investigation has led to the conclusion that the Bahais
were guilty of these assassinations as charged. The evidence is both
direct and circumstantial, with names and places. Some of the witnesses
are still living. Some have given their testimony in writing, some in
conversation with Europeans, who have reported it accurately to the
world. The environment in which they lived, and the historical and
theological traditions on which they fed, strengthen the direct proofs.
The answer to these charges by Mirza Abul Fazl in his "Brilliant
Proof"[561] is, that we should hear both sides, and that it is not right
to accept the witness of enemies against the Bahais, which is as that of
Protestants against the Catholics and _vice-versa_. Our reply is, that
both sides have been heard, and examined, and that some of the most
damaging testimony is from Bahais themselves. It should be noted that
the testimony is altogether from the followers of the Bab, of various
kinds and not from Moslem writers. Mr. Phelps, like many Bahai writers,
would ignore the charges. He says,[562] "I do not think that it would be
time well employed to advert to them in detail." He pronounces them
"incredible" and "flatly in contradiction to the spirit, lives and
teachings of Baha Ullah and his successor," and destined "quickly to
fade away and be forgotten, if left to themselves." No indeed! Lovers of
truth will not overlook and forget such a record. They will judge Bahais
by their deeds, not by their professions.
The conclusions of Professor Browne, who was undoubtedly a
favourably-inclined judge, who investigated impartially and heard the
testimony on both sides, has the greatest weight in determining the
judgment of the world.[563] In the "Traveller's Narrative," his first
volume on Babism and Bahaism, he states that it is only with great
reluctance and solely in the interest of truth, that he sets down these
grave accusations against the Bahais, and adds,[564] "If they are true,
of what use are the noblest and most humane utterances, if they are
associated with such deeds? If they are false, further investigation
will, without doubt, conclusively prove their falsity." In the "New
History," which was published two years later, after further
investigation and calm deliberation, he wrote,[565] "At first not a few
prominent Babis,[566] including even several 'Letters of the Living'
and personal friends of the Bab, adhered faithfully to Subh-i-Azal. One
by one these disappeared, most of them as, I fear, _cannot be doubted,
by foul play on the part of too zealous Bahais_."
FOOTNOTES:
[494] "Bahai Proofs," p. 12.
[495] "The Modern Social Religion," p. 167.
[496] Phelps, pp. 19-20.
[497] Pages 178-181.
[498] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 356-358.
[499] "Bahai Proofs," p. 51.
[500] Manuscript "Life of Beha Ullah," p. 20.
[501] Professor Browne, afterwards in Persia, found the attitude of the
Bahais towards the Azalis "unjust and intolerant" and reprimanded them
for "their violence and unfairness." They cursed and reviled in the
presence of Professor Browne ("A Year Among the Persians," pp. 525-530).
[502] "New Hist.," p. 200, Note 4.
[503] _Jour. Roy. As. Soc._, 1892, p. 296, by Professor Browne. Also
"Trav.'s Narr.," p. 359.
[504] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 369.
[505] Phelps, "Life of Abbas Effendi," pp. 40-44.
[506] "Brilliant Proof," p. 11.
[507] Chicago Edition, pp. 20-23; and "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 368, 369.
[508] Phelps, _Ibid._, p. 40.
[509] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 359.
[510] Phelps, p. 39.
[511] Phelps, p. 38.
[512] "Trav.'s Narr.," p, 361.
[513] _Ibid._, p. 362.
[514] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 361.
[515] _Ibid._, p. 361.
[516] _Ibid._, p. 371.
[517] "A Year Among the Persians," pp. 513-517.
[518] Possibly he counts those who afterwards left their allegiance to
Baha.
[519] "Haifa, etc.," p. 107; "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 370.
[520] Phelps, p. 75.
[521] _Jour. Roy. As. Soc._, 1889, p. 519; "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 94, 370.
[522] "Brigham Young," by Cannon, p. 271. "Brigham failed to punish or
even condemn those criminals who served him too well."
[523] Manuscript, pp. 41-48.
[524] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 362.
[525] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 359; _Jour. Roy. As. Soc._, 1889, p. 519;
1892, pp. 995-996.
[526] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 363.
[527] _Ibid._, p. 332. Also "New Hist.," p. 391.
[528] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 363.
[529] _Ibid._, pp. 357, 365.
[530] "Religions et Philosophies dans l'Asie Centrale," pp. 277-278.
[531] _Jour. Roy. As. Soc._, 1889, p. 996.
[532] Page xxiii.
[533] "A Year Among the Persians," p. 530.
[534] The Bab asked his fellow prisoner to kill him ("Mirza Jani," p.
xlvii.).
[535] "New Hist.," pp. 274, 275; "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 198, 199, 311.
[536] The "Kasas-ul-Ulema," the Shiah history, says, "Certain Babis,
stung by his words, fell upon him early one morning as he was praying in
the mosque, and with knives and daggers inflicted on him eight wounds
from which he died two days later" ("Trav.'s Narr.," p. 198).
[537] Pages 61, 62.
[538] "New Hist.," pp. 82, 278.
[539] "New Hist.," p. 115 and note, p. 411.
[540] _Ibid._, p. 73; "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 178.
[541] _Ibid._, p. 323.
[542] "The Brilliant Proof," p. 11.
[543] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 100-101.
[544] Phelps, p. 50.
[545] Manuscript Life, p. 36.
[546] Compare "History by Mirza Jani," p. xvi.
[547] "Notes taken at Acca," by Mrs. C. True, p. 27.
[548] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 357-358.
[549] "Facts for Behaists," p. 42.
[550] "Oriental Rose," p. 186.
[551] "Fifty-three Years in Syria," pp. 637, 605.
[552] Doctor Kheiralla believes that assassination is to be feared at
the present time. He told me that a prominent follower of M. Mohammed
Ali had been poisoned at Jiddah. Doctor Pease said to me, "Until now
Doctor Kheiralla is afraid of assassination. A Bahai told me, 'We want
only one thing from Kheiralla, _i. e._, the translation of the
"Kitab-ul-Akdas," then we will get rid of him.'" When Hasan Khorasani
came to Chicago, Kheiralla was warned from Syria to beware of him and he
put himself under special police protection.
[553] Chicago Edition, 1908, pp. 11-14.
[554] "Answered Questions," by Barney, pp. 199-201.
[555] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 372; "A Year in Persia," p. 328.
[556] _Ibid._, p. 406.
[557] "A Year in Persia," p. 306.
[558] _Moslem World_, 1912, p. 237.
[559] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 371-373.
[560] _Ibid._, p. 296.
[561] A Reply to Rev. P. Z. Easton's article in the _Evangelical
Christendom_.
[562] "Life of Abbas Effendi," p. 43.
[563] Mr. A. J. Stenstrand, of Chicago, was convinced by the facts. He
wrote, "When I studied the Babi history and read about the terrible
cruelty and assassinations which the followers of Beha perpetrated upon
Subh-i-Azal's supporters which made no resistance, this broke the
backbone of my Behai faith." In conversation he told me that Doctor
Kheiralla had informed the Chicago assembly that the account of the
assassinations as narrated by Professor Browne was true and that the
Manifestation had a right to slay them."
[564] Page 364.
[565] "New Hist.," p. xxiii.