Like many men of his class, Mirza Huseyn 'Ali had a turn for mysticism, but combined this—like so many other mystics—with much practical ability. He became a Babi early in life, and did much to lay the foundations of the faith both in his native place and in the capital. His speech was like a 'rushing torrent,' and his clearness in exposition brought the most learned divines to his feet. Like his half-brother, he attended the important Council of Badasht, where, with God's Heroine—Kurratu'l 'Ayn—he defended the cause of progress and averted a fiasco. The Bab—'an ambassador in bonds'—he never met, but he corresponded with him, using (as it appears) the name of his half-brother as a protecting pseudonym. [Footnote: TN, p. 373 n. 1.]

The Bab was 'taken up into heaven' in 1850 upon which (according to a Tradition which I am compelled to reject) Subh-i-Ezel succeeded to the Supreme Headship. The appointment would have been very unsuitable, but the truth is (pace Gobineau) that it was never made, or rather, God did not will to put such a strain upon our faith. It was, in fact, too trying a time for any new teacher, and we can now see the wisdom of Baha-'ullah in waiting for the call of events. The Babi community was too much divided to yield a new Head a frank and loyal obedience. Many Babis rose against the government, and one even made an attempt on the Shah's life. Baha-'ullah (to use the name given to Huseyn 'Ali of Nur by the Bab) was arrested near Tihran on a charge of complicity. He was imprisoned for four months, but finally acquitted and released. No wonder that Baha-'ullah and his family were anxious to put as large a space as possible between themselves and Tihran.

Together with several Babi families, and, of course, his own nearest and dearest, Baha-'ullah set out for Baghdad. It was a terrible journey in rough mountain country and the travellers suffered greatly from exposure. On their arrival fresh misery stared the ladies in the face, unaccustomed as they were to such rough life. They were aided, however, by the devotion of some of their fellow-believers, who rendered many voluntary services; indeed, their affectionate zeal needed to be restrained, as St. Paul doubtless found in like circumstances. Baha-'ullah himself was intensely, divinely happy, and the little band of refugees—thirsty for truth—rejoiced in their untrammelled intercourse with their Teacher. Unfortunately religious dissensions began to arise. In the Babi colony at Baghdad there were some who were not thoroughly devoted to Baha-'ullah. The Teacher was rather too radical, too progressive for them. They had not been introduced to the simpler and more spiritual form of religion taught by Baha-'ullah, and probably they had had positive teaching of quite another order from some one authorized by Subh-i-Ezel.

The strife went on increasing in bitterness, until at length it became clear that either Baha-'ullah or Subh-i-Ezel must for a time vanish from the scene. For Subh-i-Ezel (or, for shortness, Ezel) to disappear would be suicidal; he knew how weak his personal claims to the pontificate really were. But Baha-'ullah's disappearance would be in the general interest; it would enable the Babis to realize how totally dependent they were, in practical matters, on Baha-'ullah. 'Accordingly, taking a change of clothes, but no money, and against the entreaties of all the family, he set out. Many months passed; he did not return, nor had we any word from him or about him.

'There was an old physician at Baghdad who had been called upon to attend the family, and who had become our friend. He sympathized much with us, and undertook on his own account to make inquiries for my father. These inquiries were long without definite result, but at length a certain traveller to whom he had described my father said that he had heard of a man answering to that description, evidently of high rank, but calling himself a dervish, living in caves in the mountains. He was, he said, reputed to be so wise and wonderful in his speech on religious things that when people heard him they would follow him; whereupon, wishing to be alone, he would change his residence to a cave in some other locality. When we heard these things, we were convinced that this dervish was in truth our beloved one. But having no means to send him any word, or to hear further of him, we were very sad.

'There was also then in Baghdad an earnest Babi, formerly a pupil of Kurratu'l 'Ayn. This man said to us that as he had no ties and did not care for his life, he desired no greater happiness than to be allowed to seek for him all loved so much, and that he would not return without him. He was, however, very poor, not being able even to provide an ass for the journey; and he was besides not very strong, and therefore not able to go on foot. We had no money for the purpose, nor anything of value by the sale of which money could be procured, with the exception of a single rug, upon which we all slept. This we sold and with the proceeds bought an ass for this friend, who thereupon set out upon the search.

'Time passed; we heard nothing, and fell into the deepest dejection and despair. Finally, four months having elapsed since our friend had departed, a message was one day received from him saying that he would bring my father home on the next day. The absence of my father had covered a little more than two years. After his return the fame which he had acquired in the mountains reached Baghdad. His followers became numerous; many of them even the fierce and untutored Arabs of Irak. He was visited also by many Babis from Persia.'

This is the account of the sister of our beloved and venerated Abdul Baha. There are, however, two other accounts which ought to be mentioned. According to the Traveller's Narrative, the refuge of Baha-'ullah was generally in a place called Sarkalu in the mountains of Turkish Kurdistan; more seldom he used to stay in Suleymaniyya, the headquarters of the Sunnites. Before long, however, 'the most eminent doctors of those regions got some inkling of his circumstances and conditions, and conversed with him on the solution of certain difficult questions connected with the most abstruse points of theology. In consequence of this, fragmentary accounts of this were circulated in all quarters. Several persons therefore hastened thither, and began to entreat and implore.' [Footnote: TN, pp. 64, 65.]

If this is correct, Baha-'ullah was more widely known in Turkish Kurdistan than his family was aware, and debated high questions of theology as frequently as if he were in Baghdad or at the Supreme Shrine. Nor was it only the old physician and the poor Babi disciple who were on the track of Baha-'ullah, but 'several persons'—no doubt persons of weight, who were anxious for a settlement of the points at issue in the Babi community. A further contribution is made by the Ezeli historian, who states that Subh-i-Ezel himself wrote a letter to his brother, inviting him to return. [Footnote: TN, p. 359.] One wishes that letter could be recovered. It would presumably throw much light on the relations between the brothers at this critical period.

About 1862 representations were made to the Shah that the Babi preaching at Baghdad was injurious to the true Faith in Persia. The Turkish Government, therefore, when approached on the subject by the Shah, consented to transfer the Babis from Baghdad to Constantinople. An interval of two weeks was accorded, and before this grace-time was over a great event happened—his declaration of himself to be the expected Messiah (Him whom God should manifest). As yet it was only in the presence of his son (now best known as Abdul Baha) and four other specially chosen disciples that this momentous declaration was made. There were reasons why Baha-'ullah should no longer keep his knowledge of the will of God entirely secret, and also reasons why he should not make the declaration absolutely public.

The caravan took four months to reach Constantinople. At this capital of the Muhammadan world their stay was brief, as they were 'packed off' the same year to Adrianople. Again they suffered greatly. But who would find fault with the Great Compassion for arranging it so? And who would deny that there are more important events at this period which claim our interest? These are (1) the repeated attempts on the life of Baha-'ullah (or, as the Ezelis say, of Subh-i-Ezel) by the machinations of Subh-i-Ezel (or, as the Ezelis say, of Baha-'ullah), and (2) the public declaration on the part of Baha-'ullah that he, and no one else, was the Promised Manifestation of Deity.

There is some obscurity in the chronological relation of these events, i.e. as to whether the public declaration of Baha-'ullah was in definite opposition, not only to the claims of Subh-i-Ezel, but to those of Zabih, related by Mirza Jani, [Footnote: See NH, pp. 385, 394; TN, p. 357. The Ezelite historian includes Dayyan (see above).] and of others, or whether the reverse is the case. At any rate Baha-'ullah believed that his brother was an assassin and a liar. This is what he says,—'Neither was the belly of the glutton sated till that he desired to eat my flesh and drink my blood.... And herein he took counsel with one of my attendants, tempting him unto this.... But he, when he became aware that the matter had become publicly known, took the pen of falsehood, and wrote unto the people, and attributed all that he had done to my peerless and wronged Beauty.' [Footnote: TN, pp. 368, 369.]

These words are either a meaningless extravagance, or they are a deliberate assertion that Subh-i-Ezel had sought to destroy his brother, and had then circulated a written declaration that it was Baha-'ullah who had sought to destroy Subh-i-Ezel. It is, I fear, certain that Baha-'ullah is correct, and that Subh-i-Ezel did attempt to poison his brother, who was desperately ill for twenty-two days.

Another attempt on the life of the much-loved Master was prevented, it is said, by the faithfulness of the bath-servant. 'One day while in the bath Subh-i-Ezel remarked to the servant (who was a believer) that the Blessed Perfection had enemies and that in the bath he was much exposed.... Subh-i-Ezel then asked him whether, if God should lay upon him the command to do this, he would obey it. The servant understood this question, coming from Subh-i-Ezel, to be a suggestion of such a command, and was so petrified by it that he rushed screaming from the room. He first met Abbas Effendi and reported to him Subh-i-Ezel's words.... Abbas Effendi, accordingly, accompanied him to my father, who listened to his story and then enjoined absolute silence upon him.' [Footnote: Phelps, pp. 38, 39.]

Such is the story as given by one who from her youthful age is likely to have remembered with precision. She adds that the occurrence 'was ignored by my father and brother,' and that 'our relations with Subh-i-Ezel continued to be cordial.' How extremely fine this is! It may remind us of 'Father, forgive them,' and seems to justify the title given to Baha-'ullah by his followers, 'Blessed Perfection.'

The Ezelite historian, however, gives a different version of the story. [Footnote: TN, pp. 359, 360.] According to him, it was Subh-i-Ezel whose life was threatened. 'It was arranged that Muhammad Ali the barber should cut his throat while shaving him in the bath. On the approach of the barber, however, Subh-i-Ezel divined his design, refused to allow him to come near, and, on leaving the bath, instantly took another lodging in Adrianople, and separated himself from Mirza Huseyn 'Ali and his followers.'

Evidently there was great animosity between the parties, but, in spite of the Eight Paradises, it appears to me that the Ezelites were chiefly in fault. Who can believe that Baha-'ullah spread abroad his brother's offences? [Footnote: Ibid.] On the other hand, Subh-i-Ezel and his advisers were capable of almost anything from poisoning and assassination to the forging of spurious letters. I do not mean to say that they were by any means the first persons in Persian history to venture on these abnormal actions.

It is again Subh-i-Ezel who is responsible for the disturbance of the community.

It was represented—no doubt by this bitter foe—to the Turkish Government that Baha-'ullah and his followers were plotting against the existing order of things, and that when their efforts had been crowned with success, Baha-'ullah would be designated king. [Footnote: For another form of the story, see Phelps, Abbas Effendi, p. 46.] This may really have been a dream of the Ezelites (we must substitute Subh-i-Ezel for Baha-'ullah); the Bahaites were of course horrified at the idea. But how should the Sultan discriminate? So the punishment fell on the innocent as well as the guilty, on the Bahaites as well as the Ezelites.

The punishment was the removal of Baha-'ullah and his party and Subh-i-Ezel and his handful of followers, the former to Akka (Acre) on the coast of Syria, the latter to Famagusta in Cyprus. The Bahaites were put on board ship at Gallipoli. A full account is given by Abbas Effendi's sister of the preceding events. It gives one a most touching idea of the deep devotion attracted by the magnetic personalities of the Leader and his son.

I have used the expression 'Leader,' but in the course of his stay at Adrianople Baha-'ullah had risen to a much higher rank than that of 'Leader.' We have seen that at an earlier period of his exile Baha-'ullah had made known to five of his disciples that he was in very deed the personage whom the Bab had enigmatically promised. At that time, however, Baha-'ullah had pledged those five disciples to secrecy. But now the reasons for concealment did not exist, and Baha-'ullah saw (in 1863) that the time had come for a public declaration. This is what is stated by Abbas Effendi's sister:— [Footnote: Phelps, pp. 44-46.]

'He then wrote a tablet, longer than any he had before written, [which] he directed to be read to every Babi, but first of all to Subh-i-Ezel. He assigned to one of his followers the duty of taking it to Subh-i-Ezel, reading it to him, and returning with Subh-i-Ezel's reply. When Subh-i-Ezel had heard the tablet he did not attempt to refute it; on the contrary he accepted it, and said that it was true. But he went on to maintain that he himself was co-equal with the Blessed Perfection, [Footnote: See p. 128.] affirming that he had a vision on the previous night in which he had received this assurance.

'When this statement of Subh-i-Ezel was reported to the Blessed Perfection, the latter directed that every Babi should be informed of it at the time when he heard his own tablet read. This was done, and much uncertainty resulted among the believers. They generally applied to the Blessed Perfection for advice, which, however, he declined to give. At length he told them that he would seclude himself from them for four months, and that during this time they must decide the question for themselves. At the end of that period, all the Babis in Adrianople, with the exception of Subh-i-Ezel and five or six others, came to the Blessed Perfection and declared that they accepted him as the Divine Manifestation whose coming the Bab had foretold. The Babis of Persia, Syria, Egypt, and other countries also in due time accepted the Blessed Perfection with substantial unanimity.

Baha-'ullah, then, landed in Syria not merely as the leader of the greater part of the Babis at Baghdad, but as the representative of a wellnigh perfect humanity. He did not indeed assume the title 'The Point,' but 'The Point' and 'Perfection' are equivalent terms. He was, indeed, 'Fairer than the sons of men,' [Footnote: Ps. xlv. 2.] and no sorrow was spared to him that belonged to what the Jews and Jewish Christians called 'the pangs of the Messiah.' It is true, crucifixion does not appear among Baha-'ullah's pains, but he was at any rate within an ace of martyrdom. This is what Baha-'ullah wrote at the end of his stay at Adrianople:—[Footnote: Browne, A Year among the Persians, p. 518.]

'By God, my head longeth for the spears for the love of its Lord, and I never pass by a tree but my heart addresseth it [saying], 'Oh would that thou wert cut down in my name, and my body were crucified upon thee in the way of my Lord!'

The sorrows of his later years were largely connected with the confinement of the Bahaites at Acre (Akka). From the same source I quote the following.

'We are about to shift from this most remote place of banishment (Adrianople) unto the prison of Acre. And, according to what they say, it is assuredly the most desolate of the cities of the world, the most unsightly of them in appearance, the most detestable in climate, and the foulest in water.'

It is true, the sanitary condition of the city improved, so that Bahaites from all parts visited Akka as a holy city. Similar associations belong to Haifa, so long the residence of the saintly son of a saintly father.

If there has been any prophet in recent times, it is to Baha-'ullah that we must go. Pretenders like Subh-i-Ezel and Muhammad are quickly unmasked. Character is the final judge. Baha-'ullah was a man of the highest class—that of prophets. But he was free from the last infirmity of noble minds, and would certainly not have separated himself from others. He would have understood the saying, 'Would God all the Lord's people were prophets.' What he does say, however, is just as fine, 'I do not desire lordship over others; I desire all men to be even as I am.'

He spent his later years in delivering his message, and setting forth the ideals and laws of the New Jerusalem. In 1892 he passed within the veil.



PART III

BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL (continued)

SUBH-I-EZEL (OR AZAL)

'He is a scion of one of the noble families of Persia. His father was accomplished, wealthy, and much respected, and enjoyed the high consideration of the King and nobles of Persia. His mother died when he was a child. His father thereupon entrusted him to the keeping of his honourable spouse, [Footnote: NH, pp. 374 ff.] saying, "Do you take care of this child, and see that your handmaids attend to him properly."' This 'honourable spouse' is, in the context, called 'the concubine'—apparently a second wife is meant. At any rate her son was no less honoured than if he had been the son of the chief or favourite wife; he was named Huseyn 'Ali, and his young half-brother was named Yahya.

According to Mirza Jani, the account which the history contains was given him by Mirza Huseyn 'Ali's half-brother, who represents that the later kindness of his own mother to the young child Yahya was owing to a prophetic dream which she had, and in which the Apostle of God and the King of Saintship figured as the child's protectors. Evidently this part of the narrative is imaginative, and possibly it is the work of Mirza Jani. But there is no reason to doubt that what follows is based more or less on facts derived from Mirza Huseyn 'Ali. 'I busied myself,' says the latter, 'with the instruction of [Yahya]. The signs of his natural excellence and goodness of disposition were apparent in the mirror of his being. He ever loved gravity of demeanour, silence, courtesy, and modesty, avoiding the society of other children and their behaviour. I did not, however, know that he would become the possessor of [so high] a station. He studied Persian, but made little progress in Arabic. He wrote a good nasta'lik hand, and was very fond of the poems of the mystics.' The facts may be decked out.

Mirza Jani himself only met Mirza Yahya once. He describes him as 'an amiable child.' [Footnote: NH, p. 376.] Certainly, we can easily suppose that he retained a childlike appearance longer than most, for he early became a mystic, and a mystic is one whose countenance is radiant with joy. This, indeed, may be the reason why they conferred on him the name, 'Dawn of Eternity.' He never saw the Bab, but when his 'honoured brother' would read the Master's writings in a circle of friends, Mirza Yahya used to listen, and conceived a fervent love for the inspired author. At the time of the Manifestation of the Bab he was only fourteen, but very soon after, he, like his brother, took the momentous step of becoming a Babi, and resolved to obey the order of the Bab for his followers to proceed to Khurasan. So, 'having made for himself a knapsack, and got together a few necessaries,' he set out as an evangelist, 'with perfect trust in his Beloved,' somewhat as S. Teresa started from her home at Avila to evangelize the Moors. 'But when his brother was informed of this, he sent and prevented him.' [Footnote: NH, p. 44.]

Compensation, however, was not denied him. Some time after, Yahya made an expedition in company with some of his relations, making congenial friends, and helping to strengthen the Babi cause. He was now not far off the turning-point in his life.

Not long after occurred a lamentable set-back to the cause—the persecution and massacre which followed the attempt on the Shah's life by an unruly Babi in August 1852. He himself was in great danger, but felt no call to martyrdom, and set out in the disguise of a dervish [Footnote: TN, p. 374.] in the same direction as his elder brother, reaching Baghdad somewhat later. There, among the Babi refugees, he found new and old friends who adhered closely to the original type of theosophic doctrine; an increasing majority, however, were fascinated by a much more progressive teacher. The Ezelite history known as Hasht Bihisht ('Eight Paradises') gives the names of the chief members of the former school, [Footnote: TN, p. 356.] including Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan, and states that, perceiving Mirza Huseyn 'Ali's innovating tendencies, they addressed to him a vigorous remonstrance.

It was, in fact, an ecclesiastical crisis, as the authors of the Traveller's Narrative, as well as the Ezelite historian, distinctly recognize. Baha-'ullah, too,—to give him his nobler name—endorses this view when he says, 'Then, in secret, the Sayyid of Isfahan circumvented him, and together they did that which caused a great calamity.' It was, therefore, indeed a crisis, and the chief blame is laid on Sayyid Muhammad. [Footnote: TN, p. 94. 'He (i.e. Sayyid Muhammad) commenced a secret intrigue, and fell to tempting Mirza Yahya, saying, "The fame of this sect hath risen high in the world; neither dread nor danger remaineth, nor is there any fear or need for caution before you."'] Subh-i-Ezel is still a mere youth and easily imposed upon; the Sayyid ought to have known better than to tempt him, for a stronger teacher was needed in this period of disorganization than the Ezelites could produce. Mirza Yahya was not up to the leadership, nor was he entitled to place himself above his much older brother, especially when he was bound by the tie of gratitude. 'Remember,' says Baha-'ullah, 'the favour of thy master, when we brought thee up during the nights and days for the service of the Religion. Fear God, and be of those who repent. Grant that thine affair is dubious unto me; is it dubious unto thyself?' How gentle is this fraternal reproof!

There is but little more to relate that has not been already told in the sketch of Baha-'ullah. He was, at any rate, harmless in Cyprus, and had no further opportunity for religious assassination. One cannot help regretting that his sun went down so stormily. I return therefore to the question of the honorific names of Mirza Yahya, after which I shall refer to the singular point of the crystal coffin and to the moral character of Subh-i-Ezel.

Among the names and titles which the Ezelite book called Eight Paradises declares to have been conferred by the Bab on his young disciple are Subh-i-Ezel (or Azal), Baha-'ullah, and the strange title Mir'at (Mirror). The two former—'Dawn of Eternity' and 'Splendour of God'—are referred to elsewhere. The third properly belongs to a class of persons inferior to the 'Letters of the Living,' and to this class Subh-i-Ezel, by his own admission, belongs. The title Mir'at, therefore, involves some limitation of Ezel's dignity, and its object apparently is to prevent Subh-i-Ezel from claiming to be 'He whom God will make manifest.' That is, the Bab in his last years had an intuition that the eternal day would not be ushered into existence by this impractical nature.

How, then, came the Bab to give Mirza Yahya such a name? Purely from cabbalistic reasons which do not concern us here. It was a mistake which only shows that the Bab was not infallible. Mirza Yahya had no great part to play in the ushering-in of the new cycle. Elsewhere the Bab is at the pains to recommend the elder of the half-brothers to attend to his junior's writing and spelling. [Footnote: The Tablets (letters) are in the British Museum collection, in four books of Ezel, who wrote the copies at Baha-'ullah's dictation. The references are—I., No. 6251, p. 162; II., No. 5111, p. 253, to which copy Rizwan Ali, son of Ezel, has appended 'The brother of the Fruit' (Ezel); III., No. 6254, p. 236; IV., No. 6257, p. 158.] Now it was, of course, worth while to educate Mirza Yahya, whose feebleness in Arabic grammar was scandalous, but can we imagine Baha-'ullah and all the other 'letters' being passed over by the Bab in favour of such an imperfectly educated young man? The so-called 'nomination' is a bare-faced forgery.

The statement of Gobineau that Subh-i-Ezel belonged to the 'Letters of the Living' of the First Unity is untrustworthy. [Footnote: Fils du Loup, p. 156 n.3.] M. Hippolyte Dreyfus has favoured me with a reliable list of the members of the First Unity, which I have given elsewhere, and which does not contain the name of Mirza Yahya. At the same time, the Bab may have admitted him into the second hierarchy of 18[19]. [Footnote: Fils du Loup, p. 163 n.1. 'The eighteen Letters of Life had each a mirror which represented it, and which was called upon to replace it if it disappeared. There are, therefore, 18 Letters of Life and 18 Mirrors, which constituted two distinct Unities.'] Considering that Mirza Yahya was regarded as a 'return' of Kuddus, some preferment may conceivably have found its way to him. It was no contemptible distinction to be a member of the Second Unity, i.e. to be one of those who reflected the excellences of the older 'Letters of the Living.' As a member of the Second Unity and the accepted reflexion of Kuddus, Subh-i-Ezel may have been thought of as a director of affairs together with the obviously marked-out agent (wali), Baha-'ullah. We are not told, however, that Mirza Yahya assumed either the title of Bab (Gate) or that of Nukta (Point). [Footnote: Others, however, give it him (TN, p. 353).]

I must confess that Subh-i-Ezel's account of the fortune of the Bab's relics appears to me, as well as to M. Nicolas, [Footnote: AMB, p. 380 n.] unsatisfactory and (in one point) contradictory. How, for instance, did he get possession of the relics? And, is there any independent evidence for the intermingling of the parts of the two corpses? How did he procure a crystal coffin to receive the relics? How comes it that there were Bahaites at the time of the Bab's death, and how was Subh-i-Ezel able to conceal the crystal coffin, etc., from his brother Baha-'ullah?

Evidently Subh-i-Ezel has changed greatly since the time when both the brothers (half-brothers) were devoted, heart and soul, to the service of the Bab. It is this moral transformation which vitiates Subh-i-Ezel's assertions. Can any one doubt this? Surely the best authorities are agreed that the sense of historical truth is very deficient among the Persians. Now Subh-i-Ezel was in some respects a typical Persian; that is how I would explain his deviations from strict truth. It may be added that the detail of the crystal coffin can be accounted for. In the Arabic Bayan, among other injunctions concerning the dead, [Footnote: Le Beyan Arabi (Nicolas), p. 252; similarly, p. 54.] it is said: 'As for your dead, inter them in crystal, or in cut and polished stones. It is possible that this may become a peace for your heart.' This precept suggested to Subh-i-Ezel his extraordinary statement.

Subh-i-Ezel had an imaginative and possibly a partly mystic nature. As a Manifestation of God he may have thought himself entitled to remove harmful people, even his own brother. He did not ask himself whether he might not be in error in attaching such importance to his own personality, and whether any vision could override plain morality. He was mistaken, and I hold that the Bab was mistaken in appointing (if he really did so) Subh-i-Ezel as a nominal head of the Babis when the true, although temporary vice-gerent was Baha-'ullah. For Subh-i-Ezel was a consummate failure; it is too plain that the Bab did not always, like Jesus and like the Buddha, know what was in man.

SUBSEQUENT DISCOVERIES

The historical work of the Ezelite party, called The Eight Paradises, makes Ezel nineteen years of age when he came forward as an expounder of religious mysteries and wrote letters to the Bab. On receiving the first letter, we are told that the Bab (or, as we should rather now call him, the Point) instantly prostrated himself in thankfulness, testifying that he was a mighty Luminary, and spoke by the Self-shining Light, by revelation. Imprisoned as he was at Maku, the Point of Knowledge could not take counsel with all his fellow-workers or disciples, but he sent the writings of this brilliant novice (if he really was so brilliant) to each of the 'Letters of the Living,' and to the chief believers, at the same time conferring on him a number of titles, including Subh-i-Ezel ('Dawn of Eternity') and Baha-'ullah ('Splendour of God ').

If this statement be correct, we may plausibly hold with Professor E. G. Browne that Subh-i-Ezel (Mirza Yahya) was advanced to the rank of a 'Letter of the Living,' and even that he was nominated by the Point as his successor. It has also become much more credible that the thoughts of the Point were so much centred on Subh-i-Ezel that, as Ezelites say, twenty thousand of the words of the Bayan refer to Ezel, and that a number of precious relics of the Point were entrusted to his would-be successor.

But how can we venture to say that it is correct? Since Professor Browne wrote, much work has been done on the (real or supposed) written remains of Subh-i-Ezel, and the result has been (I think) that the literary reputation of Subh-i-Ezel is a mere bubble. It is true, the Bab himself was not masterly, but the confusion of ideas and language in Ezel's literary records beggars all comparison. A friend of mine confirms this view which I had already derived from Mirza Ali Akbar. He tells me that he has acquired a number of letters mostly purporting to be by Subh-i-Ezel. There is also, however, a letter of Baha-'ullah relative to these letters, addressed to the Muhammadan mulla, the original possessor of the letters. In this letter Baha-'ullah repeats again and again the warning: 'When you consider and reflect on these letters, you will understand who is in truth the writer.'

I greatly fear that Lord Curzon's description of Persian untruthfulness may be illustrated by the career of the Great Pretender. The Ezelites must, of course, share the blame with their leader, and not the least of their disgraceful misstatements is the assertion that the Bab assigned the name Baha-'ullah to the younger of the two half-brothers, and that Ezel had also the [non-existent] dignity of 'Second Point.'

This being so, I am strongly of opinion that so far from confirming the Ezelite view of subsequent events, the Ezelite account of Subh-i-Ezel's first appearance appreciably weakens it. Something, however, we may admit as not improbable. It may well have gratified the Bab that two representatives of an important family in Mazandaran had taken up his cause, and the character of these new adherents may have been more congenial to him than the more martial character of Kuddus.

DAYYAN

We have already been introduced to a prominent Babi, variously called Asadu'llah and Dayyan; he was also a member of the hierarchy called 'the Letters of the Living.' He may have been a man of capacity, but I must confess that the event to which his name is specially attached indisposes me to admit that he took part in the so-called 'Council of Tihran.' To me he appears to have been one of those Babis who, even in critical periods, acted without consultation with others, and who imagined that they were absolutely infallible. Certainly he could never have promoted the claims of Subh-i-Ezel, whose defects he had learned from that personage's secretary. He was well aware that Ezel was ambitious, and he thought that he had a better claim to the supremacy himself.

It would have been wiser, however, to have consulted Baha-'ullah, and to have remembered the prophecy of the Bab, in which it was expressly foretold that Dayyan would believe on 'Him whom God would make manifest.' Subh-i-Ezel was not slow to detect the weak point in Dayyan's position, who could not be at once the Expected One and a believer in the Expected One. [Footnote: See Ezel's own words in Mustaikaz, p. 6.] Dayyan, however, made up as well as he could for his inconsistency. He went at last to Baha-'ullah, and discussed the matter in all its bearings with him. The result was that with great public spirit he retired in favour of Baha.

The news was soon spread abroad; it was not helpful to the cause of Ezel. Some of the Ezelites, who had read the Christian Gospels (translated by Henry Martyn), surnamed Dayyan 'the Judas Iscariot of this people.' [Footnote: TN, p. 357.] Others, instigated probably by their leaders, thought it best to nip the flower in the bud. So by Ezelite hands Dayyan was foully slain.

It was on this occasion that Ezel vented curses and abusive language on his rival. The proof is only too cogent, though the two books which contain it are not as yet printed. [Footnote: They are both in the British Museum, and are called respectively Mustaikaz (No. 6256) and Asar-el-Ghulam (No. 6256). I am indebted for facts (partly) and references to MSS. to my friend Mirza 'Ali Akbar.]

MIRZA HAYDAR 'ALI

A delightful Bahai disciple—the Fra Angelico of the brethren, as we may call him,—Mirza Haydar 'Ali was especially interesting to younger visitors to Abdul Baha. One of them writes thus: 'He was a venerable, smiling old man, with long Persian robes and a spotlessly white turban. As we had travelled along, the Persian ladies had laughingly spoken of a beautiful young man, who, they were sure, would captivate me. They would make a match between us, they said.

'This now proved to be the aged Mirza, whose kindly, humorous old eyes twinkled merrily as he heard what they had prophesied, and joined in their laughter. They did not cover before him. Afterwards the ladies told me something of his history. He was imprisoned for fourteen years during the time of the persecution. At one time, when he was being transferred from one prison to another, many days' journey away, he and his fellow-prisoner, another Bahai, were carried on donkeys, head downwards, with their feet and hands secured. Haydar 'Ali laughed and sang gaily. So they beat him unmercifully, and said, "Now, will you sing?" But he answered them that he was more glad than before, since he had been given the pleasure of enduring something for the sake of God.

'He never married, and in Akka was one of the most constant and loved companions of Baha-'ullah. I remarked upon his cheerful appearance, and added, "But all you Bahais look happy." Mirza Haydar 'Ali said: "Sometimes we have surface troubles, but that cannot touch our happiness. The heart of those who belong to the Malekoot (Kingdom of God) is like the sea: when the wind is rough it troubles the surface of the water, but two metres down there is perfect calm and clearness."'

The preceding passage is by Miss E. S. Stevens (Fortnightly Review, June 1911). A friend, who has also been a guest in Abdul Baha's house, tells me that Haydar 'Ali is known at Akka as 'the Angel.'

ABDUL BAHA (ABBAS EFFENDI)

The eldest son of Baha-'ullah is our dear and venerated Abdul Baha ('Servant of the Splendour'), otherwise known as Abbas Effendi. He was born at the midnight following the day on which the Bab made his declaration. He was therefore eight years old, and the sister who writes her recollections five, when, in August 1852, an attempt was made on the life of the Shah by a young Babi, disaffected to the ruling dynasty. The future Abdul Baha was already conspicuous for his fearlessness and for his passionate devotion to his father. The gamins of Tihran (Teheran) might visit him as he paced to and fro, waiting for news from his father, but he did not mind—not he. One day his sister—a mere child—was returning home under her mother's care, and found him surrounded by a band of boys. 'He was standing in their midst as straight as an arrow—a little fellow, the youngest and smallest of the group—firmly but quietly commanding them not to lay their hands upon him, which, strange to say, they seemed unable to do.' [Footnote: Phelps, pp. 14, 15.]

This love to his father was strikingly shown during the absence of Baha-'ullah in the mountains, when this affectionate youth fell a prey to inconsolable paroxysms of grief. [Footnote: Ibid. p. 20.] At a later time—on the journey from Baghdad to Constantinople—Abdul Baha seemed to constitute himself the special attendant of his father. 'In order to get a little rest, he adopted the plan of riding swiftly a considerable distance ahead of the caravan, when, dismounting and causing his horse to lie down, he would throw himself on the ground and place his head on his horse's neck. So he would sleep until the cavalcade came up, when his horse would awake him by a kick, and he would remount.' [Footnote: Phelps, pp. 31, 32.]

In fact, in his youth he was fond of riding, and there was a time when he thought that he would like hunting, but 'when I saw them killing birds and animals, I thought that this could not be right. Then it occurred to me that better than hunting for animals, to kill them, was hunting for the souls of men to bring them to God. I then resolved that I would be a hunter of this sort. This was my first and last experience in the chase.'

'A seeker of the souls of men.' This is, indeed, a good description of both father and son. Neither the one nor the other had much of what we call technical education, but both understood how to cast a spell on the soul, awakening its dormant powers. Abdul Baha had the courage to frequent the mosques and argue with the mullas; he used to be called 'the Master' par excellence, and the governor of Adrianople became his friend, and proved his friendship in the difficult negotiations connected with the removal of the Bahaites to Akka. [Footnote: Ibid. p. 20, n.2.]

But no one was such a friend to the unfortunate Bahaites as Abdul Baha. The conditions under which they lived on their arrival at Akka were so unsanitary that 'every one in our company fell sick excepting my brother, my mother, an aunt, and two others of the believers.' [Footnote: Phelps, pp. 47-51.] Happily Abdul Baha had in his baggage some quinine and bismuth. With these drugs, and his tireless nursing, he brought the rest through, but then collapsed himself. He was seized with dysentery, and was long in great danger. But even in this prison-city he was to find a friend. A Turkish officer had been struck by his unselfish conduct, and when he saw Abdul Baha brought so low he pleaded with the governor that a hakîm might be called in. This was permitted with the happiest result.

It was now the physician's turn. In visiting his patient he became so fond of him that he asked if there was nothing else he could do. Abdul Baha begged him to take a tablet (i.e. letter) to the Persian believers. Thus for two years an intercourse with the friends outside was maintained; the physician prudently concealed the tablets in the lining of his hat!

It ought to be mentioned here that the hardships of the prison-city were mitigated later. During the years 1895-1900 he was often allowed to visit Haifa. Observing this the American friends built Baha-'ullah a house in Haifa, and this led to a hardening of the conditions of his life. But upon the whole we may apply to him those ancient words:

'He maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.'

In 1914 Abdul Baha visited Akka, living in the house of Baha-'ullah, near where his father was brought with wife and children and seventy Persian exiles forty-six years ago. But his permanent home is in Haifa, a very simple home where, however, the call for hospitality never passes unheeded. 'From sunrise often till midnight he works, in spite of broken health, never sparing himself if there is a wrong to be righted, or a suffering to be relieved. His is indeed a selfless life, and to have passed beneath its shadow is to have been won for ever to the Cause of Peace and Love.'

Since 1908 Abdul Baha has been free to travel; the political victory of the Young Turks opened the doors of Akka, as well as of other political 'houses of restraint.' America, England, France, and even Germany have shared the benefit of his presence. It may be that he spoke too much; it may be that even in England his most important work was done in personal interviews. Educationally valuable, therefore, as Some Answered Questions (1908) may be, we cannot attach so much importance to it as to the story—the true story—of the converted Muhammadan. When at home, Abdul Baha only discusses Western problems with visitors from the West.

The Legacy left by Baha-'ullah to his son was, it must be admitted, an onerous educational duty. It was contested by Muhammad Effendi—by means which remind us unpleasantly of Subh-i-Ezel, but unsuccessfully. Undeniably Baha-'ullah conferred on Abbas Effendi (Abdul Baha) the title of Centre of the Covenant, with the special duty annexed of the 'Expounder of the Book.' I venture to hope that this 'expounding' may not, in the future, extend to philosophic, philological, scientific, and exegetical details. Just as Jesus made mistakes about Moses and David, so may Baha-'ullah and Abdul Baha fall into error on secular problems, among which it is obvious to include Biblical and Kuranic exegesis.

It appears to me that the essence of Bahaism is not dogma, but the unification of peoples and religions in a certain high-minded and far from unpractical mysticism. I think that Abdul Baha is just as much devoted to mystic and yet practical religion as his father. In one of the reports of his talks or monologues he is introduced as saying:

'A moth loves the light though his wings are burnt. Though his wings are singed, he throws himself against the flame. He does not love the light because it has conferred some benefits upon him. Therefore he hovers round the light, though he sacrifice his wings. This is the highest degree of love. Without this abandonment, this ecstasy, love is imperfect. The Lover of God loves Him for Himself, not for his own sake.'—From 'Abbas Effendi,' by E. S. Stevens, Fortnightly Review, June 1911, p. 1067.

This is, surely, the essence of mysticism. As a characteristic of the Church of 'the Abha' it goes back, as we have seen, to the Bab. As a characteristic of the Brotherhood of the 'New Dispensation' it is plainly set forth by Keshab Chandra Sen. It is also Christian, and goes back to Paul and John. This is the hidden wisdom—the pearl of great price.



PART IV

BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL; AMBASSADOR TO HUMANITY

AMBASSADOR TO HUMANITY

After the loss of his father the greatest trouble which befell the authorized successor was the attempt made independently by Subh-i-Ezel and the half-brother of Abdul Baha, Mirza Muhammad 'Ali, to produce a schism in the community at Akka. Some little success was obtained by the latter, who did not shrink from the manipulation of written documents. Badi-'ullah, another half-brother, was for a time seduced by these dishonest proceedings, but has since made a full confession of his error (see Star of the West).

It is indeed difficult to imagine how an intimate of the saintly Abdul Baha can have 'lifted up his foot' against him, the more so as Abdul Baha would never defend himself, but walked straight forward on the appointed path. That path must have differed somewhat as the years advanced. His public addresses prove that through this or that channel he had imbibed something of humanistic and even scientific culture; he was a much more complete man than St. Francis of Assisi, who despised human knowledge. It is true he interpreted any facts which he gathered in the light of revealed religious truth. But he distinctly recognized the right of scientific research, and must have had some one to guide him in the tracks of modern inquiry.

The death of his father must have made a great difference to him In the disposal of his time. It is to this second period in his life that Mr. Phelps refers when he makes this statement:

'His general order for the day is prayers and tea at sunrise, and dictating letters or "tablets," receiving visitors, and giving alms to the poor until dinner in the middle of the day. After this meal he takes a half-hour's siesta, spends the afternoon in making visits to the sick and others whom he has occasion to see about the city, and the evening in talking to the believers or in expounding, to any who wish to hear him, the Kuran, on which, even among Muslims, he is reputed to be one of the highest authorities, learned men of that faith frequently coming from great distances to consult him with regard to its interpretation.

'He then returns to his house and works until about one o'clock over his correspondence. This is enormous, and would more than occupy his entire time, did he read and reply to all his letters personally. As he finds it impossible to do this, but is nevertheless determined that they shall all receive careful and impartial attention, he has recourse to the assistance of his daughter Ruha, upon whose intelligence and conscientious devotion to the work he can rely. During the day she reads and makes digests of letters received, which she submits to him at night.'

In his charities he is absolutely impartial; his love is like the divine love—it knows no bounds of nation or creed. Most of those who benefit by his presence are of course Muslims; many true stories are current among his family and intimate friends respecting them. Thus, there is the story of the Afghan who for twenty-four years received the bounty of the good Master, and greeted him with abusive speeches. In the twenty-fifth year, however, his obstinacy broke.

Many American and English guests have been entertained in the Master's house. Sometimes even he has devoted a part of his scanty leisure to instructing them. We must remember, however, that of Bahaism as well as of true Christianity it may be said that it is not a dogmatic system, but a life. No one, so far as my observation reaches, has lived the perfect life like Abdul Baha, and he tells us himself that he is but the reflexion of Baha-'ullah. We need not, therefore, trouble ourselves unduly about the opinions of God's heroes; both father and son in the present case have consistently discouraged metaphysics and theosophy, except (I presume) for such persons as have had an innate turn for this subject.

Once more, the love of God and the love of humanity—which Abdul Baha boldly says is the love of God—is the only thing that greatly matters. And if he favours either half of humanity in preference to the other, it is women folk. He has a great repugnance to the institution of polygamy, and has persistently refused to take a second wife himself, though he has only daughters. Baha-'ullah, as we have seen, acted differently; apparently he did not consider that the Islamic peoples were quite ripe for monogamy. But surely he did not choose the better part, as the history of Bahaism sufficiently shows. At any rate, the Centre of the Covenant has now spoken with no uncertain sound.

As we have seen, the two schismatic enterprises affected the sensitive nature of the true Centre of the Covenant most painfully; one thinks of a well-known passage in a Hebrew psalm. But he was more than compensated by several most encouraging events. The first was the larger scale on which accessions took place to the body of believers; from England to the United States, from India to California, in surprising numbers, streams of enthusiastic adherents poured in. It was, however, for Russia that the high honour was reserved of the erection of the first Bahai temple. To this the Russian Government was entirely favourable, because the Bahais were strictly forbidden by Baha-'ullah and by Abdul Baha to take part in any revolutionary enterprises. The temple took some years to build, but was finished at last, and two Persian workmen deserve the chief praise for willing self-sacrifice in the building. The example thus set will soon be followed by our kinsfolk in the United States. A large and beautiful site on the shores of Lake Michigan has been acquired, and the construction will speedily be proceeded with.

It is, in fact, the outward sign of a new era. If Baha-'ullah be our guide, all religions are essentially one and the same, and all human societies are linked By a covenant of brotherhood. Of this the Bahai temples—be they few, or be they many—are the symbols. No wonder that Abdul Baha is encouraged and consoled thereby. And yet I, as a member of a great world-wide historic church, cannot help feeling that our (mostly) ancient and beautiful abbeys and cathedrals are finer symbols of union in God than any which our modern builders can provide. Our London people, without distinction of sect, find a spiritual home in St. Paul's Cathedral, though this is no part of our ancient inheritance.

Another comfort was the creation of a mausoleum (on the site of Mt. Carmel above Haifa) to receive the sacred relics of the Bab and of Baha-'ullah, and in the appointed time also of Abdul Baha. [Footnote: See the description given by Thornton Chase, In Galilee, pp. 63 f.] This too must be not only a comfort to the Master, but an attestation for all time of the continuous development of the Modern Social Religion.

It is this sense of historical continuity in which the Bahais appear to me somewhat deficient. They seem to want a calendar of saints in the manner of the Positivist calendar. Bahai teaching will then escape the danger of being not quite conscious enough of its debt to the past. For we have to reconcile not only divergent races and religions, but also antiquity and (if I may use the word) modernity. I may mention that the beloved Master has deigned to call me by a new name.[Footnote: 'Spiritual Philosopher.'] He will bear with me if I venture to interpret that name in a sense favourable to the claims of history.

The day is not far off when the details of Abdul Baha's missionary journeys will be admitted to be of historical importance. How gentle and wise he was, hundreds could testify from personal knowledge, and I too could perhaps say something—I will only, however, give here the outward framework of Abdul Baha's life, and of his apostolic journeys, with the help of my friend Lotfullah. I may say that it is with deference to this friend that in naming the Bahai leaders I use the capital H (He, His, Him).

Abdul Baha was born on the same night in which His Holiness the Bab declared his mission, on May 23, A.D. 1844. The Master, however, eager for the glory of the forerunner, wishes that that day (i.e. May 23) be kept sacred for the declaration of His Holiness the Bab, and has appointed another day to be kept by Bahais as the Feast of Appointment of the CENTRE OF THE COVENANT—Nov. 26. It should be mentioned that the great office and dignity of Centre of the Covenant was conferred on Abdul Baha Abbas Effendi by His father.

It will be in the memory of most that the Master was retained a prisoner under the Turkish Government at Akka until Sept. 1908, when the doors of His prison were opened by the Young Turks. After this He stayed in Akka and Haifa for some time, and then went to Egypt, where He sojourned for about two years. He then began His great European journey. He first visited London. On His way thither He spent some few weeks in Geneva. [Footnote: Mr. H. Holley has given a classic description of Abdul Baha, whom he met at Thonon on the shores of Lake Leman, in his Modern Social Religion, Appendix I.] On Monday, Sept. 3, 1911, He arrived in London; the great city was honoured by a visit of twenty-six days. During His stay in London He made a visit one afternoon to Vanners' in Byfleet on Sept. 9, where He spoke to a number of working women.

He also made a week-end visit to Clifton (Bristol) from Sept. 23, 1911, to Sept. 25.

On Sept. 29, 1911, He started from London and went to Paris and stayed there for about two months, and from there He went to Alexandria.

His second journey consumed much time, but the fragrance of God accompanied Him. On March 25, 1912, He embarked from Alexandria for America. He made a long tour in almost all the more important cities of the United States and Canada.

On Saturday, Dec. 14, 1912, the Master—Abdul Baha—arrived in Liverpool from New York. He stayed there for two days. On the following Monday, Dec. 16, 1912, He arrived in London. There He stayed till Jan. 21, 1913, when His Holiness went to Paris.

During His stay in London He visited Oxford (where He and His party—of Persians mainly—were the guests of Professor and Mrs. Cheyne), Edinburgh, Clifton, and Woking. It is fitting to notice here that the audience at Oxford, though highly academic, seemed to be deeply interested, and that Dr. Carpenter made an admirable speech.

On Jan. 6, 1913, Abdul Baha went to Edinburgh, and stayed at Mrs. Alexander Whyte's. In the course of these three days He addressed the Theosophical Society, the Esperanto Society, and many of the students, including representatives of almost all parts of the East. He also spoke to two or three other large meetings in the bleak but receptive 'northern Athens.' It is pleasant to add that here, as elsewhere, many seekers came and had private interviews with Him. It was a fruitful season, and He then returned to London.

On Wednesday, Jan. 15, 1912, He paid another visit to Clifton, and in the evening spoke to a large gathering at 8.30 P.M. at Clifton Guest House. On the following day He returned to London.

On Friday, Jan. 17, Abdul Baha went to the Muhammadan Mosque at Woking. There, in the Muhammadan Mosque He spoke to a large audience of Muhammadans and Christians who gathered there from different parts of the world.

On Jan. 21, 1913, this glorious time had an end. He started by express train for Paris from Victoria Station. He stayed at the French capital till the middle of June, addressing (by the help of His interpreter) 'all sorts and conditions of men.' Once more Paris proved how thoroughly it deserved the title of 'city of ideas.' During this time He visited Stuttgart, Budapest, and Vienna. At Budapest He had the great pleasure of meeting Arminius Vambery, who had become virtually a strong adherent of the cause.

Will the Master be able to visit India? He has said Himself that some magnetic personality might draw Him. Will the Brahmaists be pleased to see Him? At any rate, our beloved Master has the requisite tact. Could Indians and English be really united except by the help of the Bahais? The following Tablet (Epistle) was addressed by the Master to the Bahais in London, who had sent Him a New Year's greeting on March 21, 1914:—

'HE IS GOD!

'O shining Bahais! Your New Year's greeting brought infinite joy and fragrance, and became the cause of our daily rejoicing and gladness.

'Thanks be to God! that in that city which is often dark because of cloud, mist, and smoke, such bright candles (as you) are glowing, whose emanating light is God's guidance, and whose influencing warmth is as the burning Fire of the Love of God.

'This your social gathering on the Great Feast is like unto a Mother who will in future beget many Heavenly Feasts. So that all eyes may be amazed as to what effulgence the true Sun of the East has shed on the West.

'How It has changed the Occidentals into Orientals, and illumined the Western Horizon with the Luminary of the East!

'Then, in thanksgiving for this great gift, favour, and grace, rejoice ye and be exceeding glad, and engage ye in praising and sanctifying the Lord of Hosts.

'Hearken to the song of the Highest Concourse, and by the melody of Abha's Kingdom lift ye up the cry of "Ya Baha-'ul-Abha!"

'So that Abdul Baha and all the Eastern Bahais may give themselves to praise of the Loving Lord, and cry aloud, "Most Pure and Holy is the Lord, Who has changed the West into the East with lights of Guidance!"

'Upon you all be the Glory of the Most Glorious One!'

Alas! the brightness of the day has been darkened for the Bahai Brotherhood all over the world. Words fail me for the adequate expression of my sorrow at the adjournment of the hope of Peace. Yet the idea has been expressed, and cannot return to the Thinker void of results. The estrangement of races and religions is only the fruit of ignorance, and their reconciliation is only a question of time. Sursum corda.



PART V

A SERIES OF ILLUSTRATIVE STUDIES BEARING ON COMPARATIVE RELIGION

A SERIES OF ILLUSTRATIVE STUDIES BEARING ON COMPARITIVE RELIGION

EIGHTEEN (OR, WITH THE BAB, NINETEEN) LETTERS OF THE LIVING OF THE FIRST UNITY

The Letters of the Living were the most faithful and most gifted of the disciples of the so-called Gate or Point. See Traveller's Narrative, Introd. p. xvi.

Babu'l Bab. A. Muhammad Hasan, his brother. A. Muhammad Baghir, his nephew. A. Mulla Ali Bustani. Janabe Mulla Khodabacksh Qutshani. Janabe Hasan Bajastani. Janabe A. Sayyid Hussain Yardi. Janabe Mirza Muhammad Ruzi Khan. Janabe Sayyïd Hindi. Janabe Mulla Mahmud Khoyï. Janabe Mulla Jalil Urumiyi. Janabe Mulla Muhammad Abdul Maraghaï. Janabe Mulla Baghir Tabrizi. Janabe Mulla Yusif Ardabili. Mirza Hadi, son of Mirza Abdu'l Wahab Qazwini. Janabe Mirza Muhammad 'Ali Qazwini. Janabi Tahirah. Hazrati Quddus.

TITLES OF THE BAB, ETC.

There is a puzzling variation in the claims of 'Ali Muhammad. Originally he represented himself as the Gate of the City of Knowledge, or—which is virtually the same thing—as the Gate leading to the invisible twelfth Imâm who was also regarded as the Essence of Divine Wisdom. It was this Imâm who was destined as Ka'im (he who is to arise) to bring the whole world by force into subjection to the true God. Now there was one person who was obviously far better suited than 'Ali Muhammad (the Bab) to carry out the programme for the Ka'im, and that was Hazrat-i'-Kuddus (to whom I have devoted a separate section). For some time, therefore, before the death of Kuddus, 'Ali Muhammad abstained from writing or speaking ex cathedra, as the returned Ka'im; he was probably called 'the Point.' After the death of this heroic personage, however, he undoubtedly resumed his previous position.

On this matter Mr. Leslie Johnston remarks that the alternation of the two characters in the same person is as foreign to Christ's thought as it is essential to the Bab's. [Footnote: Some Alternatives to Jesus Christ, p. 117.] This is perfectly true. The divine-human Being called the Messiah has assumed human form; the only development of which he is capable is self-realization. The Imamate is little more than a function, but the Messiahship is held by a person, not as a mere function, but as a part of his nature. This is not an unfair criticism. The alternation seems to me, as well as to Mr. Johnston, psychologically impossible. But all the more importance attaches to the sublime figure of Baha-'ullah, who realized his oneness with God, and whose forerunner is like unto him (the Bab).

The following utterance of the Bab is deserving of consideration:

'Then, verily, if God manifested one like thee, he would inherit the cause from God, the One, the Unique. But if he doth not appear, then know that verily God hath not willed that he should make himself known. Leave the cause, then, to him, the educator of you all, and of the whole world.'

The reference to Baha-'ullah is unmistakable. He is 'one like thee,' i.e. Ezel's near kinsman, and is a consummate educator, and God's Manifestation.

Another point is also important. The Bab expressed a wish that his widow should not marry again. Subh-i-Ezel, however, who was not, even in theory, a monogamist, lost no time in taking the lady for a wife. He cannot have been the Bab's successor.

LETTER OF ONE EXPECTING MARTYRDOM [Footnote: The letter is addressed to a brother.]

'He is the Compassionate [superscription]. O thou who art my Kibla! My condition, thanks to God, has no fault, and "to every difficulty succeedeth ease." You have written that this matter has no end. What matter, then, has any end? We, at least, have no discontent in this matter; nay, rather we are unable sufficiently to express our thanks for this favour. The end of this matter is to be slain in the way of God, and O! what happiness is this! The will of God will come to pass with regard to His servants, neither can human plans avert the Divine decree. What God wishes comes to pass, and there is no power and no strength, but in God. O thou who art my Kibla! the end of the world is death: "every soul tastes of death." If the appointed fate which God (mighty and glorious is He) hath decreed overtake me, then God is the guardian of my family, and thou art mine executor: behave in such wise as is pleasing to God, and pardon whatever has proceeded from me which may seem lacking in courtesy, or contrary to the respect due from juniors: and seek pardon for me from all those of my household, and commit me to God. God is my portion, and how good is He as a guardian!'

THE BAHAI VIEW OF RELIGION

The practical purpose of the Revelation of Baha-'ullah is thus described on authority:

To unite all the races of the world in perfect harmony, which can only be done, in my opinion, on a religious basis.

Warfare must be abolished, and international difficulties be settled by a Council of Arbitration. This may require further consideration.

It is commanded that every one should practise some trade, art, or profession. Work done in a faithful spirit of service is accepted as an act of worship.

Mendicity is strictly forbidden, but work must be provided for all. A brilliant anticipation!

There is to be no priesthood apart from the laity. Early Christianity and Buddhism both ratify this. Teachers and investigators would, of course, always be wanted.

The practice of Asceticism, living the hermit life or in secluded communities, is prohibited.

Monogamy is enjoined. Baha-'ullah, no doubt, had two wives. This was 'for the hardness of men's hearts'; he desired the spread of monogamy.

Education for all, boys and girls equally, is commanded as a religious duty—the childless should educate a child.

The equality of men and women is asserted.

A universal language as a means of international communication is to be formed. Abdul Baha is much in favour of Esperanto, the noble inventor of which sets all other inventors a worthy example of unselfishness.

Gambling, the use of alcoholic liquors as a beverage, the taking of opium, cruelty to animals and slavery, are forbidden.

A certain portion of a man's income must be devoted to charity. The administration of charitable funds, the provision for widows and for the sick and disabled, the education and care of orphans, will be arranged and managed by elected Councils.

THE NEW DISPENSATION

The contrast between the Old and the New is well exemplified in the contrasting lives of Rammohan Roy, Debendranath Tagore, and Keshab Chandra Sen. As an Indian writer says: 'The sweep of the New Dispensation is broader than the Brahmo Samaj. The whole religious world is in the grasp of a great purpose which, in its fresh unfolding of the new age, we call the New Dispensation. The New Dispensation is not a local phenomenon; it is not confined to Calcutta or to India; our Brotherhood is but one body whose thought it functions to-day; it is not topographical, it is operative in all the world-religions.' [Footnote: Cp. Auguste Sabatier on the Religion of the Spirit, and Mozoomdar's work on the same subject.]

'No full account has yet been given to the New Brotherhood's work and experiences during that period. Men of various ranks came, drawn together by the magnetic personality of the man they loved, knowing he loved them all with a larger love; his leadership was one of love, and they caught the contagion of his conviction.... And so, if I were to write at length, I could cite one illustration after another of transformed lives—lives charged with a new spirit shown in the work achieved, the sufferings borne, the persecutions accepted, deep spiritual gladness experienced in the midst of pain, the fellowship with God realized day after day' (Benoyendra Nath Sen, The Spirit of the New Dispensation). The test of a religion is its capacity for producing noble men and women.

MANIFESTATION

God Himself in His inmost essence cannot be either imagined or comprehended, cannot be named. But in some measure He can be known by His Manifestations, chief among whom is that Heavenly Being known variously as Michael, the Son of man, the Logos, and Sofia. These names are only concessions to the weakness of the people. This Heavenly Being is sometimes spoken of allusively as the Face or Name, the Gate and the Point (of Knowledge). See p. 174.

The Manifestations may also be called Manifesters or Revealers. They make God known to the human folk so far as this can be done by Mirrors, and especially (as Tagore has most beautifully shown) in His inexhaustible love. They need not have the learning of the schools. They would mistake their office if they ever interfered with discoveries or problems of criticism or of science.

The Bab announced that he himself owed nothing to any earthly teacher. A heavenly teacher, however, if he touched the subject, would surely have taught the Bab better Arabic. It is a psychological problem how the Bab can lay so much stress on his 'signs' (ayât) or verses as decisive of the claims of a prophet. One is tempted to surmise that in the Bab's Arabic work there has been collaboration.

What constitutes 'signs' or verses? Prof. Browne gives this answer: [Footnote: E. G. Browne, JRAS, 1889, p. 155.] 'Eloquence of diction, rapidity of utterance, knowledge unacquired by study, claim to divine origin, power to affect and control the minds of men.' I do not myself see how the possession of an Arabic which some people think very poor and others put down to the help of an amanuensis, can be brought within the range of Messianic lore. It is spiritual truth that we look for from the Bab. Secular wisdom, including the knowledge of languages, we turn over to the company of trained scholars.

Spiritual truth, then, is the domain of the prophets of Bahaism. A prophet who steps aside from the region in which he is at home is fallible like other men. Even in the sphere of exposition of sacred texts the greatest of prophets is liable to err. In this way I am bound to say that Baha-'ullah himself has made mistakes, and can we be surprised that the almost equally venerated Abdul Baha has made many slips? It is necessary to make this pronouncement, lest possible friends should be converted into seeming enemies. The claim of infallibility has done harm enough already in the Roman Church!

Baha-'ullah may no doubt be invoked on the other side. This is the absolutely correct statement of his son Abdul Baha. 'He (Baha-'ullah) entered into a Covenant and Testament with the people. He appointed a Centre of the Covenant, He wrote with his own pen ... appointing him the Expounder of the Book.' [Footnote: Star of the West, 1913, p. 238.] But Baha-'ullah is as little to be followed on questions of philology as Jesus Christ, who is not a manifester of science but of heavenly lore. The question of Sinlessness I postpone.

GREAT MANIFESTATION; WHEN?

I do not myself think that the interval of nineteen years for the Great Manifestation was meant by the Bab to be taken literally. The number 19 may be merely a conventional sacred number and have no historical significance. I am therefore not to be shaken by a reference to these words of the Bab, quoted in substance by Mirza Abu'l Fazl, that after nine years all good will come to his followers, or by the Mirza's comment that it was nine years after the Bab's Declaration that Baha-'ullah gathered together the Babis at Baghdad, and began to teach them, and that at the end of the nineteenth year from the Declaration of the Bab, Baha-'ullah declared his Manifestation.

Another difficulty arises. The Bab does not always say the same thing. There are passages of the Persian Bayan which imply an interval between his own theophany and the next parallel to that which separated his own theophany from Muhammad's. He says, for instance, in Wahid II. Bab 17, according to Professor Browne,

'If he [whom God shall manifest] shall appear in the number of Ghiyath (1511) and all shall enter in, not one shall remain in the Fire. If He tarry [until the number of] Mustaghath (2001), all shall enter in, not one shall remain in the Fire.' [Footnote: _History of the Babis, edited by E. G. Browne; Introd. p. xxvi. _Traveller's Narrative_ (Browne), Introd. p. xvii. ]

I quote next from Wahid III. Bab 15:—

'None knoweth [the time of] the Manifestation save God: whenever it takes place, all must believe and must render thanks to God, although it is hoped of His Grace that He will come ere [the number of] Mustaghath, and will raise up the Word of God on his part. And the Proof is only a sign [or verse], and His very Existence proves Him, since all also is known by Him, while He cannot be known by what is below Him. Glorious is God above that which they ascribe to Him.' [Footnote: History of the Babis, Introd. p. xxx.]

Elsewhere (vii. 9), we are told vaguely that the Advent of the Promised One will be sudden, like that of the Point or Bab (iv. 10); it is an element of the great Oriental myth of the winding-up of the old cycle and the opening of a new. [Footnote: Cheyne, Mines of Isaiah Re-explored, Index, 'Myth.']

A Bahai scholar furnishes me with another passage—

'God knoweth in what age He will manifest him. But from the springing (beginning) of the manifestation to its head (perfection) are nineteen years.' [Footnote: Bayan, Wahid, III., chap. iii.]

This implies a preparation period of nineteen years, and if we take this statement with a parallel one, we can, I think, have no doubt that the Bab expected the assumption, not immediate however, of the reins of government by the Promised One. The parallel statement is as follows, according to the same Bahai scholar.

'God only knoweth his age. But the time of his proclamation after mine is the number Wahid (=19, cabbalistically), and whenever he cometh during this period, accept him.' [Footnote: Bayan, Brit. Mus. Text, p. 151.]

Another passage may be quoted by the kindness of Mirza 'Ali Akbar. It shows that the Bab has doubts whether the Great Manifestation will occur in the lifetime of Baha-'ullah and Subh-i-Ezel (one or other of whom is addressed by the Bab in this letter). The following words are an extract:—

'And if God hath not manifested His greatness in thy days, then act in accordance with that which hath descended (i.e. been revealed), and never change a word in the verses of God.

'This is the order of God in the Sublime Book; ordain in accordance with that which hath descended, and never change the orders of God, that men may not make variations in God's religion.'

NON-FINALITY OF REVELATION

Not less important than the question of the Bab's appointment of his successor is that of his own view of the finality or non-finality of his revelation. The Bayan does not leave this in uncertainty. The Kur'an of the Babis expressly states that a new Manifestation takes place whenever there is a call for it (ii. 9, vi. 13); successive revelations are like the same sun arising day after day (iv. 12, vii. 15, viii. 1). The Bab's believers therefore are not confined to a revelation constantly becoming less and less applicable to the spiritual wants of the present age. And very large discretionary powers are vested in 'Him whom He will make manifest,' extending even to the abrogation of the commands of the Bayan (iii. 3).

EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND BAHAISM AND BUDDHISM

The comparisons sometimes drawn between the history of nascent Christianity and that of early Bahaism are somewhat misleading. 'Ali Muhammad of Shiraz was more than a mere forerunner of the Promised Saviour; he was not merely John the Baptist—he was the Messiah, All-wise and Almighty, himself. True, he was of a humble mind, and recognized that what he might ordain would not necessarily be suitable for a less transitional age, but the same may be said—if our written records may be trusted—of Jesus Christ. For Jesus was partly his own forerunner, and antiquated his own words.

It is no doubt a singular coincidence that both 'Ali Muhammad and Jesus Christ are reported to have addressed these words to a disciple: 'To-day thou shalt be with me in Paradise.' But if the Crucifixion is unhistorical—and there is, I fear, considerable probability that it is—what is the value of this coincidence?

More important is it that both in early Christianity and in early Bahaism we find a conspicuous personage who succeeds in disengaging the faith from its particularistic envelope. In neither case is this personage a man of high culture or worldly position. [Footnote: Leslie Johnston's phraseology (Some Alternatives to Jesus Christ, p. 114) appears to need revision.] This, I say, is most important. Paul and Baha-'ullah may both be said to have transformed their respective religions. Yet there is a difference between them. Baha-'ullah and his son Abdul-Baha after him were personal centres of the new covenant; Paul was not.

This may perhaps suffice for the parallels—partly real, partly supposed—between early Christianity and early Bahaism. I will now refer to an important parallel between the development of Christianity and that of Buddhism. It is possible to deny that the Christianity of Augustine [Footnote: Professor Anesaki of Tokio regards Augustine as the Christian Nagarjuna.] deserves its name, on the ground of the wide interval which exists between his religious doctrines and the beliefs of Jesus Christ. Similarly, one may venture to deny that the Mahâyâna developments of Buddhism are genuine products of the religion because they contain some elements derived from other Indian systems. In both cases, however, grave injustice would be done by any such assumption. It is idle 'to question the historical value of an organism which is now full of vitality and active in all its functions, and to treat it like an archaeological object, dug out from the depths of the earth, or like a piece of bric-à-brac, discovered in the ruins of an ancient royal palace. Mahâyânaism is not an object of historical curiosity. Its vitality and activity concern us in our daily life. It is a great spiritual organism. What does it matter, then, whether or not Mahâyânaism is the genuine teaching of the Buddha?' [Footnote: Suzuki, Outlines of Mahâyâna Buddhism, p. 15.] The parallel between the developments of these two great religions is unmistakable. We Christians insist—and rightly so—on the 'genuineness' of our own religion in spite of the numerous elements unknown to its 'Founder.' The northern Buddhism is equally 'genuine,' being equally true to the spirit of the Buddha.

It is said that Christianity, as a historical religion, contrasts with the most advanced Buddhism. But really it is no loss to the Buddhist Fraternity if the historical element in the life of the Buddha has retired into the background. A cultured Buddhist of the northern section could not indeed admit that he has thrust the history of Gautama entirely aside, but he would affirm that his religion was more philosophical and practically valuable than that of his southern brothers, inasmuch as it transcended the boundary of history. In a theological treatise called Chin-kuang-ming we read as follows: 'It would be easier to count every drop of water in the ocean, or every grain of matter that composes a vast mountain than to reckon the duration of the life of Buddha.' 'That is to say, Buddha's life does not belong to the time-series: Buddha is the "I Am" who is above time.' [Footnote: Johnston, Buddhist China, p. 114.] And is not the Christ of Christendom above the world of time and space? Lastly, must not both Christians and Buddhists admit that among the Christs or Buddhas the most godlike are those embodied in narratives as Jesus and Gautama?

WESTERN AND EASTERN RELIGION

Religion, as conceived by most Christians of the West, is very different from the religion of India. Three-quarters of it (as Matthew Arnold says) has to do with conduct; it is a code with a very positive and keen divine sanction. Few of its adherents, indeed, have any idea of the true position of morality, and that the code of Christian ethics expresses barely one half of the religious idea. The other half (or even more) is expressed in assurances of holy men that God dwells within us, or even that we are God. A true morality helps us to realize this—morality is not to be tied up and labelled, but is identical with the cosmic as well as individual principle of Love. Sin (i.e. an unloving disposition) is to be avoided because it blurs the outlines of the Divine Form reflected, however dimly, in each of us.

There are, no doubt, a heaven where virtue is rewarded, and a hell where vice is punished, for the unphilosophical minds of the vulgar. But the only reward worthy of a lover of God is to get nearer and nearer to Him. Till the indescribable goal (Nirvana) is reached, we must be content with realizing. This is much easier to a Hindu than to an Englishman, because the former has a constant sense of that unseen power which pervades and transcends the universe. I do not understand how Indian seekers after truth can hurry and strive about sublunary matters. Surely they ought to feel 'that this tangible world, with its chatter of right and wrong, subserves the intangible.'

Hard as it must be for the adherents of such different principles to understand each other, it is not, I venture to think, impossible. And, as at once an Anglican Christian and an adopted Brahmaist, I make the attempt to bring East and West religiously together.

RELIGIOUS TEACHERS OF THE EAST

The greatest religious teachers and reformers who have appeared in recent times are (if I am not much mistaken) Baha-'ullah the Persian and Keshab Chandra Sen the Indian. The one began by being a reformer of the Muhammadan society or church, the other by acting in the same capacity for the Indian community and more especially for the Brahmo Samaj—a very imperfect and loosely organized religious society or church founded by Rammohan Roy. By a natural evolution the objects of both reformers were enlarged; both became the founders of world-churches, though circumstances prevented the extension of the Brotherhood of the New Dispensation beyond the limits of India.

In both cases a doubt has arisen in the minds of some spectators whether the reformers have anything to offer which has not already been given by the Hebrew prophets and by the finest efflorescence of these—Jesus Christ. I am bound to express the opinion that they have. Just as the author of the Fourth Gospel looks forward to results of the Dispensation of the Spirit which will outdo those of the Ministry of Jesus (John xiv. 12), so we may confidently look forward to disclosures of truth and of depths upon depths of character which will far surpass anything that could, in the Nearer or Further East, have been imagined before the time of Baha-'ullah.

I do not say that Baha-'ullah is unique or that His revelations are final. There will be other Messiahs after Him, nor is the race of the prophets extinct. The supposition of finality is treason to the ever active, ever creative Spirit of Truth. But till we have already entered upon a new aeon, we shall have to look back in a special degree to the prophets who introduced our own aeon, Baha-'ullah and Keshab Chandra Sen, whose common object is the spiritual unification of all peoples. For it is plain that this union of peoples can only be obtained through the influence of prophetic personages, those of the past as well as those of the present.

QUALITIES OF THE MEN OF THE COMING RELIGION (Gal. v. 22)

1. Love. What is love? Let Rabindranath Tagore tell us.

'In love all the contradictions of existence merge themselves and are lost. Only in love are unity and duality not at variance. Love must be one and two at the same time.

'Only love is motion and rest in one. Our heart ever changes its place till it finds love, and then it has its rest....

'In this wonderful festival of creation, this great ceremony of self-sacrifice of God, the lover constantly gives himself up to gain himself in love....

'In love, at one of its poles you find the personal, and at the other the impersonal.' [Footnote: Tagore, Sadhana (1913), p. 114.]

I do not think this has been excelled by any modern Christian teacher, though the vivid originality of the Buddha's and of St. Paul's descriptions of love cannot be denied. The subject, however, is too many-sided for me to attempt to describe it here. Suffice it to say that the men of the coming religion will be distinguished by an intelligent and yet intense altruistic affection—the new-born love.

2 and 3. Joy and Peace. These are fundamental qualities in religion, and especially, it is said, in those forms of religion which appear to centre in incarnations. This statement, however, is open to criticism. It matters but little how we attain to joy and peace, as long as we do attain to them. Christians have not surpassed the joy and peace produced by the best and safest methods of the Indian and Persian sages.

I would not belittle the tranquil and serene joy of the Christian saint, but I cannot see that this is superior to the same joy as it is exhibited in the Psalms of the Brethren or the Sisters in the Buddhistic Order. Nothing is more remarkable in these songs than the way in which joy and tranquillity are interfused. So it is with God, whose creation is the production of tranquillity and utter joy, and so it is with godlike men—men such as St. Francis of Assisi in the West and the poet-seers of the Upanishads in the East. All these are at once joyous and serene. As Tagore says, 'Joy without the play of joy is no joy; play without activity is no play.' [Footnote: Tagore, Sadhana (1913), p. 131.] And how can he act to advantage who is perturbed in mind? In the coming religion all our actions will be joyous and tranquil. Meantime, transitionally, we have much need both of long-suffering [Footnote: This quality is finely described in chap. vi. of The Path of Light (Wisdom of the East series).] and of courage; 'quit you like men, be strong.' (I write in August 1914.)

REFORM OF ISLAM

And what as to Islam? Is any fusion between this and the other great religions possible? A fusion between Islam and Christianity can only be effected if first of all these two religions (mutually so repugnant) are reformed. Thinking Muslims will more and more come to see that the position assigned by Muhammad to himself and to the Kur'an implies that he had a thoroughly unhistorical mind. In other words he made those exclusive and uncompromising claims under a misconception. There were true apostles or prophets, both speakers and writers, between the generally accepted date of the ministry of Jesus and that of the appearance of Muhammad, and these true prophets were men of far greater intellectual grasp than the Arabian merchant.

Muslim readers ought therefore to feel it no sacrilege if I advocate the correction of what has thus been mistakenly said. Muhammad was one of the prophets, not the prophet (who is virtually = the Logos), and the Kur'an is only adapted for Arabian tribes, not for all nations of the world.

One of the points in the exhibition of which the Arabian Bible is most imperfect is the love of God, i.e. the very point in which the Sufi classical poets are most admirable, though indeed an Arabian poetess, who died 135 Hij., expresses herself already in the most thrilling tones. [Footnote: Von Kremer's Herrschende Ideen des Islams, pp. 64, etc.]

Perhaps one might be content, so far as the Kur'an is concerned, with a selection of Suras, supplemented by extracts from other religious classics of Islam. I have often thought that we want both a Catholic Christian lectionary and a Catholic prayer-book. To compile this would be the work not of a prophet, but of a band of interpreters. An exacting work which would be its own reward, and would promote, more perhaps than anything else, the reformation and ultimate blending of the different religions.

Meantime no persecution should be allowed in the reformed Islamic lands. Thankful as we may be for the Christian and Bahaite heroism generated by a persecuting fanaticism, we may well wish that it might be called forth otherwise. Heroic was the imprisonment and death of Captain Conolly (in Bukhara), but heroic also are the lives of many who have spent long years in unhealthy climates, to civilize and moralize those who need their help.

SYNTHESIS OF RELIGIONS

'There is one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all.'

These words in the first instance express the synthesis of Judaism and Oriental pantheism, but may be applied to the future synthesis of Islam and Hinduism, and of both conjointly with Christianity. And the subjects to which I shall briefly refer are the exclusiveness of the claims of Christ and of Muhammad, and of Christ's Church and of Muhammad's, the image-worship of the Hindus and the excessive development of mythology in Hinduism. With the lamented Sister Nivedita I hold that, in India, in proportion as the two faiths pass into higher phases, the easier it becomes for the one faith to be brought into a synthesis combined with the other.

Sufism, for instance, is, in the opinion of most, 'a Muhammadan sect.' It must, at any rate, be admitted to have passed through several stages, but there is, I think, little to add to fully developed Sufism to make it an ideal synthesis of Islam and Hinduism. That little, however, is important. How can the Hindu accept the claim either of Christ or of Muhammad to be the sole gate to the mansions of knowledge?

The most popular of the Hindu Scriptures expressly provides for a succession of avatârs; how, indeed, could the Eternal Wisdom have limited Himself to raising up a single representative of Messiahship. For were not Sakya Muni, Kabir and his disciple Nanak, Chaitanya, the Tamil poets (to whom Dr. Pope has devoted himself) Messiahs for parts of India, and Nisiran for Japan, not to speak here of Islamic countries?