Materials For the Study of

The Religion of Bayan
And
The Bahai Claims
By
Jalal S. Azal
1962-1969, Cyprus
Volume I

JAL-01-06
(1)
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
14th November 1961
Librarian,
The Hebrew University
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to donate to the Oriental Library of the university BABi literature on the BABi
movement. I am to add that the literature will be interesting to students of Comparative Religion and
the history of Religious Evolution.
A brief description of the literature forwarded under separate cover is appended. Acknowledgement of
receipt is requested. Please quote index numbers of the works for future reference.
Yours Sincerely
Jelal S. Ezel
JAL-01-07
(2)
1.
2.

3.
4.

The Persian Bayan, by Mirza Ali Muhammad, entitled the BAB, the First Point.
The Persian Bayan, supplement to, by Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal, the appointed successor of the
BAB. The supplement is facsimile of the original in the handwriting of Subh-i-Azal. Prefaced to
the supplement is the fac-simile of transcript made by Subh-i-Azal of the epistle written by the
BAB and addressed to Subh-i-Azal, directing and instructing him to complete the unfinished
Bayan.
The Arabic Bayan by the BAB. Available fac-similes of the Arabic Bayan in the handwriting of
the BAB are reproduced in the book.
The Epistle of the BAB and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn, accompanied by their fac-simile
in the handwriting of their respective authors. Among other things, this collection contains the
original of the document written by the BAB nominating Subh-i-Azal as his successor.

JAL-01-08
(3)
5. The Tanbihun-Naimin (The Awakening of the Sleepers). It comprises four parts:
(a) a fac-simile of the letter from Abdul Baha to his aunt known as Khanum-i-Buzurg, urging her
to believe in Baha and to abjure other half brother Subh-i-Azal.
(b) A long reply to this from Khanum-i Buzurg, containing a considerable amount of interesting
historical and biographical matter about Bahais, especially during the Baghdad period and the
schism between the Bahais and Azalis; this portion of the book being commonly called
Risala-i Amma (the Aunt’s Epistle); the reply rebuts the pretensions of Baha;
(c) A homily (Khutba) in Arabic followed by a refutation (Risala-i Raddiyya) in Persian, both by
Mirza Ahmad of Kerman;
(d) Fac-simile of the Will and Testament of Baha. The preamble and the concluding notea are in
the handwriting of Baha whilst the body of the Will is the handwriting of his secretary. Baha
recognised Subh-i-Azal as his chief and admitted to his authority.

JAL-02-01
JNUL response and acknowledgement
JAL-02-02
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus

11th December 1961
Librarian,
The Hebrew University
Jerusalem
Mr E.J.Lorch,
Acquisition Dept.
The Jewish National and university library
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to acknowledge receipt of your letter no. JC/L8/L6 of Nov 23, 1961 and to request you to
let me have a list of other publications on BABi literature which form part of the comprehensive
Oriental Collections of the library.
I have conveyed your thanks to all concerned in the gift.
I am directed further to donate to the library, a printed copy of Hasht Bihisht (“The Eight Paradises”).
I am to add that the Introduction, page I to XVII, delas with the authorship of the work. In the light of
the letter reproduced in fac-simile on page XVII, the ideas contained in the book represent the
teachings
JAL-02-02
(2)
and sayings of Haji Sayyid Jawad of karbala, who was of the first Letters of the Living (“Hurrufat-i
Hayy-i Awwal), and was composed the “First Unity” of the BABi hierarchy.
The original spirit of the contents is his through the form of words belongs to Sheikh Ahmad-i Ruhi of
Kerman, and Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, both noted men of Letters and sons-in-laws of Subh-i-Azal.
The Introduction also contains biographical notes on them.
As far as the book itself, the preface extends from page 1 to 29. It deals with the religion of the Bayan
and discusses “virtues” (Khasais) which the religion of the Bayan has over all other religions, and
seven “claims” (daavi) which its adherents made for it.
The body of the work consists of eight chapters, pages 29-299 for which reason the book is entitled
Hasht Bihisht (“The Eight Paradises”). It deals with the practice of the religion of the Bayan and the
events of the Day of the Resurrection, i.e. the circumstances of the BAB’s manifestation. Footnotes
have been inserted in the book where no quotable authority could be invoked to corroborate views and
opinions expressed by the authors.
JAL-02-03
(Duplicate)
JAL-02-04
(3)
Page 300-301 contain Sharh-i-Hal-i Hazrat-i Thamara-i Bayan (“Elucidation of the circumstances of
His Highness the Fruit of the Bayan”) and page 301-304 deals with Sharh-i-Hal-i Ajal-i Samiri
(“Elucidation of the Circumstances of the Calf of Samiri”).
The conclusion, pages 304-306, contains Bayan-i Sharh-i Fitna-i-Salam (Elucidation of the Direful
Mischief”), by which is meant the secession between the Azalis and the Bahais.
The work ends with narrative of “one of the people of the Bayan”, i.e. an Azali BABi, of a visit which
he paid to Acre from Cyprus, and of what he saw and heard there. The visitor was none other than
Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of Hasht Bihisht.
In conclusion, I am to say that the work is systematic treatise in the philosophy, theory, ethics, morality
and the history of the religion of the Bayan.
It is unnecessary to stress the importance of such a work from such a source.
Please acknowledge
Yours Sincerely
Jelal S. Ezel
JAL-02-05

The acknowledgement of JNUL for Hasht Bihisht
JAL-02-06
The acknowledgement of JNUL for Qurat-al-Ayn and The Point’s Diary
JAL-02-07
The acknowledgement of JNUL for Aiin-i BAB and the Succint Account
JAL-02-08
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
26th April 1962
Mr. E. J. Lorch,
Acqusition Department,
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to donate to the library a lithographed copy of the Traveller’s Narrative written to
illustrate the episode of the BAB (Maqala-i Shakh-i Sayyah bi dar Sziyya-i BAB neveshte ast), Vol. I,
Persian Text.
The book is in the handwriting of Zaynul-Abidin known as Zaynul-Muqarrabin, the Bahai scribe. The
book was wriiten anonymously by Abdul baha in A.D. 1886 during the lifetime of Baha and a copy of
it was gifted to E. G. Browne during his visit to Baha at Acre in 1890. The book was published by Prof.
Browne. Vol. I contains and embodies notes A to Z by Professor Browne at the end of the book.
Writing on the chief features of the tone of the Traveller’s Narrative, Professor Browne notes
(a) “The quite secondary importance accorded to the BAB,
JAL-03-01
(2)
whose mission is throughout depicted as a mere preparation”, for Baba and
(b)
“nominal supremacy enjoyed by Subh-i-Azal out of regard for certain considerations of
expediency”.
Commenting on the Traveller’s Narrative in his Introduction to his French translation of Le Bayan
Persan, Vol I pages XVI, Al.L.M. Nicholas

« et le livre intitulé «Maqalé Chakhs-i-Séyyah» oeuvre d’Abd-oul-Béha’, est un mauvais
roman, composé uniquement pour prouver que le Bab est simplement le précurseur,
l’annonciateur de Béha Oulla. Extrêmement tendancieux il méconnaît à tout instant la vérité
historique, et l’auteur n’a même pas cherché, comme je l’ai Fait, dans l’oeuvre immense du
Bâb, les notes autobiographiques qui y abondent. Il se contente de réunir les légendes qui
cadrent le mieux avec le but qu’il poursuit’. Il est regrettable qu’un homme comme Abbas
Effendi se montre si ignorant de la vie de Séyyèd Ali Mohammed, dit le Bâb. »
“A Traveller’s Narrative” is the work of Abdul-Baha. It is a poorly written account to prove
that BAB is a mere precursor to Baha’u’llah. It is an extremely tendentious book which in its
entirety ignores historical truth. The author has not even sought immense works of Bab and
autobiographical notes which were abundant there. He has satisfied himself with joining
together stories which would best serve the purpose that he pursued. It is regrettable that a
man such as Abbas Effendi has shown to be ignorant of the life of Sayyid Ali Muhammad,
known as Bab.”
In the Traveller’s Narrative, page 78-79, 80, 81, Persian text, we are told “Bahaullah had in his mind
the intention of corresponding and entering into relations with the BAB”, the medium of this

correspondence was Mulla Abdul-Karim of Qazwin [otherwise known as Mirza Ahmad-i-Katib]”,
since “the BAB and Bahaullah were in great danger and liable to incur severe punishment, Bahaullah
and Mulla Abd al Karim of Qazwin thought it expedient to take measures for the safety of Baahullah”,
and for this purpose “Subh-i-Azal was made notorious and famous on the tongue of friends and foes”
while “Bahaullah remained safe and secure”. As “secret correspondences were in progress, the BAB
highly approved of this scheme.” This
JAL-03-02
(3)
“mighty plan of wondrous efficacy”, ended “with arrival of Bahaullah at Baghdad in the month of
Muharam in the year A.H. 1269 (Oct. 15, Nov. 13, A.D. 1852).”
In the absence of documentary evidence to substantiate his case, Bah alleged “plan of wondrous
efficacy” is untenable. This alleged “plan of wondrous efficacy” misfired. The BAB did not escape
execution. Mulla Abdul Karim of Qazwin was put to death at Teheran in August 1852.
Baha himself was arrested on suspicion of complicity in the attempt on the then Shah’s life which took
place on 28th Shawwal A.H. 1269 (15th August A.D. 1852) and was cast into prison. “He was only
saved from imprisonment for life thanks to the unremitting efforts of his own sister by a lavish
expenditure of funds, subject to his good behaviourism and desistance from undesirable activities in
future, and to his expulsion from Iran “pages 7 & 8 the Tanbihun Naimin (the Awakening of Aleepers).
Letters addressed by the BAB and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn to Subh-i-Azal and Mulla Abd
al Karim of Qawin and reproduced in fac-simile in the collection of the Epistles of the BAB and his
amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn disprove Baha’s “plan of wondrous efficacy”.
In the nomination document appearing in page 1 of the collection Sub-i-Azal is directed by the BAB
“to keep what has been revealed in the Bayan, and what has been commanded, for verily thou art a
mighty way of Truth.”
In the Epistle addressed to Mulla
JAL-03-03
(4)
Abd al Karim of Qazwin, Subh-i-Azal’s authority is once again asserted. Furthermore, in the BAB’s
epistle addressed to Subh-i-Azal reproduced in the supplement to the Persian Bayan by Subh-i-Azal,
the BAB says: “And if god cause one like unto thee appear in thy days, then he it is to whom shall be
bequeathed the authority on the part of god, the Single, the One (Wahid stands as equivalent to Yahya,
i.e. Subh-i-Azal) and if [such an one] appears not, know for a surety that god hath not willed to make
Himself known, and render up the authority to god, your Lord, and the Lord of the worlds all.”
In the epistle, the BAB also conferred on Subh-i-Azal the right of completing the Bayan if the time
should be perilous. A French translation of the epistle appears in page 53-66 of the preface to Le Bayan
Arabe translated and published by A.L. M. Nicholas in 1905.
We are told in the Traveller’s Narrative that the “manifestation” of Baha took place in Baghdad and
that it did take place in the month of Muharram in the year A.H. 1269 (Oct. 15-Nov. 13, 1852). This
statement is impossible since Baha was arrested soon after the attempt on the then Shah’s life which
took place on 28th Shawwal A.H. 1268 (15th August 1952) and was imprisoned at Teheran for four
month before he was permitted to leave Baghdad.
Yet, in the Kitab-i-Iqan (the Book of Assurance) written by him in Baghdad in A.D. 1858, five years
after his exodus to Baghdad, Baha makes no declaration of “manifestation”. He makes no claim to
supremacy. He speaks
JAL-03-04
(5)
of the Bayan as the last revelation supported by augments drawn from the Pentateuch, Gospel, Quran
and Traditions.
He says that “he never sought precedence over any one in any matter”, adds that on his “first arrival” in
Baghdad, he withdrew after two years into wilderness by himself intending to remain there all his life,
since he did not wish to be the cause of strife and dissension among the believers. How could he alter
his resolution since “the order to return emanated from the source of command [i.e. Subh-i-Azal] to
which,” he “necessarily submitted.”
A copy of the Kitab-i-Iqan (The Book of Assurance) will be donated to the library in the near future.
The author of the Traveller’s Narrative is Abdul Baha Abbas. He wrote it under the direction of his
father Baha. He had at his disposal every means of ascertaining the facts. He did not do so. Purposely
and deliberately he antedated the “manifestation” of Baha. His reason for doing so is not far to seek.

He is out to whittle down the extent or duration of Subh-i-Azal’s authority, and to give colour to his
pretension that Baha was from the first regarded by the BAB as “He whom god shall manifest” whose
advent he announced.
Since under Baha’s alleged “plan of wondrous efficacy” Subh-i-Azal’s “supremacy was a diversion
intended to give authority to Baha during his continuance in Iran. Abdul Baha is compelled, in order
that his pretension may appear consistent with facts,
JAL-03-05
(6)
to represent this supremacy as ceasing on Baha’s arrival in Baghdad. This “plan of wondrous efficacy”
has no historical foundation.
The Tanbihun-Naimin (The Awakening of Sleepers) contains extracts from Baha’s letters written
during the Baghdad period wherein he acknowledges his allegience to the BAB and Subh-i-Azal. Their
originals contained in a collection of Baha’s letters during the Baghdad period are being lithographed
and will be donated to the library in the future for historical record.
Please acknowledge the receipt of the Traveller’s Narrative.
Yours Sincerely
Jelal S. Ezel
JAL-03-06
JNUM letter acknowledging the receipt of Persian introduction to N-K, Ayn Bab and Materials for the
study of theBABi religion.
JAL-03-07
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
6th May 1962
Dear Mr. E.J. Lorch,
Acqusition Department,
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to donate to the library copy of the Kitab-i Iqan (The Book of Assurance). The book was
translated into French by Mr. H.M. Dreyfus under the title of Le Livre de la Certitude (Paris, 1904).
The Iqan is known to have been composed by Mirza Husayn Ali known as “Bahaullah” during the
Baghdad period of the BABi exiles.
On the internal evidence appearing in page 144 of the Iqan to the effect that “one thousand two
hundred and eight years have elapsed since the manifestation of the Point of Furqan (i.e. Muhammad
who is so called in correspondences with the title “Point of the Bayan” applied to Ali Muhammad the
BAB), “and all of those wretches have read the Quran, and have not yet attained to a single letter of the
JAL-03-08
(2)
purport thereof”, the date of composition of the Iqan would appear to be in the year A.H. 1280 (A.D.
1863-1864).
In pages 188, 189, and 190 of the Iqan, he states that “eighteen years have elapsed” since the date when
hundreds of learned men in Iran embraced the BABi faith and laid down their lives in this Cause, in
which case the date of the composition of the Iran would appear to be in the A.H. 1278 (A.D. 18611862) reckoning from the date of the manifestation of the BAB in the year A.H. 1260 (A.D. 1844).
In the chronological poem on the events in the life of Baha by Muhammad Nabil of Zarand, J.R.A.S
October 1899, pages 983-990, the following data is furnished as regards Baha:
Stanza 1, date of birth : 2nd Muharram A.H. 1233 = Nov. 12, 1817
Stanza 6, date of arrival at Baghdad from Iran: at age 37.
Stanza 6, date of retirement into the soltitude of the deserts, at age of 38
Stanza 7, date of return to Baghdad; at age of 40
In page 211 of the Iqan, Baha states that “two years have elapsed” since his return to Baghdad.
In the light of the foregoing, the date of composition of the Iqan would appear to be in the year 1275
(A.D. 1858-1859).

In his coverage of the several interviews with Baha at Acre between the years A.D. 1886 and A.D.
1890,
JAL-04-01
(3)
Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht quotes Baha as saying that “he
composed the Iqan otherwise known as the “Khaluiyya tract” (named after the BAB’s maternal
relatives) in order to proselytize the BAB’s maternal relative who had not embraced the BABi faith.
Various reasons are given for the withdrawal into the solitude of the deserts, and return to Baghdad, of
Baha:
(a) In the Traveller’s Narrative, pages 82 and 83, Persian text, we are told “on his arrival in Baghdad
from Iran, Baha so acted that the hearts of men of this [BABi] sect were drawn towards him, while
most of the inhabitants of Iraq were reduced to silence and speechlessness, some being amazed and
others angered.” After remaining in Baghdad “for one year”, he withdrew his hands from all
things, quitted Baghdad and retired into the wilderness”, when “he was consulted on the solution
of certain difficult matters connected with the most abstruse points of theology.” When his
whereabouts were traced “several persons hastened thither and began to entreat and implore, and
the urgent entreaty of all brought about his return.”
(b) In the Epitome of BABi and Bahai History to A.D. 1898 by Mirza Muhammad Jawad of Qazwin,
Materials for the study of the BABi religion by Professor E. G. Browne, pages 7, 8, and 9,
JAL-04-02
(4)
we are told “Bahaullah set himself in Baghdad to the elevation of the word, whereby the fire of envy
kindled in the heart of Mirza Yahya [i.e. Subh-i-Azal] and his companions, to extinguish which he set
out suddenly into the wilderness in A.H. 1271 (A.D. 1854-1855)” and remained there “until he was
sought out and brought back to Baghdad” by specific persons.
(c) In his hostile and critical study of the BABi and Bahai movements in his book entitled KashfulHiyal (the Uncovering of Deceptions) Mirza Abdul Husayn Ayat nicknamed Avareh, one-time
Bahai missionary since recanted, page 18 Vol. I, pages 78 and 79 Vol. II, states that Baha retired
into the wilderness in a bid “to find the pholosopher’s stone.” The author accuses Baha of
“plagiarism” and asserts that “all the arguments and quotations” in the Iqan were copied by him
from the works of the Nakshbandi’s order during his retirement.
(d) The authors of the Hasht Bihisht, pages 301 and 302 state that Baha by reason of his association
with men of every class acquired certain “breadth of disposition” and “religious pliability”, which
attracted round him men of like mind, to whom some slackening of the strict code of the Bayan
was not unwelcome. Alarmed at the undesirable activities of Baha, leading BABis reprimanded
Baha so vigorously
JAL-04-03
(5)
that he left Baghdad in wrath and proceeded to Suleymaniya. In response to his entreaties for return,
Sayyid Jawad of Karbala, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht intended with Subh-i-Azal for him
and he was permitted to return.
E) In the Iqan, pages 209, 210, 211, Baha complains of the envy and aversion wherewith BABis regard
him. He says: “although I never exalted myself over anyone in any matter, nor sought for authority
over anyone; I associated with everyone with the utmost affections and was extremely patient and
accessible, and with the poor was as the poor, and with the learned and great I was perfectly submissive
and contented.” He then goes on to say that on his “first arrival” in Baghdad he withdrew “for two
years into the wilderness” intending to remain all his life, since his “only desire was to avoid being a
cause of dissension and strife among the believers.” But he had to alter his resolution to stay when “the
order to return emanated from the source of command [i.e. Subh-i-Azal] to which he ‘necessarily
submitted and returned.”
As is stated in my letter of April 26, 1962, the Iqan is entirely filled with praises of the BAB and
arguments in favour of the BABi religion established by the BAB.
In the Iqan, the Bayan is throughout spoken of the last revelation. In the preamble, throughout the Iqan,
and at the end
JAL-04-04
(6)

of the book, Baha refers to the BAB, as “our Lord the Most High”. He admits the authority and
supremacy of Subh-i-Azal and arrogates to himself no superiority over his comrades. All this despite
his “manifestation on arrival in Baghdad from Iran”, if the Traveller’s Narrative is to be credited.
The colophon with which the Iqan closes is noteworthy. It reads as follows:
“Revealed from the B. and H. [i.e. Baha] “and peace be upon whoever hearth the song of the dove on
the ‘Lote-tree beyond which there is no passing”, and glory be to our Lord the Most High”
The expression ‘revealed’ (al-manzul) could hardly be compatible with his assertion that he “claimed
no authority over anyone”. The colophone is an after-thought and was added in Acre after Baha’s
“third manifestation” in Edirne. This point will be dealt with when forwarding another document of
historical interest in the near future.
Will you kindly acknowledge the receipt of the Kitab-i Iqan (the Book of Assurance).
Yours Sincerely
Jelal S. Ezel.
JAL-04-05
JNUM Letter acknowledging the receipt of Traveller’s Narrative.
JAL-04-06
JNUM acknowledges receipt of the Kitabi Subhi by Mirza Fayzullah Muhtadi
JAL-04-07
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
25th June 1962
Dear Mr. E. J. Lorch,
Acquisition Department,
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to refer to my letter of the 19th March 1962, forwarding a manuscript in Persian of the
Succinct Account of the BABi Movement (Mujmal-i Dar Bar-i Waqay-i Zuhur-i Mani’) by Subh-i
Azal and to furnish the following additional information accompanied by a glossary of the Succinct
Account:
To understand the BABi movement and the references in the Succinct Account a short survey of the
background of the BABi movement is necessary. According to the Sunnis, the office of the Khalifa of
the prophet is a matter to be decided by popular choice. The Sunnis await the appearance of the Mahdi.
According to the Doctrine of the
JAL-04-08
(2)
Imamate of the Shias or the “Church of the Twelve” (Mazhab-i Athna Ashariyya) the office of the
Khalifa of the prophet is a spiritual one; an office conferred by god alone, first by his prophet and
afterwards by those who succeeded him. Twelve persons successively held the office of Imam. The
twelfth Imam was Muhammad, son of Imam Hasan Askari and Narjis Khatun, called by the Shia
“Imam Mahdi”, “Hujatullah (The Proof of God), “Qaim-i Al-i Muhammad” (He who shall arise of the
family of Muhammad), “Sahibu-z-Zaman” (The Lord of the Age). He succeeded his father in the
Imamate A.H. 260. The Shia hold that he did not die, but disappeared from view and communicated
with his followers through a chosen few, who, one after another, acted as channels of communication
between him and his followers.
These persons were known as “Gates” (Abwab) and were four in number1. The last of the “Gates” was
Abul-Hasan-Ali who did not nominate a successor saying “God hath a purpose which He will
accomplish”. On his death all communication between the twelfth Imam and his Church ceased and the
“Major occultation” (Ghaybat-i Kubra) set in and will continue until the return of the absent Twelfth
Imam. The Shia hold that he still
JAL-05-01
1

This period of the four Gates is known as the Minor Occultation (Ghaybat-i Sughra).

(3)
lives in one of those mysterious cities, Jabulqa and Jubolsa. The Shia awaits the appearance of the
Qaim or the absent Imam.
According to the Sheikhi school which differs from the other sects of the Shia in its belief in the
‘Fourth Support’ (Rukn-i Rabi’), and from whose bosom the BABi movement arose, supports and
essential principal of religion are four:
(1) Unity of god,
(2) Belief in Prophethood,
(3) Belief in the Imamate, and
(4) The Fourth support namely that there must be amongst the Shia someone “Perfect Shia”
(Shia-i Kamil) to serve as a channel of grace’ between the absent Twelfth Imam and his
church.
The founder of the Sheikhi school was Sheikh Ahmad of Ihsa or Lahsa. In his death he was succeeded
by his disciple Hajji Sayyid Kazim of Rasht. In the BABi movement these two men are known as the
“Two Gates” (BAB) and bear the appellation of “Initiatory Gate of God” (Babullah-il-Muqaddam).
In the view of Mirza Jani of Kashan, the author of the Nuqtatul-Kaf composed by him soon after the
execution of the BAB or the Point, as the time for a new manifestation approaches, following the major
occultation, one of the gates reappears or returns
JAL-05-02
(4)
to prepare mankind for the new manifestation. The period of these precursors or harbingers of the
theophany is called the minor manifestation (Zuhur-i Sughra). The minor manifestation of the BABi or
Bayani cycle was Sheikh Ahmad of Ihsa and Haji Sayyid Kazim of Rasht, the two initiatory gates of
god.
Now, after the death of Haji Sayyid Kazim of Rasht, both Sayyid Ali Muhammad and Haji Muhammad
Karim Khan regarded themselves as being the ‘Fourth Support’, or Channel of Grace, apparently in the
same sense as were the four original gates (BABs) who served as an intermediary between the absent
Twelfth Imam and his followers during the period of minor occultation. In the result, the Sheikhi
school was divided into two branches, one under the leadership of Haji Muhammad Karim Khan, who
determined the original Sheikhi school and the other the name of the BABi movement led by Sayyid
Ali Muhammad.
In the view of Sayyid Ali Muhammad the term BAB did not however convey the same sense as
understood by the Shias. Please see my letter of February 1962.
JAL-05-03
(5)
Glossary of the Succinct Account
Note. Each of the letter of the Arabic Alphabet has a numerical value and every word may be
represented by a corresponding number, formed by adding together the volumes of its component
letters. These are named the Science of the Letters and the Science of Numbers.
In his Commentary on the final chapter of the Quran, Sheikh Muhiyud-Din ibni’l Arabi states that
“existences emerged from the BA of Bismillah. Since the BA, which signifies the First Intelligence
which was the final thing which god created, follows Alif which stands for the essence of god.”
In the word of letters, the letter BA, “which pervades all the letters”, corresponds to the “Final Will” or
“First Intelligence”, and followes the Alif which represents the “Essence of God”.
Alif stands for One and in Arabic one is Wahid. The numerical value of Wahid is 19. Thus 1 represents
Un-manifested Essence of God, and 19 the first manifestation of same. In the world of numbers, the
number of the Alif is “the One which pervades all the numbers. The ‘One pervading the numbers’ has
to be taken into full account in the sphere of Differences and plurality. The number 1
JAL-05-04
(6)
represents the undifferentiated, the un-manifested Essence : 19 the manifestation thereof. 19 X 19 =
361 represents the manifested universe. This the BAB calls ‘Addad-i Kulu Shay’ (the number of All
things).
The value of the letters in Kullu-Shay is 360 plus the One pervading the numbers makes 361.
In the wold He is represented by Sayyid Ali Muhammad the ‘Point’ (Nuqta). Ahsanul-Qisas : The Best
of Stories, also called Qayyum-ul-Asma, a commentary on the Surat-u-Yousuf, by the Point at the
beginning of his mission. In the Abjad notation, the number of Qayyum agrees with the number of
Yousuf, 136 referred to in the Persian Bayan, Unity VII, Chapter I.

Azim, Janab-i : Mulla Sheikh Ali
B. According to the Persian Bayan, Unity III, Chapter 8, in the formula of Bismillah-al-Amna-alAqdas, all the letters thereof to the Point of the Letter BA from which they manifest themselves in the
beginning. As is explained in my letter of the 12th February 1062, the Point of the letter BA, or the
letter BA is the place of manifestation of the Primal Will. Hence the Point calls himself “the BA which
JAL-05-05
(7)
pervades all the letters.’
BAB Gate, see my letter of 12th February 1962.
N.B In the Succinct Account, the term BAB stands for Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawieh.
BABul BAB : Gate of the Gate : Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawieh.
Babullahil Muqaddam. Initiatory Gate of God : Sheikh Ahmad of Ahsa and Haji Sayyid Kazim of
Rasht, the founder of Sheikhi school and his successor respectively.
Dozdidand : were stolen (by Bahais_
Hayy : The living. One of the names bestowed by the Point on Subh-i-Azal. In the nomination
document. See the Epistle of the Point and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn, page 1, the Point calls
himself Ali before Nabil (i.e. Ali Nabil). Nabil is equivalent of Muhammad the proper name of the
Point. The numerical value
JAL-05-06
(8)
Hayy Cd.
of either word is the same, i.e. 92.
In the nomination document Subh-i-Azal is not addressed by his proper name Yahya. He is addressed
as : “He whose name is equivalent to the One (Wahid), because the numerical value of both <Persian
text> and <Persian text> is the same, i.e. 28.
Concerning the sacred nature of the word Hayy see Gobineau in his Religions et Philosophies dens
L’Asie Central, page 320.
The term Hayy also represents the First Eighteen believers in the Point and the One pervading the
numbers, i.e. the Point = 19.
Professor Browne had acted for a complete list of the 18 Letters, who with the Point, constituted the
hierarchy of 19 known as “First Unity” (Wahid-i-Awwal).
In his reply as set forth in the succinct Account Subh-i-Azal said : “As for the Letters of the Living,
concerning whom you asked, most of them were martyred in Mazandaran, but some few, as it appears,
were $ and not suffer martyrdom there. But the matter is established in the name of the Last (see infra)
and is sufficiently represented by the word Hayy (the living).”
Hazrat : Sayyid Ali Muhammad
Huruf-i Hayy : The Living Letters, See Wahid-i-Awwal.
JAL-05-07
(9)
Ismullahul-Awwal : The name of god: Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawiyeh : The First Letter of
the Living, the Letter Sin : The First to believe.
Ismullahul Akhar : The last name of god : Hazrat-i or Janab-i Quddus : Mulla Muhammad Ali of
Barfurush : The last letter of the Living, the Letter Sin.
Jabal-i Basit : The Open Mountain : Chihriq
Jabal-i Shadid : The grievous Mountain : Maku
Kitab-i Awwal : The First Book : Ahsanul-Qisas.
Mahall-i Zarb : The place of Blow : Tabriz
Madda-i Teheran : Affairs of Teheran. The attempt on the Shah’s life the subsequent massacre of the
BABis.

JAL-05-08
(10)
Mazlum : The much wronged-one : Qurratul-Ayn
Mazlume Ta : The much wronged-one Ta : Tahira entitled Quratul-Ayn.
Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawiyeh : The First Name of God. : The First Letter Letter of the
Living : The First to believe : The Letter Sin : Bab-ul BAB : BAB.
Mulla Muhammad Ali of Barfurush : See Quddus.
Nuqta : The Point : Sayyid Ali Muhammad. See BA and my letter of the February 1962.
Quddus, Hazrat-i or Janab-i : Mulla Muhammad Ali of Barfurush : The Last Name of God : The Last
Letter of the Living : The Last Name of God : The Last Letter of the Living : The Letter Sin.
JAL-06-01
(11)
Sin, the letter : The second and the last letter in the formula of Bismillah-al-Amna-al-Aqdas
(abbreviates Bismillah). The First Letter of Bismillah is BA which represents Sayyid Ali Muhammad
as the Point, see BA.
The Point has treated the second letter of Bismillah, i.e. the letter Sin as the First to believe, or the First
Letter of the Living, namely Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawiyeh.
The Point has treated the Last Letter of Bismillah, i.e. the letter Sin as the Last Letter to believe, or the
Last Letter of the Living, namely Mulla Muhammad Ali of Barfurush surnamed Quddus.
There are 19 letters in Bismillah.
Tahira : The Pure : Qurratul-Ayn.
Wahid-I-Awwal : The First Unity. In Arabic One is Wahid. The sum of the letters in this word in the
Abjad notation is 19. The First Unity represents the first eighteen believers or the Letters of the living
who manifested themselves from the Point, i.e. Sayyid Ali Muhammad. These constituting the
complete First Unity. The First Eighteen believers in the point and the One pervading the numbers, i.e.
the Point = 19.
The First to believe of the First Unity
JAL-06-02
(12)
was Mulla Muhammad Husayn of Bushrawiyeh and the last to believe of the first Unity was Mulla
Muhammad Ali of Barfurrush entitled Quddus.
Reference is made to their burial places in the Persian Bayan, Unity VIII, Vhapter 11, as “tonbeau du
premier Croyant et du dernier.”
Whaid-i-Sani dar Jamis-i-A’dad : The One which pervades all the numbers.
Please acknowledge.
Yours Sincerely,
Jelal S. Ezel
JAL-06-03
Acknowledgement of the receipt of Succinct Account.
JAL-06-04
Acknowledgement of the receipt of the printed copy of the Kashful-Hiyal containing three volumes,
218 pages of hand written notes to the first volume of the volume.
JAL-06-05
Acknowledgement of the receipt of the Payam-I-Padar. With handwritten short index of the contents of
this work.
Also, the lithographed copy of Will & Testament of Baha, written in his own handwriting. With
copious comments in 17 pages.
Typed copy of the Baha’s memoirs and Will & Testament. Barring the original, this is the only copy
extant. Short index of the memoirs is also received.

JAL-06-06
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
31st December 1962
31st December 1962
Mr. E. J. Lorch,
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Dear Mr. Lorch
I am directed to refer to my letter letter of December 11, 1961 forwarding a printed copy of the HashtBihisht and to donate to the library the original of the report, Exhibit A, partly in Persian and partly in
Arabic drawn up by Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman in his own handwriting giving an account of the visit
paid by him to Mirza Husayn Ali commonly known as Bahaullah and of the several interviews he held
with him at Acre between the years A.D. 1886 and A.D. 1890.
A short biography of Mirza Aka Khan of Kerman is given in the letter under reference.
JAL-06-07
(2)
Excerpts from the Report appeared in the Hasht-Bihisht. Selected passages from the Report were
included in the several letters accompanying the literature gifted to the library to date.
To facilitate the decipherment of the Report a typed copy thereof is appended, errors and omissions
excepted.
Following the then practice to expunge signatures from controversial documents to protect their authors
from foul play should such documents fall into the hands of philistines, the author’s signature was
washed out by its addressee, apparently Subh-i-Azal judging by the cipher at the top of the report.
This does not however detract from the historical value of the report.
The report was received by me in the form in which it is donated.
Salient points in the report are summarised as follows:
Page 1:
1) Cypher 38, in the Abjad notation, represents Azal, i.e. Subh-i-Azal.
JAL-06-08
(3)
(2) The author visited the “city of vision”, viz. Acre, at the invitation of Abdul Baha Abbas where he
saw “the manifestation of plurality, namely, the combination thunder, lightning, darkness and the
thunderbolt.”
The first of “the unbelieving souls and manifestations of infidelity,” whom he met was the Most
Mighty Branch Abbas, whom he calls “stealthily withdrawing whisperer,” (‘al-waswas-al-khanas’), an
attribute of the devil. Quran, cxiv, 4. Al-waswas is numerically equivalent to the name of Abbas, both
words in the Abjad notation a total of 133. After that, he continues, he met the rest of Baha’s followers
who were unable to answer the simplest question put to them who invariably referred him to Baha.
The author then gives a vivid description of his first interview with Baha. P. 329 the Hasht-Bishisht and
P. 148 of the notes attached to the letter of November 5, 1962.
JAL-07-01
(4)
page 2
1) Baha’s versions of :
a) his expulsion from Iran to Baghdad, P. 8 notes attached to letter of Nov. 5, 1962;
b) his flight from Baghdad to Suleymaniyya, letters of May 6 and 18, 1962;
c) his return to Baghdad, letter of May 18, 1962;
d) Murder of Asadullah Dayyan, p. 2 et see notes;
e) Marriage of BAB’s second wife, Fatima, pp. 36-41A notes;
f) The BABis degeneration of his efforts to reform them, pp. 132 ($$) notes;
g) his composition of Iqan, letter of May, 1962;

h) his annunciation in Edirne, pp. 132 $$ notes;
i) his protection of Nasirud-Din Shah, P. 8 Notes;
j) his disclaimer of responsibility for the slaughter of the Azalis at Acre, letter of May 29,
1962 and pp, 211-213 notes;
k) his denial of plagiarism of the BAB’s works, p. 171; et see notes; p. 145 $$ notes;
l) his claim to be the wronged-one, letter of May 29, 1962 which speaks for itself;
m) the complaint to district authority in Edirne, p. 213-214;
n) his having nipped in the bud several plots hatched by his followers in Acre who
proceeded to Cyprus to assassinate Subh-i-Azal.
JAL-07-02
(5)
2. Baha's offer to the author to mediate and compose the difference between Baha and Subh-I Azal.
3. Baha's criterion of Janab-I "Wad," or "Wadud," namely, Mirza Hadi Dowlatabadi, a staunch
supporter of Subh-I Azal and the author of a treatise in refutation of Baha's pretensions.
4. Aqa Sayyid Sheykh Muhammad stands for Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan, the murdered Azali
at Acre, letter of May 29, 1962.
5. Janab-I "Shin," stands for Sheikh Ahmad Ruhi of Kerman, one of the co-authors of Hasht Bishisht,
letter of December, 11, 1961.
6. Wajh$ stands for Haji Sayyid Jawad of Karbala, one of Karbala, one of the co-authors of the Hasht
Bishisht, letter of December 11, 1961.
JAL-07-03
(6)
7. "Wahideh Khanim." Stands for Badri Jihan, Subh-I Azal's wife, and the mother-in-law of the author.
Following the schism between Baha and Subh-I Azal in Edirne, attended with Baha's attempts to starve
Subh-I Azal and members of his family into submission to exact Subh-I Azal's recohnition of Baha's
pretensions. Badri Jihan was lured into Baha's camp unable to tighten her belt and "to put up with
privations," to quote Subh-i Azal, or "with the avowed purpose of marrying the Most Mighty Branch,"
Abdul Baha Abbas, to quote Baha. Her brothers, Mirza Nasrullah and Mirza Rida Quli followed suit.
In a letter, Exhibit B, addressed to Mirza Nasrullah by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, the Servant of God,
on behalf of Baha, see reverse exhibit B, in Edirne, Mirza Nasrullah, Mirza Rida-Quli and Badri Jihan
are spoken of in laudable terms and are highly commended. Mirza Nasrullah is enjoined upon to
engage in missionary work in favour of Baha. He is, however, warned "not to be heedless of," or "to
remain veiled," from Baha's Cause. Two epistles revealed by Baha intended for Mirza Nasrullah and
his brother Mirza Riza-Quli were enclosed to Exhibit B which are not available.
The commendation was however still born.
JAL-07-04
(7)
Before the Babi exiles were removed from Edirne to Famagusta and Acre, Subh-I Azal to Famagusta
and Baha to Acre, Mirza Nasrullah was poisoned in Edirne by the Bahais, letter of May 29, 1962.
Mirza Rida-Quli and her sister Badri Jihan accompanied Baha to Acre, where Mirza Rida-Quli was
murdered by the Bahais. Letter of May 29, 1962.
In his interview with the author, Baha accuses Mirza Rida-Quli and Badri Jihan "of making mischief of
doing shameful things such as eating pork and going to taverns to drink wine".
At the end of his report, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman places on the record his heartfelt joy on finding
himself once more outside of the 'city of $'.
The report constitutes 6 of the literatures to be gifted to the library and referred to in my letter of
November 5, 1962.
It appears from the Introduction of the Hasht Bihisht on the biography of Sheikh Ahmad Ruhi of
Kerman and Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman that these men of letters were domiciled in Istanbul. They
stood for a constitutional regime in Iran and conducted a campaign of propaganda
JAL-07-05
(8)
against the then despotic monarchy in Iran.
Alarmed at their activities, Iranian authorities of the then regime pressed for their extradition for their
alleged complicity in the assassination of Nasirud-din Shah. Extradited by Ottoman authorities, both
men were put to death by order of Muhammad Ali Mirza, the then Crown Price in Tabriz.

Avareh lays the blood of the victims at the door of "Abdul Baha Abbas who by his secret reports to
Muhammad Ali Mirza against them brought about the death of Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman and Sheikh
Ahmad Ruhi of Kerman". The Kashful Hiyal, vol I, 6th impression, P.69.
Please acknowledge.
Yours Sincerely
Jalal S Azal
--------------------JAL-07-06
41 Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
31st December 1962
Dear Mr. E.J Lorch
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National and university library
Jerusalem
Dear Mr. E.J Lorch,
I am directed to refer to refer to your letter No. JL.NR/LIB of December 6, 1962 and to request you to
note the following:
1. para 3 : Litographed copy of the Will and Testament of Bahaullah to read ………. Of
Muhammad Ali, son of Bahaullah.
2. para 4. typed copy in Persian of Bahaullah;s memoirs and Will and Testament to read
………… of Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s.
I have taken the liberty to call attention to these typing errors that have crept into your letter as Baha
has left no memoirs and
JAL-07-07
As the full text of his Will & Testament has never been made public by Abdul Baha Abbas dictated by
"the considerations," which rendered the suppression "expedient". P.75 Mirza Jawad's Historical
Epitome. Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion by Professor Browne.
Yours Sincerely
Jalal S. Azal
-------------JAL-07-08
The acknowledgement of the receipt of Mirza Aqa Khan’s report together with a typed copy. Plus,
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan’s letter to Mirza Nasrullah. As well as comments. Acknowledgement of
errors.
JAL-08-01
The acknowledgement of the receipt of Exhibit A & B. The original report of Mirza Aqa Khan’s
several interview with Baha together with a typed copy of it.
JAL-08-02
The acknowledgement of the Conveyance document.
JAL-08-03
The acknowledgement of the Conveyance document.
JAL-08-04
The acknowledgement for the portrait of Mirza Husayn Ali and short biography of Baha. As well as
facsimile copy of the Baha’s interpretation of Ghyath and Mustaqath in his own handwriting. Plus
facsimile reproduction made by Mirza Muhammad Ali of the afore mentioned document.
JAL-08-05

The acknowledgement for the portrait of Mirza Husayn Ali and short biography of Baha. As well as
facsimile copy of the Baha’s interpretation of Ghyath and Mustaqath in his own handwriting. Plus
facsimile reproduction made by Mirza Muhammad Ali of the afore mentioned document.
JAL-08-06
<<Some scribbles as follows:
(1) Persian Bayan
(2) Supplementary to Persian Bayan
(3) Arabic Bayan
(4) “Not English”
(5) Tanbihun-Naimin
(6) “Not English”
(7) Hasht-Bihisht
(8) Quratul-Ayn
(9) Ayin Bab
(10) Succinct Account of the BABi movement
(11) Succinct document of BABi mobement
(12) Nuqtatul-Kaf
(13) Traveller’s Narrative
(14) Episode of the BAB
(15) Kitab-i Iqan
JAL-08-07
<<Scribbles
Kashf-al-Hiyal
The Karawan
Dalail-Saba’
Resaleh Jenab-i Jud
Resaleh Ayubieh (Istedlalieh)
Payam-i Pedar
JAL-08-08
<<Scribbles
Succinct Account Glossary
Payam-i Pedar
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Ghiyath & Mustaghath
JAL-09-01
Risala-i Janab-i Jud
To
Hazrat-i Samandar
Note A (XIII) PP. 01-92
&
Note G(I) P. 168
JAL-09-02
Extracts from
The Istidlaliyya (Evidences)
Or
Risala-i Ayyubiyya
(The Epistle of Jud)
By
Mirza Abul Fazl of Gulpaygan
JRAS, October 1892
(Note A P/1) &
(Note by (K) pp 185-187)
JAL-09-03
Original of the Conveyance from Mirza Musa son of Haji Mirza Muhammad Hadi al-Jawahari to
Mirza Husayn Ali commonly called Bahaullah

JAL-09-04
Scribbles in Hebrew. Apparently list of books and dates:
Kashf-ul-Hiyal 12.2.62
3 volumes of it
JAL-09-05
<<Scribbles in Hebrew>>
Qurat-al-Ayn
Ayin-i BAB
Nuqtatul-Kaf
Kitab-i Subhi by Mirza Fazlulah Muhtadi
Payam-i Pedar
JAL-09-06
<<Scribbles in Hebrew>>
Kasful-Hiyal
Dalail-ul-Saba’
Resaleh Jenab-i Jud; Hazrat Samandar
Istedlaliyya
JRAS
JAL-09-07
<<Scribles in Persian and Hebrew>>
Majmal-i Badi dar Vaqaie Zuhur Mani’
BAB and Quratul-Ayn
JAL-09-08
<<Scribbles in Hebrew and Persian>>
Ghyath ia Mustaghath
Covenant Keepers
Resal-i Jenab-i Jud
Exhibit B
JAL-10-01
(2)
quotations from the document appear in Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s Will and Testament, in Baha’s son
Muhammad Ali’s Will and Testament, and in Risala-I-Janab-i Jud already donated to the library. All
this literature emanated from the Unitarians or non-Abdul Bahaists.
The document is considered to be Baha’s swang-song. In it, Baha admits the true meaning of the words
Ghiyath and Mustaghath as meaning that more than a thousand, and probably either 1511 or 2001 years
(represented by the sum of the letters in the words Ghiyath and Mustaghath) must elapse between the
time of the BAB and the advent of Him Whom God Shall Manifest, as conceived by the BAB and as is
laid down in the Bayan.
While admitting the true meaning of these words, Baha in the document speaks of them as applying to
his own manifestation.
Subh-i Azal’s authoritative opinion as Baha’s swan-song is summarised in pp. 142-144 notes, and in
my letter of March 19, 1963.
Prominent BABis’ authoritative opinion on Baha’s swan-song is quoted in my letter of March 19,
19632.
JAL-10-02
41, Princess Elizabeth Street,
26th March, 1963
Mr. E. J. Lorch
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem

2

It is not clear what the date of this letter is and there seems to be missing letters from December 62 to
March 63.

Dear Mr. E. J. Lorch,
I am directed to refer to my letter of Nov. 5, 1962 as well as to my letter of March 19, 1963 and to
donate to the library:
a) fac-simile reproduction of Baha’s document in Arabic penned in his own hand-writing in
interpretation of the words Ghiyath and Mustaghath:
b) fac-simile of transcript made by Baha’s son Muhammad Ali of document (a).
The document (b) compared to document (a) is legibility itself and is intended to decipher document
(a) in legible hand.
The words Ghiyath and Mustaghath and their implications are fully dealth with in pages 83 and 157170, notes attached to my letter of Nov. 19623. Baha’s interpretation thereof are summarised in my
letter of March 19, 1963.
JAL-10-03
The original document interpreting Ghiyath & Mustaghath (Mirza Muhammad Ali’s)
JAL-10-04
The original document interpreting Ghiyath & Mustaghath (Baha’s)
JAL-10-05
The BAB’s Personal Diary A.D. 1850
Exhibit B
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashans letters to Mirza Nasrullah
JAL-10-06
Document B
Fac-simile reproduction of transcript made by Baha’s son Muhammad Ali of document A.
JAL-10-07
Document A
Fac-simile reproduction of Mirza Husayn Ali commonly called Bahaullah’s writing penned in his own
handwriting in interpretation of the words Ghiyath & Mustaghath
JAL-10-08
Confidential
Mr E.J. Lorch
Acqusition department
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Exhibit A
Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman’s original report on his several interviews with Mirza Husayn Ali
commonly called Bahaullah at Acre
JAL-11-01
11-01a to 11-05b are the typed copy of the Mirza Aqa Khan’s report.
JAL-11-06
Is the original document of Mirza Aqa Khan’s report
JAL-11-07
Fortunately for science a happy combination of circumstances averted the complete suppression or
destruction of this document on considerations of expediencies.
The document see daylight for the first time in its un-truncated form. It will be interesting to students of
Comparative Religion and the history of religious evolution. The document draws light on the
background of the Bahai faith.
The document constitutes item 10 of the literature to be donated to the library and referred to in my
letter of Nov. 5, 1962.
You will be good enough to take due care of rare document gifted to the library for historical record.
Kindly acknowledge the receipt of Mirza Husayn Ali’s commonly called Bahaullah’s document in
interpretation of the words Ghiyath & Mustaghth and its transcript by his son Mirza Muhammad Ali.
Yours Sincerely

3

This letter is missing so far.

Jelel S. Ezel
JAL-11-08
(5)
3
unfortunately, neither Prof. Browne nor A.L. Nicholas had access to this document of such historical
importance.
Only Unitarians, namely, partisans of Baha’s son Mirza Muhammad Ali, have revealed the existence of
this document wherewith to belabour and rebut Abdul Baha’s pretensions and their disclosure was
intended for strictly private circulation.
The covenant-keepers, namely, Abdul Bahaists have completely suppressed the document as it
prejudices Abdul Baha’s claim “to have covered the space of one thousand years by single foot step”,
the deadline fixed by Baha for the One due to appear in his name. PP. 3-4, Ibn-al-baha Badiullah’s
memoirs.
No Oriental Bahai, Unitarian or Covenant-keeper, is aware of the significance of the document.
As for Western Bahais, they grope in the dark as they have no direct access to Baha’s writings in
Persian or Arabic except to such material as it is served to them dictated by considerations of
expediency.
JAL-12-01a – 12-04b
Seems to be the remainder of the Mirza Aqa Khan’s report
JAL-12-05
This is not a letter of Mirza Aqa Khan but of Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan to Bahaullah
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan was Baha’s secretary.
JAL-12-06
The document of Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan
JAL-12-07
<<Persian text for the title of Succinct account>>
JAL-12-08 – JAL-15-01
Succinct account in handwriting of Subh-i Azal’s son
JAL-15-02
41, Princess Elizabeth Street
Famagusta,
Cyprus
19th March 1962
Mr. E. J. Lorch,
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National and University Library
Jerusalem
Dear Sir,
I am directed to donate to the library a manuscript copy in Persian of the “Succinct Account of the
BABi Movement” (Mijmal-i Badi Dar Waqay-i Zuhur-i Mani’) by Subh-i Azal. The manuscript is in
the handwriting of Aqay Bahhaj son of Subh-I-Azal.
To quote from Professor Edward G. Browne’s Introduction to the Tarikh-i Jadid, page LII, it was
written for me by Subh-I-Azal in November-December 1889 in reply to sundry questions which I had
addressed to him a little while previously. On the importance of such an account coming from such a
source, it is unnecessary to dwell, it is almost though we had a narrative of the first beginning of Islam
by Ali Ibn Abi Talib.
JAL-15-03
(2)
that so valuable a document deserved publication will, I shall think, be questioned by no one.”
The English translation of the Succinct Account of the BABi movement forms appendix IV of the
Tarikh-i jaded, whilst the Persian text stands at the end of the book after the index.
Please acknowledge the receipt of the manuscript.
Yours Sincerely

Jelal S. Ezel
JAL-15-04 to JAL-17-03
The testament of Mirza Muhammad Ali
JAL-17-04
41, Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
19th Nov, 1962
Mr. E. J. Lorch
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National and University Library,
Jerusalem
Dear Mr. E. J. Lorch
I am directed to refer to my letter of Nov. 5, 1963 and to donate to the library a lithographed copy of
the Will & Testament of Muhammad Ali son of Mirza Husayn Ali commonly known as Bahaullah. The
Will & Testament is penned in the handwriting of Muhammad Ali and is signed and dated by him. As
it will be noted from the cover of the testament Muhammad Ali was surnamed by Baha “He Whom
God [i.e. Baha] has chosen,” (man-astafahullah), “the most great branch,” (Ghusan-i Akbar ), “the
Branch derived from the Ancient Stock,” (Fará Munshaib az Asl-i Qadim).
A short biography of Muhammad Ali appears in p(6), p. 70 of the notes attached to the letter under
reference.
JAL-17-05
(6)
2
A short survey of the dispute between Muhammad Ali and his half-brother Abdul Baha appears in G.
pp. 42-44 of the notes.
Selected passages from the testament appear in pp. 77-78 and in B(V), p. 109 $$ of the notes.
Unlike his brother Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah, Muhammad Ali, as far as he is known, has left no memoirs.
In the Testament, the BAB, Baha, and Abdul Baha Abbas are not designated by name. They are
referred to as the Forerunner, God, and the Most Mighty Branch respectively. However, read between
the lines, in the Testament Muhammad Ali defines and defends his position.
He is carefully polite towards Abdul Baha Abbas; he condemns Abdul Baha’s innovations in Bahaism,
particularly the fake Imamzadeh (Marabout) created by Abdul Baha himself for himself by his erection
a Mausoleum on Mount Carmel in erroneous interpretation of Baha’s “Holy” writ.
Muhammad Ali was instrumented in the recovery and suppression of BAB’s and Baha’s writings
establishing the BAB’s dispensation and the vicegerency of Subh-I-Azal as the appointed successor of
the BAB. Pp. 10-17, the Tanbihun-Naimin (The Awakening of the Sleepers).
JAL-17-06
(6)
3
He was also responsible interior economy of Bahaism during Baha’s “epiphany,” at Acre (p. 2, Ibn-al
Baha Badiullah’s memoirs).
As such, he was privy to the inner working of Baha’s machinery. Like the Triumvirate, namely, Baha,
Abdul Baha, and Shoghi Efendi, Muhammad Ali has passed to the mercy of god, survived by his
masterpieces in calligraphy.
Now to Muhammad Ali’s Will and Testament: His line of argument is as follows:
God is unknowable except through his manifestation, the prophet. The prophet of the age was Sayyid
Ali Muhammad, the Promised Qaim and the Mahdi, whose advent is expected in Islam. With all his
might and sovereignty, he designated himself as the forerunner of a greater manifestation of god, Baha,
whose name he concealed in his consummate wisdom and called it “He Who Shall Appear”, or “He
Whom God Shall Manifest”.
The BAB’s statements that “you will attain all the good in the ninth year”, and “you will meet with god
in the ninth year”, and Sheikh Ahmad of Ihsa’s (founder of the Sheokhi school of thought) document
that
------------

JAL-17-07
(4)
“you will know the news of it “after a while”, come true and in the year A.H. 1269 in Iraq on the day of
the resurrection of the Quran “He Whom God Shall Manifest”, of the Bayan appeared in the person of
Baha. This was however a “private manifestation”, of Baha. Baha’s “general manifestation” took place
in A.H. 1280 followed by the revelation of inspired words.
A line of distinction is to be drawn between a partial manifestation which denotes prophethood and
total manifestation which stands for divinity.
Baha’s is total and supreme manifestation of god. Baha is the pivot of divine manifestations round
which the previous and future dispensations revolve.
Baha’s supreme manifestation of god is one which graces the world one in every five hundred years.
Baha’s writ is to hold good for one thousand years to come. If some one does appear after lapse of one
thousand years he will be speaking on behalf of Baha.
However, the One due to appear in Mustaghath (2001 years reckoning from the date of dispensation
-------------JAL-18-01
(5)
of the BAB) is to testify to Baha’s divinity.
The Point of difference between the BABis and the Bahais as regards the station of Sayyid Ali
Muhammad as the Point, the year Nine, the word “after a while”, the period represented by the word
“Mustaghath”, the day of the resurrection of the Quran, and “He Who Shall Appear”, or “He Whom
God Shall Manifest”, are fully dealt with in the notes to which reference may be made.
It may be mentioned in passing that since the One due to appear in Mustaghath is none other than “He
Who Shall Appear”, or “He Whom God Shall Manifest”, as is laid down in the Bayan and admitted by
Baha in his epistle penned in his own handwriting, Baha’s claim to be “He Who Shall Appear”, or “He
Whom God Shall Manifest”, is invalidated by his own admission.
Other points of interest in Muhammad Ali’s testament are summarised as follows:
==========
JAL-18-02
(6)
In the considered opinion of Muhammad Ali on the strength of Baha’s authority quoted in the
Testament, Baha speaks of :
1) himself as the Ancient Stock (Asl-i Qadim), when not in human form;
2) the Book, to denote his mst Holly Book (The Kitab-i Aqdas);
3) Book, the, of my Testament (Kitab-I-Ahdi) to denote his Will and Testament;
4) Himself as the Branch (Ghusn) in human form;
5) Branches (Aqsan) derived from the Lote Tree to denote his four sons, namely Abdul Baha
Abbas, Muhammad Ali, Ziyaullah and Badiullah;
6) Branches derived from the Ancient Stock (Fari’ Munshaib az Asl-i Qadim) to denote Abdul
Baha Abbas, the Most Mighty Branch (Ghusn-i Azam), and Muhammad Ali, the Most Great
Branch (Ghusn-i Akbar);
7) Himself as the Lote-Tree (Sidra) or the Lote-Tree of the Limit (Sidra-al-Muntaha) when not in
human form;
8) Most High of Creatures (Ala al-Khalq) to denote his four sons, Abdul Baha Abbas,
Muhammad Ali, Ziyaullah and Badiullah;
9) Servitude (Ubudiyya) with reference to himself as the manifestation of Service;
--JAL-18-03
10) Supreme Pen (Qalam-i Ala) to denote himself as the instrument whereby God’s pleasure is
made known to men;
11) Of himself in human form as the Temple (Haykal) as being the “Corporeal” temple which the
deity inhibits;
12) Temple (Haykal) in other places to denote his particular revelation, the Kitab-i Haykal (the
Book of Haykal).
Again in the considered opinion of Muhammad Ali, the word “Turning unto” (Tawajjuh) appearing in
Baha’s Will & Testament, whereby Branches (Aqsan) are commanded to turn unto Abdul Baha Abbas
has three meanings:

13) Turning of Creatures unto God, Baha, as in the Cause of religious worship;
14) Turning of God, Baha, unto his Creatures as in the case of Baha’s revelations addressed to his
Creatures; and
15) Turning of Creatures unto Creatures.
In discovering Abdul Baha’s claims Muhammad Ali, on Baha’s authority quoted in the Testament,
makes the following observations;
1) Branches (Aqsan) are Baha’s “Proof” among his “Creation”, and his “Fragrances between the
heavens and the earth”, while Baha is “above all names and attributes, free from all likenesses and
similitude, and without peer and associate”.
-----------JAL-18-04
The word “turning unto”, Abdul Baha appearing in Baha’s Will and Testament connotes “a line”
between Baha’s “Creation” and “his Most High of the Creatures”, intended to exalt god’s, Bah’s, word
and to disseminate god’s Baha’s, utterances.
The allegation of “manifestation of Service”, with reference to Abdul Baha is untenable.
2) The Divine Unity and the Supreme Immaculateness are peculiar to god, Baha, to the entire
exclusion of all others. As is laid down in Baha’s Most Holy Book, men should know that Baha is
the manifestation of god in the world, without which knowledge good actions are of no avail.
God. Baha. Admits of no partnership in the divine unity and the supreme immaculateness.
3) “the temple of god” (Haykal-i Rabb), erected by the Branch (Ghusn), namely Baha, is Baha’s
“Kitab-i Haykal”, (the Book of Haykal), and not the Maqam erected by Abdul Baha on Mount
Carmel by reason of his branch-hood (Ghusniyya).
----------JAL-18-05
(9)
4) In as much as what is meant by Book is Baha’s Most Holy Book, and by the derived Branch (Fari’
Munshaib) the Branch (Ghusn) without distinction of the most Mighty Branch or the Most Great
Branch, the expression “the derived Branch”, cannot be interpreted to mean that Abdul Baha is the
one and only Interpreter (Mubayyin) of Baha’s “Holy Writ”.
5) In the words of god, Baha, “No ornaments of gold are available”, in Baha’s holy court “to require
an executor for division”, nor “is god’s”, Baha’s “Cause in need of an executor”. Such
presumption on the part of Baha’s creatures is a “sin against god”, Baha, “the protector, the selfexistent”.
6) To treat Baha’s Testament as interpretive as Baha’s Most Holy Book is to regard, god, Baha, as the
forerunner of his own servant” to consider the principal, Baha, as the herald of the accessory,
Abdul Baha Abbas, is preposterous.
7) In Baha’s epiphany, authority vested in him; in his occultation, authority resides in his Most Holy
Book.
------------JAL-18-06
8) allegations that Muhammad Ali has tampered with Baha’s writings are dismissed as absurd.
Muhammad Ali challenges Abdul Baha to produce documentary evidence to substantiate his
allegations.
Here ends a summarised version of Muhammad Ali’s Testament. Arguments adduced by Muhammad
Ali against Abdul Baha are available against Baha with reference to his dealings with the BAB and his
appointed successor Subh-i Azal. It must however be put down to the credit of Muhammad Ali that his
Testament is not tainted with invectives or abusive language, although, on evidence of Ibn-al-Baha
Badiullah’s memoirs, he suffered a great deal at the hands of Abdul Baha, and is designated by Ibn-alBaha Badiullah as the wronged-one.
In contrast to Muhammad Ali’s Testament, Abdul Baha in his Will & Testament, assumes the airs of
the wronged-one; he associates the attempted fratricide alleged by Baha; he gives unbridled $ to his
allegations of fulminations against Muhammad Ali, his son Shuaullah, and Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah.
Documentary evidence is produced to substantiate the allegations which must be accepted by Abdul
Baha’s followers as gospel truth.
-------JAL-18-07
Two excerpts from Abdul Baha’s Testament were released for publication, one for consumption by
Oriental Bahais and the other by occidental Bahais. Any reference to alleged fratricide is suppressed in

the excerpts intended for occidental consumption but it would serve as an eye-opener. Baha’s sons,
Muhammad Ali and Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah, their issues, Baha’s members of family and relatives, the
BAB’s relatives, and Muhammad Ali’s partisans who resisted Abdul Baha’s claims are not designated
by name in Abdul Baha’s Testament. Muhammad Ali is referred to as the Center of Sedition and all the
rest is clubbed together and dubbed as the company of Covenant-Breakers which expression in eludes
also Muhammad Ali4. The term Aghsan (Branches) refers to Muhammad Ali and Ibn-al-Baha
Badiullah who survived Abdul Baha and the term Twigs (Afnan) means the BAB’s kindred and
relatives. Reasons for non-designation by name are not far to seek: disclosures of the names of
Covenant-Breakers would have been fatal to Abdul Baha’s vested interests.
Appended questions are from the Excerpts from the Will & Testament of Abdul Baha Abbas, the Bahai
World, Vol II, 1926-1928. PP. 81-89:
------JAL-18-08
(12)
“All-praise to Him who by the Shield of His Covenant, hath guarded the Temple of His Cause from the
darts of doubtfulness, ………. Staying thereby the onslaught of the company of covenant-breakers. O
God, My God, held fast in the talons of ferocious lions, of avenging wolves, of bloodthirsty beasts .
that I may drink of the chalice that brimmeth over with faithlessness to thee ……… I call thee to
witness that no day passeth but that I $ my fill from this cup, so grievous are the misdeeds wrought by
them that have broken the covenant, kindled discord, showed their malice, stirred sedition in the land,
and dishonoured thee and thy servants. Lord! Shield thou from these covenant-breakers the stronghold
of thy Faith and protect thy secret sanctuary from the onslaught of the ungodly …. Teaching the Cause
is of utmost importance …….. This wronged servant has spent his days and nights in promoting the
Cause and urging the peoples to service. He rested not a moment, till the flame of the Cause of God
was noised abroad in the world and the celestial strains from the Abha kingdom [Malakut-al-Abha,
Baha’s Heaven] roused the East and the West.”
-----------JAL-19-01
(13)
“ …. It is incumbent upon the members of the House of Justice, upon all Aqhsan, the Afnan, the Hands
of the Cause of God to show their obedience, submissiveness and subordination unto the guardian of
the church of god, to turn unto him, and be lowly before him. He that opposeth him hath opposed the
True One, will make a breach in the Cause of god, will subvert His word and will become a
manifestation of the Center of Sedition [i.e. Muhammad Ali]. Beware, bewarethe days after the
ascension (of Baha) [i.e. Baha’s death] waxed haughty and rebellious and divine unity for his Excuse
deprived himself and perturbed and poisoned others ……… By the Ancient Beauty [Jamal-i Qadam, to
wit Baha]! This wronged one [i.e. Abdul Baha] hath in nowise borne nor doth He bear a grudge against
anyone; towards none doth He entertain any ill-feeding and uttereth no word save for the good of the
world. My supreme obedience, however, of necessity prompeth me to guard and preserve the Cause of
God …. Beware lest anyone falsely interpret these words, and like unto them that have broken the
covenant after the day of ascension (of Baha), to advance a pretext, raise the standard of revolt, wax
stubborn and open wide the door of fake interpretation ..”
----------JAL-19-02
(14)
On the one hand, the Father designates Muhammad Ali as “the Branch derived from the ancient stock,
He whom god has chosen, the Most Great Branch, god’s proof among his creation, and the Sweet
Savor of god between the heaven and the earth”, on the other hand, the son, Abdul Baha Abbas “the
Center of the Covenant, the Most Mighty Branch, the Branch derived from the ancient stock”, brands
Muhammad Ali as “the Center of sedition, a ferocious lion, a ravening wolf, a blood-thirsty beast, a
perturber and poisoner of others, a covenant-breaker, a kindler of discord, a shower of malice, a stirrer
of sedition, a dishonour of god, and a temperer with the sacred writings”.
Has god, Baha, erred in his divine judgement of Muhammad Ali? Or it is that history repeats itself?
-----------JAL-19-03
(15)
As for Abdul Baha’s assertion that he “uttereth no word save for the good of the world”, a few extracts
without comment are appended.
4

This sentence does not make sense.

The extracts are from a recording of a message by Abdul Baha broadcast from the Abha kingdom in
the invisible world addressed to his followers in the world:
The Kashful-Hiyal (the Uncovering of Deceptions) by Abdul Husayn Ayati nicknamed Avareh, onetime chief Bahai missionary, vol I, sixth impression, pp. 130-133:
O’ Stupid Sheep! For the past seventy years we have tantalised you with promises we have held out to
you; we have defrauded you of your earnings acquired by you by the toil of the hand” to be billed.
What have we offered you in return to compensate your sacrifices in life and property?
What is the effect of the Faith we have brought you! If there were justice it has increased, if there were
morals they have deteriorated; if there were universal peace its foundations have become weaker; if
there were superstitions we have added new ones to them. In short our word is of no effect and will
never be of any effect.
-----------JAL-19-04
(16)
We have failed to protect members of our own family from falsehood, dissension, avidity, and base
qualities. How can we protect you and the peoples of the world from them? We ourselves have broken
up into several factions, indulging ourselves in scurrilous language, one against the other and casting
reflections on the honour and integrity of one another. Do you expect that the effect of our word is such
as to edify you and the people of the world? Then know that you yourselves are stupid and naïve
persons; if you reform yourselves, if you cast off your superstitions, and if ameliorate your characters,
you will have no need of us and of the guardian of the Cause. But for your ready response, we and the
guardian of the Cause will be on wild-goose-chase.
If you wish to carry on as before, by all means do so! You are quite welcome to it, may god give you
eternal toil, and make sacrifices in life and property until there is no spark of life left in you.
Here ends a summary of Abdul Baha’s message from the Abha kingdom. Avareh describes the Abha
kingdom as Baha’s figment of imagination.
----------JAL-19-05
(17)
Muhammad Ali’s Will & Testament, though lithographed, has never been made public. Apparently,
this defect arises from the practice of concealment of religious opinions dictated by prudential motives
(Ketman or Taqiya in Persian).
The testament is being made public for the first time and its historical interest need not be stressed. It
will enable interested readers to become acquainted with the Bahais dispute inter se.
The copy constitutes item 8 of the literature to be gifted to the library and referred to in my letter under
reference.
Please acknowledge,
Yours Sincerely
Jelal S. Ezel

JAL-19-06 to JAL-30-05
Dalail-Saba’
JAL-20-06
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol. I, Notes
A
P. 30-31, Vol. I
(JAL-30-06)
“In the year A.H. 1305 (A.D. 1887-1888) Mirza Abul-Fazl of Gulpaygan wrote at the request of certain
elders of the Jews a treatise entitled Risala-i Ayubiyya (‘the Epistle of Jud’)”. The treatise is otherwise
known as Istidlaliyya (evidence). The treatise is intended to prove by quotations and arguments drawn
from the Old Testament that Baha is the promised Messiah and deliverer of Israel, and is addressed
chiefly to the Jews.
In this treatise the date of Baha’s manifestation is given as A.H. 1285 (A.D. 1868). In the treatise the
author ‘fixed the date of the second restoration of the Holy Temple at four hundred and thirty years,
whereas other chronologists have stated it to be six hundred years’. Page xxxv Introduction to the

Tarikh-i Jadid (The New History of Mirza Ali Muhammad the BAB) by Mirza Husayn of Hamadan,
translated from the Persian by Professor E. G. Browne.
Footnote 3 by Browne in the same page : “The objection which I raised to Mirza Abdul Fazl’s
chronology is neither very clearly nor very accurately stated here.
His contention was that the 2300 days (i.e. years) during which the sanctuary shall be trodden under
fort, as mentioned in the Book of Dannial (Ch. Viii, V. 14), came to an end at the time of Baha’s
“manifestation” in A.H. 1285 (A.D. 1868), and the quarter raised bore reference to the terminus a quo.’
See also P. 45 Persisan Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf.
JAL-20-07 To JAL-3--05 : 7 Proofs.
B
P. 35, Vol. I
(JAL-30-07)
Dayyan:
Dayyan stands for Mirza Assadullah of Tabriz surnamed Dayyan. He was directed by the BAB to
propaganda for Subh-i Azal. Dayyan and Asad yield the same number in the Abjad notation. During
the sojourn of the BABi exiles in Baghdad, he claimed to be the Promised One of the Bayan’. Subh-i
Azal composed the Mustayqidh (‘The Sleeper Awakened5”) and denounced him.
See : The Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn Page 10 , 2nd epistle; & PP 218,
219, and 226-227 Materials for the Study of BABi Religion by Professor Browne.
Mirza Asadullah entitled Dayyan was one of the second group of “Letters of the Living” or “Second
Unity”. The Hasht Bihisht refers to him as the Judas Iscariot of his people’.
He was appointed by the BAB amanuensis to Subh-i Azal. He was learned in the Hebrew and Syriac
languages. He declared himself to be “He Whom God Shall Manifest”.
One Mirza Ibrahim believed in him. Mirza Husayn Ali commonly called Bahaullah had a protracted
discussion with him. Later Baha instructed his servant Mirza Muhammad of Mazandaran to slay him,
which was accordingly done. PP. 302, 303, the Hasht-Bihisht.

JAL-30-08
In his coverage of the several interviews he held with Baha at Acre between the year A.D. 1286and
A.D. 1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht, quotes Baha as
saying: “On my return to Baghdad [from Suleymaniyya] I found that a dispute had arisen between my
brother [i.e. Subh-i Azal] and Mirza Asadullah [Dayyan] “that the former had decreed the putting to
death of the latter. Dayyan had laid no claim to the promised office [i.e. to be Whom God Shall
Manifest]. He said that the manifestation was apparent. In short he was put to death wrongly.”
Upon his apostasy from the BAB, Subh-i Azal denounced Dayyan in his book entitled Mustayqidth and
branded him as the ‘Father of Evils’ (Abu-al Shurur) expressing surprise that his followers “sit in their
places and do not spear this accursed one with their lancers” and “do not cut the tongue of his bowels
with their hands and do not spear him with the lances of their powerful lips.”
<Arabic Text>
According to Tanbihun-Naimin, PP 87-90, the authoress takes her newphew Abdul Baha Abbas to
severe task for his visluent campaign against Subh-i Azal to involve the latter in the murur of Dayyan
and quotes a passage from a letter written by Bahaullah, addressed to Aqa Mirza Muhammad Hadi
wherin Baha takes full credit
(JAL-31-01)
for having carried into effect the judgment of god to dispose of Dayyan, from which the authoress
comes to the conclusion that either the father or the son is a liar, the former for his admission to have
killed Dayyan and the latter for his attempt to contradict and whitewash him.
C
Vol. I Pages 14-20
Avarah’s statement that Baha received education and instruction is confirmed by the authoress of
Tanbihun-Naimin, P. 4.
In the Traveller’s Narrative, P. 73 Persian text Vol. I. Abdul Baha Abbas speaks of “the lack of
instruction and education of Baha”. In footnote 2 in pages 57 & 58, the Traveller’s Narrative Vol. II,

5

This does not seem to be correct translation. “The Vigilant” seems to be the correct one.

English Translation and Notes, Professor Browne quotes a passage from Baha’s Epistle to the king of
Persia wherein he sums:
<Arabic Text>
I have not studied the science which men have, neither have I entered the colleges, ask the city wherein
I was that thou mayest be sure that I am not of those who lie”.
According to the Persian Bayan, Unity VI, Chapter 8, the Promised One of the Bayan, i..e. “He Whom
God Shall Manifest”, is to produce inspired words, or “spontaneous verses” (Ayat-i fitri). This is called
“Ilm-i wahbi or Laduni”, i.e.
Cont.
(JAL-31-2) P. 16-20
“Imparted” or “Immediate Knowledge”. This is the knowledge of the prophets. This explains away the
attempt to show that allegedly Baha was “illiterate” (Ummi).
For the qualification of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest” see PP. 27-31, Persian Introduction by Prof.
Browne to the Nuqtatul-Kaf.
D
Vol. I, PP. 20-27
Appropriation of the title of Baha or Bahaullah by Mirza Husayn Ali is confirmed by TanbihunNaimin, P.5. No such title was conferred on Mirza Husayn Ali commonly called Bahaullah. See my
letter of 12th February 1962 and my letter of 19th January 1962 and my letter of 19th January 1962
forwarding the Point’s Personal Diary.
A garbled version of the bestowal of this title in page 211 of the Dawn-Breakers (Nabil’s Narrative of
the early days of the Bahai? Revelation) translated by Shoghi Efendi:
“Those who had gathered in Badasht were eighty-one in number …… everyday He (Baha) revealed a
Tablet which Mirza Suleyman-i Nur chanted in the presence of the assembled believers. Upon each he
bestowed a name. He himself was henceforth designated by the name Baha …. To each of those who
had convened at Badasht a special Tablet was subsequently revealed by the BAB, each of whom He
addressed
D continued
Vol. I PP. 20-27,
JAL-31-03
By the name recently conferred upon him. …. Even the identity of Him [i.e. Bahaullah] who had
bestowed a name upon each of those who had congregated in that hamlet remained unknown to those
who had received them. … Few, if any, dimly surmised that Bahaullah was the author of the farreaching changes which were being fearlessly introduced”.
In page 317 of the Dawn-Breakers, the author Nabil refers to an epistle, “penned in the BAB’s own
handwriting, in which He commits Mirza Yahya [surnamed Subh-i Azal] to the care of Baha and urges
that attention be paid to his education and training”. … “thatcommunication the people of the Bayan
[followers of Subh-i Azal, footnote 2] have misconstrued as an evidence of the exaggerated claims
which they have advanced in favour of their leader” [i.e. Subh-i Azal].
The epistle in question is none other than the one, the text of which appears in page 32 of the
Tanbihun-Naimin, It is referred to in the Point’s Personal Diary as set forth in my letter of 19th January
1962 forwarding the Point’s Personal Diary. The Epistle in question was addressed to 238, brother of
Thamara.
As is stated in the said letter, the numerical value of Mirza Husayn Ali in the Abjad notation is 238.
E
Vol. I P. 35
JAL-31-04
The attempt on the life of Nasirud-Din Shah was made on the 28th Shawwal A.H. 1268 = 15th August
A.D. 1852.
The Tanbihun-Naimin (PP 5-8) corroborates Baha’s complicity in the attempt. From the outset Baha
was obsessed with personality cult. He had an inordinate lust for power; the hankered after world
conquest and monarchy. He laboured under the misapprehension that if the Shahwere to come to grief,
he was destined to step into his shoes and accede to the throne.

With this obsession preying on his mind, he incited and instigated one Karimkhan Mafi to assassinate
the Shah. He supplied him with funds and arms. At eleventh hour Karimkhan Mafi left Baha in the
lunch6.
With funds and arms he decamped to Istanbul. Undeterred by his frustration, Baha this time picked on
Muhammad Sadiq of Tabriz, an attendant of Janab-i Azim, otherwise known as Mulla Sheikh Ali.
Pretending to him that he had the approval of Subh-i Azal, Baha sent Muhammad Sadiq of Tabriz to
the alter, which was a prelude to the dark, dreadful, dire calamity (Fitna-i Dahma-i Saylam) with which
the people of Bayan became afflicted. The massacare of the BABis started and spread to the length and
breadth of Islam. This was the first seed of discord and disaster sown by Baha
After the event, Baha denied everything and laid the responsibility at others’ door. Baha was cast into
prison for life imprisonment.
E continued
Vol. I, P. 35
JAL-31-05
By a lavish expenditure of funds on the part of the authoress of the Tanbihun-Naimin Baha’s release
from imprisonment was bought subject to his future good behaviour and abjuration of undesirable
activities and to his expulsion from Iran.
In his coverage of the several interviews, he held with Baha at Acre between the year A.D. 1886 and
A.D. 1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht, quotes Baha as
saying: “When I was being taken from Tehran to Baghdad under escort I told my brother ]i.e. Subh-i
Azal] : Do not come [with me] as I am the guilty one allegedly; No one is molesting you
………………. I protected Nasirud-Din Shah under my Jubbat [outer robe or gown] for thirty-five
years” Baha goes on to say that he “did not run away from Teheran as alleged” but he was escorted
from Teheran to Baghdad by “horsemen guards provided by the Imperial Government of Iran and the
Russian Embassy”.
In the Traveller’s Narrative, pp 63-65, Persian text Vol. I, Abdul Baha Abbas says that attempt on the
Shah’s life was made by “a youth, Sadiq by name” who, “when the BAB was residing in Azarbaijan,
night and day was busy serving him. …. Bahaullah rode forth with perfect composure and calmness
from Afcha, and came to Niyavaran, which was the abode of the
E continued
Vol. I,
JAL-31-06
Royal Train and the station of the Imperial camp. Immediately on his arrival he was placed under
arrest, and a whole regiment guarded him closely.”……….
“So it was established and proven that the assassin had on his own responsibility engaged in this
grievous action” ……” and when the truth of the matter became evident the innocence of Bahaullah
from this suspicion established in such wise that no doubt remained for anyone; the decision of the
court declared his purity and freedom from this charge.” …
“Indeed Bahaullah requested permission to withdraw to the Supreme Shrines [of Karbala and Najaf]
and, after some month, by the royal permission and with the leave of the Prime Minister, set out
accompanied by one of the king’s messengers for the Shrines.”
In the Chapter on the attempt on the Shah’s life and its consequences, pp. 438-474, in the DawnBreakers, author Nabil gives an altogether different version as Aqay-i Kalim (brother of Baha) named
Musa; Baha conferred on him title of Kalim (Interlocutor) because he was in communion with “god”,
i.e. Baha, Nabil states that Baha “in his interview with Azim [Mulla Sheikh Ali] advised him, in the
most emphatic terms, to abandon the plan he had conceived. Bahaullah
E Continued
Vol. I JAL-31-07
Condemned his designs, and disassociated himself from the act, it was his intention to commit.”
………. Nabil continues on his own authority: The news of the attempt reached Bahaullah when he
was staying in the village of Afcha”. …. “the criminal act was committed …… by two obscure and
irresponsible young men, one named Sadiq-i Tabrizi, and the other Fathullah-i Qumi.”
On his way “to Niyavaran, the headquarters of the Imperial army,” Bahaullah “aaarived at the village
of Zankandeh, the seat of the Russian legation, where he was met by Mirza Majid, his brother-in-law,
who acted as secretary to the Russian Minister.” He was invited by his brother-in-law “to stay at his
6

This dies not make sense.

home.” ….”the news of his arrival reached the Shah, who “immediately sent one of his trusted officers
to the legation, demanding that the Accused [i.e. Baha] be delivered into his hands. The Russian
Minister refused, and requested Bahaullah to proceed to the home of Mirza Aqa Khan, the grand
Vazir” ……. “His request was granted, whereupon the Minister formally communicated to the grand
Vazir his desire that the utmost care shall be taken to ensure the safety and protection of the Trust his
government was delivering into his keeping, warning him that he would be responsible
E Continued
Vol. I, P. 35 JAL-31-08
Should he fail to regard his wishes.” ………. “the precaution the Russian Minister had taken, and the
warning he had uttered,” proved abortive and Bahaullah was imprisoned. ……….. The Russain
Minister intervened through the interpreter …..” When Azim [Mulla Shaykh Ali] was questioned as to
whether he regarded Baha as the responsible leader of the group that had made the attempt on the
Shah’s life, he answered:” the leader of this community was none other than Sayyid-i BAB, who was
slain in Tabriz, and whose martyrdom induced me to arise and avenge his death. I alone conceived the
plan and endeavoured to execute it. The youth who threw the Shah from his horse was none other than
Sadiq-i Tabrizi, a servitor in a confectionary shop in Tehran.” ……. “the words of his declaration were
taken down by both the Minister’s interpreter and the Grand Vazir representative, who submitted their
records to Nirza Aqa Khan. The documents which were placed in his hands were chiefly responsible
for Bahaullah’s release from his imprisonment.” …….. “No sooner had Bahaullah recovered his
freedom than the decision of the government was handed to him, informing him that within a month of
the issuing of this order, he with his family, was expected to leave Teheran”.
E Continued
Vol. I P. 35
JAL-32-01
“for a place beyond the confines of Persia, the Russian minister, as soon as he learned the action which
the government contemplated taking, volunteered to take Bahaullah under his protection, and invited
him to go to Russia. He refused the offer and chose indeed to leave for Iraq.” …
“On the ninth of Rabuu-th-Thani in the year A.H. 1269 (12th January A.D. 1853) Bahaullah,
accompanied by the members of his family, among whom were the Most Great Branch [i.e. Abdul
Baha Abbas], and Aqay-i Kalim [Baha’s brother Musa], and escorted by a member of the Imperial
body-guard and an official representing the Russian legation, set out from Teheran on his journey to
Baghdad.”
Side by side with the Azali account. I have given three Bahai accounts for what they are worth thinking
that here, as elsewhere, the truth may lie between the two extremes. When a verdict of “not guilty” bids
fair to jeopardise the judge’s reputation for loyalty, if not place him in actual peril, acquittals in such a
country as the Persia were hard to win. “The decision of the Court” stressed by Abdul Baha Abbas is a
misnomer and compares ill with Nabil’s account of the Russian
E Continued
Vol. I P. 35 JAL-32-02
Ambassador’s intervention, in acknowledgement of which, according to footnote 2 in P. 442 of the
Dawn-Breakers, Baha, at his leisure at Acre, “revealed” a tablet in honour of the then Czar of Russia in
the following terms:
“When I was in chains and fetters in the prison of Ta (Teheran), one of thine ambassadors assisted ME.
Therefore hath god decreed unto thee a station which none but Himself can comprehend. Beware lest
thou change this lofty station.” (Baha’s tablet of the Czar of Russia)
Whether or not the tablet was ever sent to the Czar or whether or not the Czar retained the “divinely
ordained station” is left to Avareh to deal with in the Kashful-Hiyal. See PP. 62-65.
The crime and crucltis which followed the attempted assassination are black enough without going
even beyond the Azali or Bahai chronicles.
In his written reply to several questions put to him by A.L.M. Nicholas, translator of the Arabic and
Persian Bayans, touching the schism in the BABi religion, Subh-i Azal among other things states:
“the cause of the outrage on the lofty person of the Shah was not an order from the Source of
Command [i.e. Subh-i-Azal] (Sabab-i bi hormati bar vujud-i Shah, hukmi az masdar-i amr nabood).

Vol. 1 P. 35 JAL-32-03

Azim (Mulla Sheikh Ali) decreed the commission of the outrage as a retaliatory act for the execution of
the BAB by Mirza Taqi Khan, Amir Nizam. His object was retaliation. “The object was not the
monarchy or the setting up of a republican regime.” [“maqsud be padeshah-i ya ankeh jumhuriyyat
shaved nabood”].
Section VI (pp 279-289) of the Materials for the study of the BABi religion by Professor Browne
contains the fac-simile, text and translation of a Persian state paper, document A.7, according to which
“by chance, and through the ill-considered policy of former officials” …… “Mirza Husayn Ali of Nur
[i.e. Bahaullah, footnote 2] obtained release from the Anbar prison and permission to take up his
residence at Baghdad …….” Sometimes moreover, he hath put his hand to sedition and incitements to
murder, as in the case of His Most accomplished Reverence Mulla Aqa of Darband.” …..”besides
sundry other assassinations which took place.”
F
Vol. I
PP 46-55 JAL-32-04
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan.
This man stuck to Baha through thick and thin. According to the Historical Epitome of Mirza Jawad of
Qazwin, whose sister-in-law was married to Muhammad Ali, second son of Baha, P.9 and P.88,
Materials for the Study of the BABI Religion by Professor Browne, Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan was
surnamed by Baha His Honour the Servant of the Presence (Abd-i Hazir) or His Hnour the Servant of
God (Janab-i Khadimullah) . He was amanuensis to Baha. He ranked after the sons of Baha whose
followers were commended by him to ‘show honour to the Servant who stands before the throne in a
laudable station.”
According to the Hasht-Bihisht, (Chapters on the Elucidation of the Encounters of the calf and Samiri,
and on the Elucidation of the Direful Mischef, pp. 301-326, allusion is made to the golden calf which
the children of Israel were misled into worshiping. By “the Calf” is meant Baha, by “Samiri” Mirza
Aqa Jan of Kashan, designated as the “Scald-headed Soap-Seller of Kashan”, who greatly encouraged
Baha to stake out his claim to be “He Whom God Shall Manifest’ .” He is also called “The First to
believe (Awwal-i Man-Aman-i (in Baha).
F Continued
Vol. I, PP. 35-41 continued JAL-032-05
According to Kitab-i Subhi, PP 116-123, Baha replied to petition from his followers through the
servant of god, penned in the latter’s handwriting. The actual utterance of Baha was quoted as “saying”
(Qawlili) and “end” (inteha), used as quotation marks if such term is permissible. Rightly or wrongly,
this system of reply created the impression by the “servant of god” himself, with the exception of such
part or parts thereof which came within the orbit of ‘Qawlili” and “Inteha” which emanated from Baha.
Alive to the latent dangers of such an “impression” should survive him “when the kingdom of my
Epiphany becomes cancelled, and the waves of the ocean of my utterances are hushed” (Arabic Text”)
To quote from his Kitab-i Aqdas, (The Most Holy Book). Therefore, to provide against this potential
danger, Baha, towards the end of his days, since :verily there is in my Epiphany a reason, and in my
Occultation another reason” (Arabic Text) to quote his own words again from Kitab-i Aqdas, called
upon the “servant of god” to declare in writing, and urbi at orbi, that the whole body of such replies,
quoted and unquoted, did in fact emanate from Baha. This, the “servant of god”, for reasons of his own,
refused to do. Hence the estrangement of Baha.
F Continued
Vol. I, PP. 46-55 JAL-32-06
After the death of Baha, Abdul Baha Abbas did extort an admission in writing to this effect from “the
Servant of God”.
According to Mirza Jawad’s historical Epitome, PP. 87-91, Materials for the study of BABi Religion
by Professor Browne, “The Servant of God” passed strictures on Abdul Baha Abbas for his acts and
deeds contrary to God’s command.” On being informed of the “Servant of God”’s words by Sayyid
Hadi the father of Shoghi Efendi, Abdul Baha Abbas “appeared on the scene, seized him by the hand,
and expelled him from the house bare-headed and bare footed, while his followers beat him on the head
and face.”
The “Servant of God” was denounced as “reprobate, apostate, croaker, hypocrite and devil”. The
Historical Epitome seeks to tone down the incident. The “Servant of God”’s tract entitled ‘The Dreaded
Calamity of the Servant of God in the Blessed and Supreme Garden” (Waqaia-i Haila-i Khadim-i Baha
dar Rawza-i Mubaraka-i Ulya), PP 197-198, Materials for the Study of the BABi Religion by Professor
Browne, contains “an account of the cruel treatment to which the “servant of god” was exposed in the

garden of Bahja at Acre in May 1899, at the hands of the partisans of Abdul Baha Abbas. ….. “He was
grievously maltreated, beaten, imprisoned in a stable, rubbed of
F Continued.
Vol. I, PP. 46-55, JAL-32-07
His books, threatened with strangulation and excommunication by the followers of Abdul Baha.”
According to Hasht-Bihisht, PP. 310-312, the scald-headed hew7 had saved a sum of five hundred
pounds, during the days when he disported himself in the game of god-casting, which he employed at
interest and some business at Acre. When Abdul Baha Abbas became aware of this, he ‘blocked’ the
sum on the grounds the scald-headed hew, as a domestic in Baha’s household, could not have money of
his own. To this, the scald-headed hers restorted to Abdul Baha as follows:
“I have never been a domestic of you. If you desire to know the truth here it is: I was the mentor and
tutor of your father, he was the Ass and I was Anti-Christ; he was the Craft and I was Samiri; he was a
Creature and I was the Creator. The Cow has calved [you are a piece of good fortune]; you are my
child; I was the one who indoctrinated into him the ‘loving’ (of the Calf) “Verily I am God”; all his
verses [inspired words] are my fabrications or forgeries.”
Faced with the brazen-facedness and impudence of the scald-headed hew, Abdul Baha Abbas restorted
to intimidations and threats of murder which put the scald-headed hew to flight. He took up his
residence in Haifa where he set himself to the task of revealing and despatching epistles to Iran and
other places. Several Bahai exiles in Acre
F Continued.
Vol. I, PP 46-55, JAL-32-08
Became well-disposed towards him.
In view of this development, Abdul Baha Abbas produced out of Pandora’s box Baha’s letter, penned
in his own handwriting, couched in a minatory tone, and addressed to his sons wherein the “servant of
the presence”, The First to believe in Baha, the pilgrim after truth (Salik-i Haqiqat) who composed the
Risala-i Ithbatiyya (Arabic text) in Edirne in support of Baha’s mission, was branded as “renegade and
apostate, puffed up with overwearing conceit like unto Lucifer and Iblis”. However Baha, as “God the
Clement and Concealor [Sattar]” would not “unmask” the pilgrim after truth unless he first “displayed
the cloven hoof”, when Baha’s sons were commanded to “strike him with the sword of wrath or
violence”.
Unable to deny Baha’s handwriting, the pilgrim after truth “gave unbridled licence to an outburst,
invectives and vituperation against Baha” saying: “This accused one was the idol whom I moulded into
shape with my own hands to serve as a stalking-horse for the promotion of my own cause … He is
bereft of one iota of fidelity and gratitude. He is puffed up with arrogance and conceit like unto
lapidated Satan”.
In the face of mounting intimidations and threats of Abdul Baha Abbas, this outburst
F Continued
Vol. I, PP. 46-55
JAL-33-01
Of the pilgrim after truth proved abortive. In the end, he repented and recanted and crawled back into
his shell, biding his time to introduce intrigue between Abdul Baha Abbas and his younger brother
Muhammad Ali. Evil deeds come home to roost and the pilgrim after truth, amidst scenes of belief or
disbelief and anathema, passed to the mercy of god.
In chapter twenty-two touching the death of Baha and the events thereafter”, in his Persian manuscript
entitled the Tarikh-i Bigharaz and its subsequent schism, author Mahdi Sheikhul-Malik son of Sheikh
Hasan entitled Sheikh Ustad writes that “after the death of Baha, the servant of god “ envisioned
“expectations of high esteem and veneration in which he was to be held”, as he was “the First to
believe in Baha”, and as he was “Imamzadeh” out of Baha”.
(Descendent of an Imam, one of the twelve Shia successor of Muhammad, or his shrine, a Marabout).
In his Persian manuscript compared by him in refutation of Baha’s pretensions, see para 1 of the
Introduction to Tanbihun-Naimin, and my letter of the 29th May 1962, Aqa Ali Muhammad, the
brother-in-law of the BAB, assassinated at Baghdad, states that for about eleven years he was in
attendance Baha at Baghdad. He saw him
F Continued
7

The word hew is not a noun.

Vol. I, PP. 46-55
JAL-33-02
Twice or thrice daily. “On many occasions” he “had seen and heard Baha hemming verses and
invocations pacing up and down”. “Baha would practice writing to acquire rapidity of utterance.
Baha’s exercise-books when used up were destroyed in the Shatt-al-Arab by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan
or others.” The author supports his personal observations with the following quotation from the Risala-i
Ithbatiyya in Edirne by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan “in support of Baha’s mission”, and all that which
was revealed from the firmament of pa-existence [i.e. Baha] to quote the malice of the malicious” {va
Jami’-i anchai az sama-i Aqdam Nazil mishod nazer besukun-i nari hasidin va ghilli muqhillin dar shatt
mahv minemoodam].
From this quotation, reinforced by his own personal observation, author Aqa Ali Muhammad came to
conclusion that Baha’s utterabces were not inspired (iktisabi) or obtained by toil and study.
In his refutation of Baha’s pretensions Mirza Ahmad Ruhi of Kerman, P 137 the Tanbihun-Naimin,
arrives at the same conclusion as Aqa Ali Muhammad
F. Continued
Vol. I. Pages 46-55
JAL-033-03
by reason of the fact that Baha for years practised production of verses which were taken down by
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan and then washed out by him.
The authoress of the Tanbihun-Naimin PP. 16-18 confirms Baha’s practice of verse-writing [ayat]
preparatory to declaration of his mission.
The allegation of Baha’s Epistles before and soon after his “manifestation” contains an historical letter
addressed by Baha from Acre to Sayyid Ali Akbar as Sayyid Mahdi and surnamed by Baha as
Ismullah-al-Mahdi wherein he is instructed by Baha to hand over to Janab-i Nabil before Ali [i.e. Mirza
Muhammad son of Gulam Ali, of Zarand, surnamed Nabil by Baha, presumably, because (Nabil) is
numerically equivalent to Muhammad, both words yielding, in the abjad notation, a total of 928] “all
the writings of the Point in the handwriting of the Point’s amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husaqyn for
conveyance surprisingly to the Most Holy Seat [Mazarr-i Aqdas, i.e. Acre] where they may be
transcribed, although this servant [i.e. Baha] does not see in himself the ability to reveal single verse of
[writing[ to probe into those writings” [of the Point]. (Agar Cheh In Abd Taqat-i Nuzul-i Badia dar
Khod Mushahedeh nemikonad ta che resad
F Continued
Vol. I Pages 46-55
JAL-33-04
Be Tavajuh Dar An Khutut).
A fac-simile copy of the this letter will be donated to the library in near future.
Yet in his coverage of the several interviews he held with Baha at Acre between the years A.D. 1886
and AD> 1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht, quotes Baha
as saying : “I have been accused of having plagarised the Point’s verses [i.e. inspired words] whereby
God’s life had he been alive, he would have seized the pen and taken down all the verses in the
language of [divine] might” [i.e. by Baha].
Bearing in mind that Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman had several interview with Baha at Acre a unique
account is given in page 314 of the Hasht Bihisht of the manner in which Baha revealed his verses:
Baha would pace up and down “lowing” something which the scald-headed hew would “scribe in an
illegible hand” on a piece of paper with help of the Supreme Pen” . “Neither Baha’s utterance was
available nor the scald-headed hew’s scribblings were comprehensible”. In the words of the scaldheaded hew who moved the Supreme Pen; It was the Supreme Pen which automated and write down
Baha’s verses”. The force or impart of the Supreme Pen was such as to wrench the arm of the scaldheaded hew off his shoulder. The revealed “rigmarole” would then be passed on to Abdul Baha Abbas
to indite a reply on the merits of each case.
F. Continued.
Vol. I Pages 46-55
JAL-33-05

8

This style is apparently emulated from the Point who often referred to himself as ‘Ali before the
Nabil’, i.e. Ali Muhammad.

To sum up, extensive questions from various sources are intended to bring out the point at issue in bold
relief: A line of distinction has to be drawn between “imparted” or “Immediate knowledge” (Ilm-i
Wahhi or Laduni), the knowledge of the prophets and divine manifestations, and “Ecstatic” or
“Disclosed Knowledge” (Ilm-i Zawgi or Kashfi), the knowledge of the mystics, saints, and Sufis , and
“Acquired” or “Ordinary Knowledge” (Ilm-i Kasbi or rasmi), the knowledge of divines, doctors and
scholars.
Conditions, qualifications and attributes of the Promised One of the Bayan, i.e. “He Whom God Shall
Manifest” or “He Who Shall Appear” are summarised in PP. 27-31 in Professor Browne’s Persian
Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf, according to whichproduction of verses [ayat] or inspired words, i.e.
eloquence of diction, rapidity of utterance, and knowledge unacqired by toil and study, was part of the
proof of a divine mission. To this proof alone did the BAB appealed; In addition to the other proofs, of
“Him Whom God Shall Manifest” this proof was to be expected or required. Brushing aside all other
conditions, to this proof alone did Baha appeal in that portion of the Sura-i Haykal addressed to the
People of Bayan who desired him.
That Baha trained himself in the art of producing verses and that his knowledge was therefore obtained
by toil and study was an open secret to leading BABis who
F. Continued.
Vol. I Pages 46-55
JAL-33-06
Denied him on this point also, and of whom he disposed by foul play to force his way through Mirza
Aqa Jan of Kashan, from the outset, was privy to Baha’s practise of production of verses to declaration
of his mission. He admits this fact in unmistakable terms in his Risala-i Ithbatiyya. By the effluxion of
time, the prevailing impression among Baha’s followers that Baha was couched by Mirza Aqa Jan of
Kashan in the production of verses or that Baha’s writings were drafted by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan
gained momentum. This fact is to be read between the lines in the quotations from the Kitab-iSubhi.
Alive to this unpalatable impression fraught with untoward consequences which stalked him, Baha, as
his “occultation” approached, realised that any exposure from an insider in the person of Mirza Aqa Jan
of Kashan would be far more disastrous to Baha’s cause which he so laboriously worked to build up
than in the case of the Nuqtatul-Kaf.
This consideration accounts for Baha’s desperate efforts, in forlorn hope, to extract a confession from
Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, failing which he denounced Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, “the Servant of God”,
the Servant of the Presence, the One who stood before the throne in a laudable station and the pilgrim
after truth, leaving to his own son Abdul Baha Abbas to extract a confession, which he did.
G.
Vol. I Pages 55-58
JAL-33-07
(1) Husayn Ali of Nur, Mirza entitled Baha Effendi or Bahaullah, for which title see note D.
(a) He married Asiyya Khanum known as Nawab who bore him:
(i) Abdul Baha Abbas
(ii) Bahiyya Khanum otherwise known as Sultan Khanum surnamed Waraqa-i Ulya (the Supreme Leaf)
by Baha;
(b) Gawhar Khanum who bore him:
Furughiyya Khanum
c) BiBi Fatima surnamed Mahdi-Ulya (the Most High Cradle, title given to queen mother) who bore
him:
i) Muhammad Ali
ii) Samadiyya Khanum
iii) Ziyaullah &
iv) Badiullah
The list is not exhaustive.
The term Aghsan (Branches) signifies Baha’s son and Afnan (Twigs) the Point’s kinsmen according to
Baha’s terminology. Baha considered himself to be Asl-i Qadim (the Ancient Stock). Hece the term
Branches for his sons to distinguish which from the Point’s kinsmen, since he regarded him as his

precursor or harbringer, he used the term twigs in respect of the latter although both terms are
synonymous.

G.
Vol. I Pages 55-58
JAL-33-08
Baha conferred high-sounding letters on the members of his own family and chief followers:
For titles bestowed on his wife and daughter see supra. For titles bestowed on Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan
see note F. Specimens of his honours list in respect of his entourage and chief followers are quoted
below:
Mushkin-I-Ilahi (Divine Fragrance);
Zaynul-Muqarrabin (The Ornament of the Favourable);
Jabrail-i Amin (Gabriel the Trusty);
Qannadus-Samadoniyya (The Confectioner of Divine Eternity);
Khabbazul-Wahidiyya (The Baker of Divine Unity);
Dallakul-Haqiqat (The Barber of the Truth);
Mallahul-Quds (The Sailor of Sanctity)
The Hasht-Bihisht P. 307.
G
P. 55-58
JAL-34-01
Sayyid Ali Afnan married Furughiyya Khanum daughter of Baha who bore him Husayn, Nayyir, Fayzi
and Hassan.
Husayn Afnan married an outsider of Turkish extraction. Nayyir Afnan married Ruhangiz, sister of
Shoghi Efendi. Fayzi married Thurayya daughter of Tuba Khanum daughter of Abdul Baha Abbas.
Hassan married Mehrangiz, sister of Shoghi Efendi. Gawhar Khanum wife of Baha, Furughiyya
Khanum daughter of Baha and her husband Sayyid Ali Afnan rejected the claim of Abdul Baha Abbas,
who denounced them as covenant-breakers.
Husayn Afnan, Nayyir Afnan and his wife Ruhangiz, Fayzi Afnan and his wife Thurayya Afnan and
Hassan Afnan and his wife Mehrangiz were denounced by Shoghi Efendi as covenant-breakers.
Majd-al-Din, son of Mirza Musa entitled Kalim (the Interlocutor, see infra) married Samadiyya
Khanum, daughter of Baha. They both rejected the claim of Abdul Baha, by whom they were both
branded as covenant-breakers.
G.
PP 53-58
JAL-34-02
(2) Musa, Mirza : brother of Baha; he was surnamed Kalim (Interlocutor) by Baha as he talked to god
(i.e. Baha).
His children were Majd-al-Din, Jaleh & Jamil, who rejected the claim of Abdul Baha Abbas, by whom
they were denounced as covenant-breakers.
(3) Muhammad Quli, Mirza, brother of Baha.
(3) Abdul Baha or Abbas Efendi entitled Aqa (master), ayn ayn (A A, initials of Abdul Baha Abbas),
Fari’ Munshai’b az asl-i Qadim (the Branch derived from the ancient stock), Ghusn-i Azam (the
Mighty Branch), Man-aradeuhullah (He Whom God hath willed (designated), markaz-i mithaq
(the Center of the Covenant), Mubayyin (Expositor or Enunciator [i..e Baha’s works), Sirrullah
(the Mystery of God), knighted by the government in the United Kingdom for his services during
the first world war.
Abdul Baha’s partisans are called Ath-thabitun (the steadfast). Abdul Baha Abbas married Munira
Khanum who bore him: Ziyaiyya Khanum, Tuba Khanum, Ruha Khanum and Munawwar Khanum.
Mirza Hadi Afnan married Ziyaiyya Khanum who bore him Shoghi Effendi, Ruhangiz, Mehrangiz,
Husayn and Riyath.
G
P. 55-58
JAL-34-03

Shoghi Efendi, Ruhangiz, Mehrangiz and Riyadh are surnamed Rabbani. Munira Khanum, Mirza Hadi,
Ziaiyya Khanum, Ruhangiz, Mehrangiz, Husayn and Riyadh were denounced by Shoghi Efendi as
covenant-breakers.
Mirza Muhsin Afnan married Tuba Khanum who bore him; Ruhi, Suhayl, and Thurayya. Tuba
Khanum, Ruhi, Suhayl and Thurayya were denounced by Shoghi Efendi as covenant-breakers.
Mirza Jalal son of Sayyid Hasan of Isphahan married Ruha Khanum who bore him Munib9, Zahra and
Hassan surnamed Shahid.
Zahra married Ruhi Afnan (see supra). All the members of his family were denounced by Shoghi
Efendi as covenant-breakers.
Munawwar Khanum married Aqa Ahmad Yazdi. No issue.
G
P. 55-58
JAL-34-04
Under the alleged Will & Testament of Abdul Baha Abbas, Shoghi Efendi stepped into his shoes,
ceased to be Shoghi Rabbani, and came to be designated as Shoghi Effendi, the guardian of the cause,
and Primal Branch (Ghusn-i Mumtaz).
In official documents he signed himself Shoghi Effendi. The following is a quotation from the alleged
Will & Testament as appearing in the Bahai World 1926-1928:
Page 81: “Salutation and praise, blessing and glory rest upon that Primal Branch of the Divine & sacred
Lote Tree, grown out, blest, tender, verdant and flourishing from the Twin Holy Trees [i.e. issue of
Mirza Hadi Afnan & Munira Khanum, wife of Abdul Baha Abbas through their Ziyaiyya Khanum,
wife of Mirza Hadi Afnan]; the most wondrous, unique and priceless pearl [i.e. Shoghi Effendi] that
doth glean from out of the Twin Surging Seas.”.
PP. 84-85
“After the passing away of this wronged one [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas], it is incumbant upon the Aghsan
(Branches], the Afnan (Twigs) …….. to turn unto Shoghi Effendi, the youthful and branched from the
two hallowed and saved Lote-Trees of the fruit grown from the union of the two offshoots of the Tree
of Holinesses, as he is the sign of god, the chosen branch, the guardian of the cause, he unto whom all
the Aghsan the Afnan …. Must turn. He is the expounder of the words of god and after him will
succeed the first-born of his lineal descendants”.
G
P. 85
JAL-34-05
“whoso obeyeth him not, …….. , hath not obeyed god; whoso rebeleth against him ….has rebelled
against god; whoso opposeth him hath opposed god; whoso disputeth with him hath disputed with him
hath dispusted with god; whoso denieth him hath denied god; whoso deveiateth , sepataeth and turneth
aside from him, hath in truth deviated, separated himself and turned aside from god, may the wrath, the
fierce indignation, the vengeance of god rest upon him!”

Whether or not Shoghi Effendi, this “scion” of the Bahai cause, was worthy of these high sounding
terms is left to the reader to judge after perusal of who is who in respect of Mirza Hadi and Munira
Khanum (see infra).
In the meantime, it would not be inappropriate to cap the quotation with Shoghi Effendi’s cable
wherein he gloats over the death of certain member of Baha’s family excommunicated by Abdul Baha
Abbas and Shoghi Effendi.
“No. 256
Bahai News

Bahais of the United States
Bahai year 109
Message from the Guardian
God’s [i.e. Baha’s] avenging wrath.

9

Doesn’t sound right

Inform National Assemblies (that) God’s avenging wrath having inflicted (in) rapid succession (during)
recent years two sons [i.e. Shuaullah & Musa son of Muhammad Ali
G
P. 85
JAL-34-06
Son of Baha, Musa was known as Musa Bahai and was former president of the Rotary Club, Haifa,
whose portrait still graces the club premises], brother [i.e. Badiullah son of Baha] and sister-in-law [i.e.
Thuraiyya Khanum wife of Ziyaullah son of Baha] of Arch-Breaker [i.e. Muhammad Ali son of Baha]
(of) Bahaullah’s Covenant [i.e. Baha’s Will & Testament known as Kitab-i Ahdi] has now struck
down. Second son [of] Sayyid Ali Afnan, [i.e. husband of Furughiyya Khanum daughter of Baha],
Nayyir Afnan [i.e. husband of Ruhangiz sister of Shoghi Effendi], pivot of machinations, connecting
links (between) old and new covenant-breakers (i.e. these excommunicated by Abdul Baha Abbas and
Shoghi Effendi respectively].
Wreaked (by) this virus (of) violation injected, fostered, over two decades (in) Abdul Baha’s family.
History will brand him [i.e Nayyir Afnan] wife of Bahaullah joined breakers of his covenant (on)
morrow (of) his passing, whose parents [i.e. Sayyid Ali Afnan & Furughiyya Khanum daughter of
Baha] undivided support whose father [i.e. Sayyid Ali Afnan] openly accused Abdul Baha (as) one
deserving capital punishment, (who) [i.e. Sayyid Ali Afnan] broke his promise (to) BAB’s wife [i.e.
Fatima daughter of Mulla Hassan, preacher of Isfahan, whose brothers Mulla Rajab Ali Ghahir & Aqa
Ali Muhammad were murdered by Bahais] (to) escort her (to) Holy Land, precipitating thereby her
death, who [i.e. Nayyir Afnan] was
G
P. 85
JAL-34-07
Repeatedly denounced by Center (of the) Covenant [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] (as) his chief enemy
whose [i.e. Nayyir Afnan’s] eldest brother [i.e. Sayyid Husayn] through deliberate misrepresentation
(of) facts inflicted humiliation (upon) defenders (of the) House (of) Bahaullah (in) Baghdad, whose
sister-in-law [i.e. wife of Sayyid Husayn] (is) championing (the) cause (of) declared enemies of Faith,
whose [Nayyir Afnan’s] brother supported him attributing (to) Abdul Baha Abbas responsibility (for)
fatal disease (which) afflicted their mother [i.e. Furughiyya Khanum], who [i.e. Nayyir Afnan] in
retaliation first succeeded (in) winning over through marriage my eldest sister [i.e. Ruhangiz],
subsequently paved way (for) marriage (of) his brothers (to) two other grand-children [i.e. Mehrangiz,
sister of Shoghi Effendi, & Thiraiyya daughter of Tuba Khanum daughter of Abdul Baha Abbas],
(who) [i.e. Nayyir Afnan] was planning (a) fourth marriage between his daughter (and) grandson (and)
grandson (of) Abdul Baha, thereby involving (in) shameful marriages three branches (of) His family,
who [i.e. Nayyir Afnan] over twenty years shamed (to) undermine (the) position (of the) Center of
Faith [i.e. Abdul Baha] Abbas] through association (with) representatives (of) traditional enemies (of)
Faith (in) Persia, Muslim Arab communities, notables (of) civil authorities (in) Holy Land, who [i.e.
Nayyir Afnan] was scheduled (to) appear (as) star witness (on) behalf (of) daughter [i.e. Qamar
Khanum wife of Musa Bahai] (of) Badiullah [i.e. son of Baha)
G
P. 85
JAL-34-08
(in) recent lawsuit [settled out of court presumably under the Palestine (Holy Places) Order-in-Council
1924) challenging (the) authority conferred (upon) guardian of Faith [i.e. Shoghi Efendi] in Abdul
Baha’s testament.
Haifa
Israel,
Shoghi
April 5. 1952
Side by side with this diatribe wherein Shoghi Effendi invokes god’s [Baha’s] vengeance and wrath
upon enemies of Baha’s family, Shoghi Effendi, with one and same breath, in another epistle, assumes
the aim of ambassador of peace, preaching the gospel of truth, love, and concord, taking as his motto
Baha’s edict from his Will & Testament that “the tongue is for the commemoration of the good; do not
defile it with foul speech” which edict appears to beat in vain.
Evil deeds come home to roost and in the end, Shoghi Efendi, the Primal Branch, the Guardian of the
Cause, the Most wondrous, unique and priceless pearl, the youthful branch which branched from the
two hollowed and sacred Lote-Tree, passed to the mercy of god without issue thereby belying Abdul

Baha’s prophecy that Shoghi Effendi’s writ was to run presumably for good through his lineal
descendants.
G
P. 85
JAL-35-01
In Shoghi Effendi’s cable reference is made to the BAB’s wife who was to be to the Holy Land. She
was BAB’s second wife, named Fatima daughter of Mulla Hasan, preacher ofIsfahan. Her brothers
were Mulla Rajab Ali Qahir and Aqa Ali Muhammad who rejected Baha’s claim and who wrote
treaties in refutation of Baha for which they paid with their lives as set out in my letter of 29th May
1962.
Reference is made in paragraph 9 of the Introduction to the Tanbihun Naimin to an anonymous BABi
treatise in refutation of Baha’s pretentions. The treatise reproduces in full copy of a letter by the BAB’s
second wife, i.e. Fatima daughter of Mulla Hasan, preacher of Isfahan, wherein she gives an account of
her movements and activities consequent upon BAB’s execution.
In the letter she says: Every day Imam-Juma’ (i.e the leading Imam) of Isfahan would send a suitor
who proposed marriage to me. My house was raided and many writings were carried away. After two
years Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) and my brother Aqa Ali Muhammad came to Isphahan. In
the mention a letter was received from the eldest sister [i.e. ‘Izziyya Khanum, authoress of the
Tanbinun-Naimin] of His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i-Azal, for which title see document no 1 in
page 10 of the Collection entitled ‘The Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn’]
advising me to go and see Subh-i Azal if I wanted to put an end to my troubles.
Accompanied by my brother Aqa Ali Muhammad, Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) and other
members of the family we set out for Iraq. On arrival
G
P. 85
JAL-35-02
In Kazamayn, Mirza Musa [surnamed the Interlocutor] brother of Subh-i Azal10 came to receive us,
Mirza Musa and Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) went to see Subh-i Azal. At the time my eldest
brother (Mulla Rajab Ali Qahir) was at Najaf. My brother Aqa Ali Muhammad had written to him we
were all at Kazimayn, including all the members of his family. My eldest brother replied back to say
that we were to proceed to Karbala. Consequently all the members of the family left for Karbala.
Before proceeding to Karbala, accompanied by my brother (Aqa Ali Muhammad) and Haji Sayyid
Muhammad (of Isfahan), I went to pay a visit to Subh-i Azal and to take permission from him for our
departure to Karballa as instructed by my eldest brother. “His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i Azal]
showed me the Will and Testament of His Holiness the Point, penned in his own handwriting wherein I
was explicitly addressed by the same title which was given to me by him [i.e. the Point] is Isphahan,
and to which no one else was privy, directed me therein to obey his, viz. His Holiness the Fruit [i.e.
Subh-I Azal’s] orders.”
I replied that I was ready to do his bidding.
“His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i Azal] committed me to the care of Hajji Sayyid Muhammad (of
Isfahan) united in matrimony. “…. “At the time Mirza Husayn Ali Baha was also a suitor and had
asked to marry me. All the hardship from which I and Aqay-I Haji Sayyid Muhammad [of Isfahan]
suffered originated from the enemity [of Baha for having been thrown over] of that time. It was for this
reason that my brothers were murdered [by Bahais].
G.
P. 85
JAL-35-03
……” At Acre, it was Abbas Effendi [i.e. Abdul Bahha Abbas] who Aqay-i Haji Sayyid Muhammad
[of Isfahan] with his own hands.”
A typed copy of the letter reproduced from the anonymous treatise is forwarded herewith for historical
record, at its face value. The author of the Anonymous Treatise has not been traced. In view of Bahai
heresiarch’s campaign of terror and violence, at the time, it was customary for such treatise in
refutation of Baha’s pretensions to be written anonymously so that no harm would come to their
authors should their treatise fall into hands of philistines.
In his treatise composed by him in refutation of Baha’s pretensions, Aqa Ali Muhammad, to which
reference is made in paragraph 1 of the Introduction to the Tanbuhun-Naimin, the BAB’s brother-in10

Mirza Musa was Subh-i Azal’s half-brother and Baha’s full brother.

law, murdered by Bahais, replies to criticisms levelled by Bahais against Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of
Isfahan, whom he designates as “the most great Bayani Martyr”, for having “taken to wife” the BAB’s
widow [i.e. Fatima daughter of Mulla Hassan, preacher of Isfahan] entrusted to his care by Subh-I Azal
and holds that “Haji Sayyid Muhammad of Isphahan had rendered the utmost service to her, had not
failed one moment in paying due respect to her, and had accepted the grant of his master merely to
please god.”
With her brothers and Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isphahan murdered at the hands of Bahais, it does
not stand to reason she was “to be escorted to the Holy Land” as alleged in Shoghi Effendi’s cable.
G.
P. 85
JAL-35-04
In his preface to the Persian Bayan, Vol II, page 10, A.L.M. Nicholas refers to the BAB’s second wife,
whose name he misquotes, and writes as follows:”

« On discute beaucoup sur son compte. J’ai entendu affirmer et, nier avec la plus grande
énergie que Soubh-i-Ezel l’avait épousé après la mort du Bâb. Elle était encore vivante à
Esfahan le 11 Juin 1905. »
“The wife he (i.e. Bab) married in Isfahan was called Qanete. She was the daughter of Hadji
Muhammad Sadeq. An account that is much discussed and I do not intend to confirm or reject
and with no greater enthusiasm is that Subh-i Azal married her after the death of Bab. She
was still alive in Isfahan on June 11, 1905.”
In his coverage of several interviews he held with Baha at Acre between the years A.D 1886 and A.D.
1890. Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht Bihisht, quotes Baha as saying
and also the wife of His Holiness the Point was made a bride “[va zani Hazrat-I Nuqta ham arus
kardand”].
On the face of it, Baha might be excused for his ignorance of the BAB’s law since in his epistle
addressed to the son of the wolf written towards the end of his life, translated into English by Juli
Chanler, he states as follows: PP. 127-128 “God is witness, and knows that I have not read the Bayan,
nor seen its propositions; but it is indubitably clear that the BAB has made of it primodorial($) Book
…..” I have always lived in turmoil, and have not had the tranquillity necessary to study the Books of
His Supreme Highness [i.e. the BAB], or other books.” Page 129 “yet truly I have been so preoccupied
by my relations with the whole world that I have never read these books, nor, with my own eyes,
contemplated the works of the Point.”, see Note F. concerning the disposal of Point’s works.
G.
P. 85
JAL-35-05
Commenting on Baha’s admission in the epistle to the son of the wolf, A.L.M. Nicholas in his tract
entitled Qui est le successeur de BAB, page 8, Footnote (I) puts down Baha’s admission to “ignorance
regeretable”.” In page 9 he adds: “<French text> Chakhs-I-Sayyah” (The Traveller’s Narrative).
But in footnote (4) in page 9 touching the Traveller’s Narrative, A.L.M. Nicholas makes the following
remarks: “<French Text>”.
Baha’s followers might be excused for their utter ignorance of the BAB’s laws to which they were
forbidden to have access under pains and penalties for fear of exposure of Baha and Abdul Baha
Abbas.
In the BAB’s view, the BAB himself was a manifestation of the Primal Will. He ushered in a new
dispensation and brought a new law which superseded Muhammad’s dispensation and which abrogated
the Quran. Baha himself claims to be supplementary and complementary to the BAB with a specific
mission to complete the BAB’s laws as expressed in clear cust terms by the “Supreme Pen”, which
apparently denotes Baha himself, as the instrument whereby god’s pleasure is made known to men, in
Baha’s own quoted from page 20 in the Will and Testament of Baha’s son Muhammad Ali which run
as follows:
“the precursor [i.e. the BAB] came and revealed the word; the Completer [Mutamim, i.e. Baha] came
and completed it [i.e. the word]; what for is another manifestation.” [Mubashir amad
G.

P. 85
JAL-35-06
Khabar dad mutamim amad tamam farmud digar zuhur az baray keh va az baray che.”]
In the circumstances, Baha’s plea and ignorance of the BAB’s law of which he claims, to be the
“Completer” is hardly tenable, how is then his complaint about the re-marriage of BAB’s wife refrain
of which was taken up by Abdul Baha Abbas, to be accounted for.”
The answer thereto is not far to seek:
Spurned by the BAB’s wife frustrated in his attempt to marry her and thereby consolidate his position
preparatory to declaration of his mission. Smarting under the pain of the frustration, possessed of
BAB’s writings, opponents of his pretensions disposed of by foul play, safe and secure in his sanctuary
at Acre, Baha as an after-thought, revered the true circumstances of the marriage of the BAB’s wife,
became obstreperous and vociferous in his outcry about the re-marriage of the BAB’s wife and invoked
the Quran, Sura xxxiii, the Confedrates, verse 53 which says: “and yet most enter the apostle of god,
nor marry his wiwes after him for ever” where with to belabour Subh-I Aqzal, heedless of the fact that
his verse superseded by Unity X, Chapter 10 which reads
“<French text>”
(translation by A.L.M. Nicholas) in the Arabic Bayan of the BAB’s law which Baha claims to be the
“Completer”.
G.
P. 85
JAL-35-07
In his Lama’at (“Rays” “Splendours) Subh-i Azal confirms the marriage of the BAB’s widow. The
relevant passage reads as follows:
Lama’at-al-Ula:
<Arabic Text>
G.
P. 85
JAL-35-08
Reference is made to old and new covenant-breakers in Shoghi Efendi’s cable. A line of distinction has
to be drawn between the two. They consist of two groups:
Group A. This group includes all the members of Baha’s family, headed by Baha’s son Muhammad
Ali, exclusive of Abdul Baha Abbas, members of his family, and his sister Bahiyya Khanum. This
group calls itself Ahl-ul-Tawhid or Muwahaddin (Unitarians, and has followers.
Under the Will and Testament of Baha, the office of vicegerency was first to vest in Abdul Baha
Abbas, and after his death in Muhammad Ali and on the latter’s death the administration of the Bahai
cause was to vest in what Baha euphemistically calls the Baytul Adl (The House of Justice).
The Unitarians hold that upon inductions to office Abdul Baha Abbas transferred the provision of
Baha’s Most Holy Book (The Kitab-I Aqdas) which says that “whosoever layeth claim to a [new]
dispensation before the completion of a full thousand years is a liar and prevaricator “by adopting the”
position of originality [i.e. of being the bearer of a new Revelation, and not merely the interpreter and
maintainer of that given by Baha], that he has by this transgression also deviated from the express
provisions of Baha’s “Holy Writ”, to which the “rule of Baha” [Hukm-I Beda , change in its divine
intention is not applicable (in theological parlance Al-Beda signifies the heresy of those who assert that
god can change his mind in the designation of an Imam or vicegerent, and Heretics may say “yes, this
was what god originally intended but He changed His mind and altered his plan] and
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-01
That Abdul Baha’s designation of “the Centre of the Covenant”, as applied by Abdul Baha Abbas
himself to himself, amongst to sheer impudence and profanity as “the center of the Covenant” is god,
alone, Baha, who himself covenanted with himself before the Creation of the Heavens and Earth that
man should worship none save god [i.e. Baha] alone.”
For this reason Unitarians reject the claim of Abdul Baha by whom they are denounced as CovenantBreakers (Naqiz-I Ahd) and Vacillators (Mutezalzelin).
For further elucidation of the points of difference reference may be made to Mirza Jawad’s Historical
Epitome, and to the autobiography of Dr. Ibrahim George Khayrullah designated, prior to his apostasy

from Abdul Baha Abbas for his “duplicity”, as Baha’s Clumbus, the Shepherd of God’s flocks in
America, Baha’s Peter, and Conqueror of America, embodied in the Materials for the Study of the
BABi religion by Professor Browne, as well as to Baha’s son Badiullah’s memoirs who dwells in detail
on the graveness of the dispute with Abdul Baha Abbas and on the latter’s machiavellian party.
Group B:
This group includes all the members of Abdul Baha’s family, inclusive of Munira Khanum and Shoghi
Effendi’s own parents. “the two hollowed and sacred Lote-Trees”.
Under same pretence or protest they were excommunicated by Shoghi Effendi and branded as new
covenant-breakers. They are hardly on nodding terms with members of group A; they reject
Muhammad Ali; they have no followers and
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-02
The Fall Between two schools
Commenting on the schisms in his Introduction to the Materials for the Study of the BABi Religion, P.
xvi, Professor Browne observes that “exprerience shows that with such religious bodies as the BABis
fresh manifestations of activity and developments of doctrine are essential to maintain and increase
their vitality.
The same phenomenon was witnessed again in the further schism “which took place after the death of
Bahaullah in 1897.”
(5) Who is Who
a) Mirza Hadi Afnan, father of Shoghi Efendi:
According to the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, P. 52, “Some years later the BAB was united in
wedlock with the sister of Mirza Sayyid Hassan, and Mirza Abdul Qasim.” No further information is
given.
According to the BAB’s work entitled the Kitab-I Awwal [the First Book], otherwise known as Ahsanul-Qisas (the Best of Stories), or Qayyum-al-Asma, a commentary on Sura-I Yusuf, see glossary
attached to my letter of 23rd June 1962, the name of the woman referred to in Nabil’s narrative was the
BAB’s first wife was Sara who bore him a son named Ahmad who did not survive him. The BAB died
without issue.
In his new book entitled the Payam-I Padar (The Father’s Message), Fazlulah (or Fayzullah) Muhtadi,
nicknamed Subhi, author of the Kitab-I Subhi former Persian Scribe of Abdul Baha Abbas, “a channel
of grace between god and his creation.” Writes as follows:
PP. 141-142: “As the BAB had no near relatives
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-03
Save three maternal uncles, there is too much talk about his kinsmen. Mirza Hadi was not a son of the
BAB’s maternal uncles. Mirza Hadi was the son of Sayyid Hassan son of Sayyid Abdul Qasim
SaqaKhana who was head of a gang of breast-beaters [i.e. members of mourning procession beating
their breasts] of Shah-Chiraq and received forty Tumans as wages per annum as a servant of that
institution. On dit, he had kinship with the woman [i.e. Sara] Sayyid BAB had married in Shiraz. He
did nor his sons, did take any step in the BABi cause much less self-sacrifice. After sometime, Mirza
Hadi, his grandson showed up at Acre and destitute of any assets, he took to wife Abdul Baha’s
daughter Ziyaiyya Khanum and begot Shoghi plus two other sons plus two daughters and today he
himself and his children also stand expelled from Shoghi Effendi’s court.
He did nothing but to draw money out of Abdul Baha’s parse, to eat and to belch. He was a man whose
beard will not grow, to boot. One day Abdul Baha sent for him. He was told he was shaving. Abdul
Baha retorted: Whose beard is he shaving, his beard does not grow!”
P. 147 : A jolly, unconventional and humorous Bahai in Haifa in repartee: If Baha was pleased to
confer and did confer the title of Afnan on “the litters torn in the house of Mirza Abul-Qasim SaqaKhana to the entire exclusion of children of Baha’s brothers, it was not for his creatures to call the
bestowal
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-04

in question and “to ask why or wherefor or how?”
The foregoing quotation from Subhi’s Payam-I Padar trace out the pedigree of Shoghi Effendi’s father
Mirza Hadi Afnan, one of the two hollowed and sacred Lote-Trees.”
B) Munira Khanum, wife of Abdul Baha Abbas.
Badiullah’s memoirs: The following quotations have been excerpted from the memoirse of Ibn-alBaha-Badiullah) the most luminious Branch (Ghisn-I Anwar) who, as an insider throws light on the
charcter of Munira Khanum and furnishes first-hand information about her quoting Baha as his
authority.
PP. 5-7: “During the last years preceeding the ascension [i.e. Baha’s death], he [i.e. Baha] declared
with the utmost clarity, time after time, the ulterior motives of the wife of the Most Mighty Branch
Abbas [i.e. Munira Khanum].
Also he disclosed secret intentions of her as well as of her dependents aiming at guardianship
(Walayat) and executorship (Wasayat). Most of the times this servant [i.e. Badiullah] was forbidden by
him [i.e. Baha] to go to Acre. And sometimes when his permission was forthcoming, I was strictly
enjoined upon by him to guard myself against foul play on the part of the afore-mentioned[i.e. Munira
kHanum] and against eating or drinking anything from her hands.
Whenever the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha]”
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-05
“was received in audience [by Baha] at the palace at Bahja, he would invite this servant [i.e.
Badiullah] to visit Acre. Upon submission [of the matter to] and request for permission [from Baha], he
[i.e. Baha] would say: “In order to please me, he [i.e. Abdul Baha] invites you to go to Acre. I am
averse to your going to Acre because they are out to lay snares for you. Through her influence on the
Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha], the woman of Isphahan [Isphahaniyya-i, i.e. Munira Khanum]
is out to translate her ulterior motives into action through the instrumentality of him.”
On account of her, the displeasure of the Blessed Beauty [Jamal-I Mubarrak of Baha] waxed high day
by day, and he explained her wicked motives.
One day this servant [i.e. Badiullah] applied to him for permission to Acre. Indignantly I was forbidden
[to proceed]. Mirza Habib, son of Aqa Rida, the confectioner, was in audience at the time. Owing to his
tender age, he was perturbed. After he was allowed to leave, I was summoned [by Baha]. After being
caressed and soothed, he told me: Take a seat, I will give you an elucidation of the circumstances of
this evil genius of Isphahaniyya [i.e. Munira Khanum] to enable you to guard yourself against her at all
times:
This woman was the wife of Sayyid Kazim, brother of Sultan-ash-Shuhada, in Isphahan; for a time;
This poor fellow was overtaken by afflictions caused by this fiend [i.e. Munira Khanum]; as no
intimacy was established between them and as she failed to tempt him”
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-06
By feminine wiles, she finally rid herself of him by means of poisoned hot condiments.
She had one daughter, who died. Afterwards she endeavoured for a time to become the wife of the
[Bahai] missionaries. Owing to her misdeeds and association with her paternal aunt Qanita for some
time, not one [of the missionaries] was decoyed into her trap.
She then betook herself to work as a sweeper, and serve, in the Harem [of Baha]. She prayed for
admittance, I accommodated her in the house of Kalim [Mirza Musa, brother of Baha] to serve, and
attend on, the Leaf {waraqa, title bestowed by Baha on her daughter] Sammadiyya. At the time, the
Most Mighty Branch (Abbas) was highly aspirant of a wife, and envied this desire to the Harem [of
Baha]. At the first interview with the woman of Isphahan [Munira Khanum] he had a liking for her.
Little by little, she so mesmerised him by feminine wibes that he frequented the Kalim’s house. Owing
to her misdeeds, I was aware to his taking her for wife. For sometime I refused to accede to the urgings
and exhibitions of the Most Mighty Branch (Abbas) made through some mebers of the Harem, and
withheld my permission. Finally, the matter reached such a pass that there was no other means of
escape but to submit to it.
When this news reached Iran Sultan-ash-Shuhada wrote
G.
P. 85

JAL-36-07
A letter to the Servant [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, the Servant of god, amanuensis to Baha] wherein
he expressed his overwhelming surprise at the admittance of this woman into the Harem [i.e. as wife to
Abdul Baha Abbas], so much that there was fear of his faith undergoing considerable abatement. He
wrote (and said): “When I learned that she had gone away to sweep the House [of Baha] and to serve
[his] Harem I rejoiced exceedingly because all these regions [i.e. Isfahan] had become undefiled by her
deeds and vices and she should penetrate into the Harem and become acceptable was incredible.” I
revealed a tablet (Lawh = epistle) and sent it and [thereby] placated Sultan-ash-Shuhada.Three days
after this evil genius was united [i.e. wedlock] with the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas]
she wrought a change in his character to such an extent that his treatment of other members of the
family underwent a change. She endeavoured day and night and weaned him entirely from members of
the family. She caused [matters] between the Most Mighty Branch and his mother [i.e. Asiyya Khanum
Nawwab] to reach [such a pass] that she was always tormented by, was terrified by or complained of
[Shikuh or Shakwa] him and cried.
And now she seeks throught this man [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] to establish guardianship [Walayat] and
executorship (Wasayat) within her own issue, and revive bygone fancies.”
G.
P. 85
JAL-36-08
“It is impossible, god will not suffer any male issue for the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha] by
this Munira. As the existence of you the Branches [i.e. sons of Baha] is contrary to her thoughts for the
future. She is exerting herself to the utmost to anhiliate you. You should always guard yourself against
her. Her allegation that she is His Holiness the Point’s [i.e. the BAB] bonne bouche is falsehood and
slander, never does His Holiness the Point’s bonne bouche become the cause of existence of a wicked
woman like her.
She has publicised this falsehood to establish a miracle for herself; She wants to say that from the “day
of Am I Not [Yom a-last (a-lastu) = the day of the original covenant between god and man = the day of
creation, when the interrogation, Am I Not Your God? Was put to Adam (and with him to his posterity)
by the Creator] she was intended for the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas].
She is an adept par excellence in devilish malice or craft. Although I have proscribed these fancies to
be mentioned yet she does not desist from them. She has talked to some historians about them, such as
Nabil [i.e. Mirza Muhammad Nabil of Zarand]. I have ordered [record of them] to be destroyed by
them [i.e. historians].
She would not [however] cease from [her fancies]. In the long run, this demon [i.e. Munira Khanum]
would cause an upheaval in the cause [i.e. Baha’s dispensation] none severe than the upheaval brought
about by Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan [i.e. the murdered “
G.
P. 85
JAL-37-01
Azali in Acre, see my letter of 20st May 1969], as herstronghold is the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul
Baha]. But, it is impossible, god will not suffer her thoughts to obtain currency in the world ……….
According to the order [of Baha], I [i.e. Badiullah] noted down this statement [of Baha] at the time.”
P. 8: “One day a year before the ascension [i.e. death of Baha] I was in attendance upon [Baha] in the
afternoon. The Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas], who as a rule was in audience [by Baha]
every several days, attained to the hnour of meeting, bowed down to [Baha] and stood. The Blessed
face [of Baha] was facing the window (and this) continued for several minutes. As he [i.e. Baha] turned
the face towatds the room, and the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] was standing, he [i.e.
Baha] said to him: “Welcome, sit down.” I [i.e. Baduullah] was about to leave, when he [i.e. Baha
motioned me to stay. After enquiry after his [i.e. Abdul Baha’s] health and display of kindness, he
[Baha] addressed him as follows:
“drink in what I say and act accordingly; any transgression thereof on your part as much as an atom
will yield no result but frustration, do not hearken to satanic temptations (evil suggestions) of Munira
[i.e. wife of Abdul Baha Abbas]; Let not Satan [Sharur] (or let not vanity (ghurur)] take possession of
you; her [i.e. Munira Khanum’s] aim is to introduce sedition into the Cause [i.e. Baha’s dispensation];
She is out
G.
P. 85

JAL-37-02
to establish guardianship (Walayat) and executorship (Wasayat) and to resussitate bygone fancies; act
agreeably to what I have written; do not forget [to prove] fidelity to the Supreme Penwhich has
conferred such a favour on you; know that whatever action you take contrary to the Cause (or
command) will guide no result but disgrace and trouble and dissension; men whose emergence and aid
stand recorded in tablet [epistles) by the Supreme Pen are bound to appear; they will expunge that
which is contrary to the Cause and will set down that which is agreeable to the Cause; In this
dispensation the Rule of Beda [i.e. change in the Divine Intention] is not applicable to commandments
revealed by the Supreme Pen.” This over, he [Baha] ordered tea to be served. After taking tea, the Most
Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] was allowed to leave. I [Badiullah] saw him off; Outside the
Blessed room [of Baha], he told me in an undertone: “do not mention the blessed Commands [of Baha]
anywhere.” In a moment, I had noted down what he [Baha] had said. In short, displeasure of Munira
and her dependents waxed high daily; when news of the death of her small son was brought he [i.e.
Baha] said: “It is impossible, god will not suffer any male issue for the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul
Baha Abbas] by this woman of Isfahan [i.e. Munira Khanum] to live. She intends guardianship
(Walayat)” and then, whatever means she resorted to for conception aborted. As he [i.e. Baha] gave full
expression to her thoughts for the future, she harboured hatred at heart
G.
P. 85
JAL-37-03
Towards the Blessed Beauty Bahaullah and the family [of Baha] and bided her tme for an opportunity
to crop up ………..
He [Baha] would say : “This woman [i.e. Munira] is a firebrand which tumbled into this family.
“[continuation in P.9]
P. 9 : “and the Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] is so kept in leash of submission to her
that all my counsels [to him] prove fruitless. May god protect you from her …. The apostle of God [i.e.
Muhammad] nominated [no successor], that was a cause of discord …… Had he nominated [one]
would there not have been dissension.” …….. The woman of Isfahan [i.e. Munira Khanum] will do her
business; She will disrupt the word of divine unity; She will be the cause of trouble and execration for a
limited period of time.”
P. 11 : In those days traces of displeasure were visible in Baha’s face. Some Bahais were under the
impression that Baha’s displeasure was occasioned by the Servant of god, Mirza Aqa Jan of kashan.
Upon being received by Baha, Aqa Sayyid Mahdi Dahji enquired from him whether or not his
displeasure was traceable to Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan.
Retorted back Baha: “It is absurd [to attribute my displeasure] to the Servant [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of
Kashan], go and swear that [my displeasure] is not in account to him. My enemy [i.e. Abdul Baha
Abbas and/or his wifeMunira Khanum] is (lurking) up in my sleeve.”
G.
P. 85
JAL-37-04
P. 14 : Said Baha to Badiullah: The people of Isfahan [i.e. the town from which Munira Khanum hails]
are of two categories: included in the first category are those noted for their conviction of good morals.
Classified in the second category are persons like Sayyid Muhammad [of Isfahan, the murdered Azali]
in Acre, see my letter of 19th May] and Munira [i.e. wife of Abdul Baha] [possessed) of the utmost
degree of atheism [zandaqa] and devilish malice or craft.” ……….. “the woman of Isfahan [i.e.
Munira Khanum] is lying in wait; she will provoke enormous mischief; She will carve a [golden] calf
and thereby lead persons of weak faith”.
Baha then adds a rider: “Men of the unseen world (Rajul-al-Ghaib) will appear in the fullness and
destroy [golden calf].”
P. 14 : Referring to Baha’s illness and to his treatment by Doctors Badiullah writes: “The Most Great
Branch [i.e. Muhammad Ali] and Aqay Majduddin, son of Kalim [Musa, brother of Baha], [Baha’s]
son-in-law, were charged with the duty of safeguarding of medicines against being tampered with by
self-interested persons expectant of the assension [i.e. death of Baha] and of administering same [to
Baha].”
P. 16: Badiullah adds: In order to get me out of the way “lest Baha should draw up a fresh Will &
Testament”, Abdul Baha Abbas sent me out to Acre on a fool’s errand and “made available obituary
notices” in anticipation of Baha’s death.

G.
P. 85
JAL-37-05
P.19: Badiullah writes: After Baha’s death, some members of Baha’s family and myself paid a visit to
Abdul Baha Abbas in his house where she was sitting. He used “such scurrilous language towards
Mahd-i-Ulya [i.e. Baha’s Wife] which decency prevents me from setting it down.” In her view, on the
authority of Baha’s command, the term ‘tablets’ (Aqlwah) was reserved for Baha’s writings
exclusively and was not therefore applicable to Abdul Baha’s writings.
Since this interpretation was endorsed by all members of Baha’s family, exclusive of Abdul baha
Abbas, Abdul Baha Abbas “held up the Blessed Name [of Baha] to ridicule several times to the
accompaniment of scurrilous and abusive language.”
To avoid untoward incidents Badiullah kept his self-restraint in the face of Abdul Baha’s outburst.
P. 26: Before relations between Abdul Baha Abbas and Muhammad Ali who lived in Baha’s palace at
Bahja, were ruptured and at the written request of Abdul Baha Abbas, Muhammad Ali entertained three
European ladies at the palace and kept them for the night. In his policy to play one brother against the
other, later Abdul Baha Abbas gave an altogether different slant to the matter and in his interview with
Badiullah “accused Muhammad Ali of entertaining three prostitutes at the palace to the disgrace of
Baha’s family.”
P. 31: The evil genius, the wife of Abdul Baha Abbas, had promised to give her daughter [Ziyaiyya
Khanum] in marriage to Mirza Hadi [Afnan]. The daughter was not willing to give her consent thereto.
Therefore,
G.
P. 85
JAL-37-06
Badiullah was requested by Bahoyya Khanum, sister of Abdul Baha Abbas to use his good offices, to
talk to Ziyaiyya Khanum and to prevail upon her. His good offices aborted. She refused to consent,
turned her face to the wall and cried copiously. Badiullah reported his failure to his step-sister Bahiyya
Khanum. Later, Ziyaiyya Khanum was prevailed upon to marry Mirza Hadi Afnan “on condition that
the guardianship [Walayat] was to vest in her male issue” after Abdul Baha Abbas, to which
prospective information or succession Abdul Baha Abbas “plighted his troth,” in advance. “Failure to
concive” despite all the means to, inclusive the use of the Hot Springs at Tiberias, coupled with the
resultant despair, had driven the evil genius, the wife of Abdul Baha Abbas, to accelerate the marriage
of her daughter in abid “to trump up a guardianship.”
P. 35: In the long run, Baha’s “sons” and Baha’s “members of Family” was branded as “CovenantBreakers, Satan, and Balaam,” and “the evil genius, the woman of Isfahan, the wife of Abdul Baha
Abbas, came to be known as the counsellor, advisor, and the wife of god, the custodian of the heys of
paradise and hell, the steadfast in the covenant, and the channel of access to pleasures and hell-fire.”
Muhammad Ali was pictured “as a bear”, and with the birth of a son to Ziyaiyya Khanum and her
husband Mirza Hadi Afnan, “the mask was off” and free rein was given “to the villification and
calumination of god’s [i.e. Baha’s] family and [Baha’s] sons.”
G.
P.35 Cd, P. 36
JAL-37-07
Coached by Munira, a temporary visitor to Acre was sent back to Iran “with secret instructions”. On
arrival there, she called a meeting of “the hand-maidens of god” [i.e. female believers] when Baha’s
sons were burnt in effigy by her” to the accompaniment of scurrilous language towards Baha’s sons
and family. Most of the hand-maidens highly disapproved of this act.
But the “brazen-faced” authoress of the act, who was tutoured by “one more brazen-faced” [i.e. Munira
Khanum] than herself forbade any expression of sympathy on the part of the hand-maidens of god for
Baha’s sons and family: Abdul Baha Abbas had written to say that “any man or woman in Iran who
showed the least sympathy with Baha’s sons and family was to be branded “as covenant-breaker,
followed by action to destroy him or her materially and morally.” On the contrary, “anyone who
indulged himself in calumnies, falsehoods, and curses against Baha’s sons, widow, and family, and
who regarded Abdul Baha Abbas over and over Baha, was considered to be steadfast” in Abdul Baha
Abbas. Abdul Baha Abbas had issued instructions that all outgoing letters from Bahais in Palestine
were first to be read over to, censored and sealed by him for which purpose a special seal was made
available.

Addressees in general were warned that all letters not sealed by him were to be returned unclaimed. By
this means, “matters” which “the Vilest man” would not stop to, were attributed to Baha’s “sons and
family” with companions of falsehood, calumny and tale-bearing in full swing.”
G.
JAL-38-01
P. 36 Cd.
Under the strict censorship imposed by Abdul Baha Abbas, all news of Baha’s family and sons was
completely blacked out excepting such tendentious items his adherents would write but the suggestion
of Abdul Baha Abbas, to be whom they had to truckle: under pain and penalty of excommunication
attended with the break up of their homes and loss of their means of subsistence.”
P. 39: “to secure his love and to assume dominion over him, the evil genius, wife of Abdul Baha
Abbas, would administer to him a dose of the mandrake [Mihr-I Giyah],” an overdose of which made
him “rabid”, on which occasion he would “raise a hue and cry among Bahais”.
“All avenues were blocked in the face of Baha’s sons and family, association and fraternization with
them was strictly forbidden by Abdul Baha Abbas.
Offenders were shadowed and informed against by spies engaged by Abdul Baha Abbas. Such
offenders were abused and beaten up and incured the wrath of Abdul Baha Abbas. Members of Baha’s
family were put to great straits; food supplies were cut off and the inmates of the palace of Bahja,
where Baha’s family and sons lived, were hungry for a while. Abdul Baha Abbas sought to justify his
action as a move to force an agreement with him.
But in fact “his intention was to carry into effort the wicked objective of his wife and to instal a traitory
leadership”. News leaked out; Non-Bahai friends rendered financial assistance; Abdul Baha tried to
stop it in vein.
38-02
JAL-38-02
Note by PP 55-58 cd.
(5) Who is who cd.
13) Munira Khanim wife of Abdul Baha Abbas cd.
Memoirs:
P/39 cd: The news caused a sensation in the town. Abdul Baha Abbas called on the Divisional-General
Mustafa Remzi Pasha and produced to him a cooked-up list of expenditures for the palace of Bahja,
which the General would not swallow. The General advised Abdul Baha Abbas to deal well with his
brothers.
Perturbed at this turn of events, Abdul Baha Abbas spread a false rumour that Baha's sons had lodged a
complaint against him with the authorities.
P40-41: On one occasion Abdul Baha Abbas, accompanied by his retinue proceeded to Haifa to spend
a few days at the Maqam-i Khazr at the front of Mount Carmel. His wife at Acre sent a message to the
Police commandant that a servant of Bahais guest-house named Nasrullah was out to commit a crime
and was missing. Police at Haifa was alerted who traced the man to the Maqam-i Khazr where Abdul
Baha Abbad was staying. He was apprehended and brough back to Acre in close custody. Upon
investigation, it was found that the man had gone to Haifa to pay his respect to Abdul Baha Abbas, and
that the information laid by Abdul Baha's wife was false. The whole affair was a put-up show: Abdul
Baha went to Haifa; his wife laid a false information to which he was privy; the underlying motive was
to implicate his brothers in some way or other. The governor of Acre summoned Abdul Baha Abbas to
Acre from Haifa; he forbade him to return to the Maqam-i Khazr at Haifa; he reprimanded him
severely; he held him responsible for a hair's breadth harm that may come to his
JAL-38-03
Duplicate of JAL-38-02
JAL-38-04
Brothers and Baha's family; he called upon him to warn his wife against laying false information in
future as otherwise both he and his wife were to be imprisoned.
P/45: "Abdul Baha's last Will & Testament is in the handwriting of Shoghi's mother" [i.e. Ziyaiyyah
Khanim wife of Mirza Hadi Afnan].

P/46: Abdul Baha's last Will & Testament is $ "with censures, imprecations, falsehoods and calumnies
levelled against his brothers as well as against one who is not favourably inclined toward his
degenerate successor, begotten from Hadi's [i.e. Mirza Hadi Afnan's] loins, of notorious morals and
deeds.
In fact, a claim of godhead has been constructed." …….. Said several times Abdul Baha: "A time will
come when high-spirited able men will appear to strive with the utmost effort to reform [the cause]."
……….. In the early days of strained relations between Abdul Baha Abbas and Muhammad Ali the
former sent a message to the latter to say that neither the former should play the role of Imam 'Ali' nor
the latter that of Caliph 'Umar'. But Abdul Baha Abbas turned the tables and acted as "Muawiya: and
the Muhammad Ali became "Ali".
38-05
PP.48-51: The worsened relations between Abdul Baha Abbas on the one part and his brothers on the
other part having acquired notoriety, Ulemas, elders and notables of Acre and Haifa in a circular letter,
copy of which is reproduced in the memoirs, addressed themselves to Bahai Ulemas and elders
throughout the world setting out therein the sins of omission and commission of Abdul Baha Abbas
against his brothers and other Bahais.
The letter was a open invitation to Bahai elders and notables to intervene in the matter and settle the
dispute between the brothers. In view of the strict censorship imposed by Abdul Baha Abbas requiring
his seal to be affixed to any outgoing mail destined for Bahais. The circular letter failed to serve the
purpose for which it was intended.
Badiullah adds: Abdul Baha's "tyranny, stimulated by black inspiration of the notorious evil genius,
reached such proportions" that had he had a "Bahai state" he would "have murdered all the sons of
Baha and Baha's family."
In fact, Hadi of Shiraz [i.e. Mirza Hadi Afnan, father of Shoghi Efendi], on the mere carving of a
lowing calf, "decreed the murder of Baha's sons" of a body" was essential for the survival of its healthy
members.
Whereas, "he and his son are the diseased organs for their lapse from" Baha's commandments at the
suggestion of the evil genius so that "Soltan's guardian of the cause may emerge and bygone
superstitions and fancies be revived."
JAL-38-06
P.56: In his assessment of Abdul Baha Abbas, the Divisional-General Mustafa Remzi Pasha, stationed
at Acre summed up Abdul Baha Abbas in the following words: "Abbas Effendi claims that he is
preaching the gospel of peace, love and unity for the peoples of the world. How can he justify this kind
of treatment of his brothers?" The General pondered for a while and added: "On the surface, he is light
and intrinsically utter darkness."
PP. 56-57: Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah sums up Abdul Baha's false reports and accusations against Baha's
sons and family as follows: "I can explicitly state that ninety percent of what he bruited abroad and
wrote concerning the events at Acre and the history of the Cause before after ascension [i.e. death of
Baha] up to this date is devoid of foundation and was motivated by self-interest to destroy the sons and
the family of Baha as well as the works of the Supreme Pen [i.e. Baha's writings] and to nominate a
degenerate successor as was evidenced as clear as the noon-day after his death."
PP/76 and 77: Abdul Baha Abbas associated with a bad character in Haifa named Colonel Badri Beg
who had a step-daughter. The Colonel was a gambler and Abdul Baha "footed the bill for his losses."
Abdul Baha also "paid the expenses incurred by the step-daughter."
JAL-38-07
PP. 76-88 Cd: The Colonel had "a passion of love" for the step-daughter, and could not therefore send
her away. The step-daughter had an affair with an Italian youth, which roused the jealousy of the
Colonel who had the Italian youth strangled to death by his men. The murder gave rise to little-talk in
Haifa. The mother and the relatives of the deceased held Colonel Badri Beg responsible for the murder
and instituted an action against him. "The Most Mighty Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] was also
accused by them" of complicity.. the mother of the deceased argued the point with Ibn-al-Baha
Badiullah by saying that if Abdul-Baha Abbas "was not involved in the matter and had no passion of
love for the step-daughter, how is that he has harboured her in his house at Acre".
A house, in the words of Badiullah, associated with memories of the "Blessed Beauty" [i.e. Baha] and
at present tenanted by Abdul Baha Abbas and his family.

Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah then goes on to explain that steps he took and the moves he made to whitewash
Abdul Baha Abbas, animated with the desire of keeping the name of Baha's family unqualified and
untainted.
JAL-38-08
PP.78-81: Copy is reproduced of an appeal with its relevant enclosured addressed by Mrs Rosamund
Templeton to leading Babis in Iran wherein she sets forth the circumstances under which she came to
mediate between Abdul Baha Abbas and his brothers animated with a genuine desire to settle the
chronic dispute subsisting between them. The suggestion to mediate and arbitrate between the parties
emanated from Abdul Baha himself who agreed with her that she was justified in her request for the
production of Baha's Will & Testament in the possession of Abdul Baha Abbas for examination." As
the gravamen of Abdul Baha's complain against his brother was their refusal to recognize him as the
Chief of the Babi religion at Acre, it was proposed by her that the parties concerned, accompanied by
their respective witnesses, should attend a meeting to be held at Baha's tomb on a specified date at
which Abdul Baha Abbas was to produce Baha's Will & Testament was to produce Baha's Will &
Testament for being photographed.
Abdul Baha's brothers consented in writing to the proposal. Abdul Baha himself declined and backed
out.
Abdul Baha himself Abbas "admitted that he had read the contents of Baha's Will & Testament to
Colonel Badri Beg and that he had sent a copy of it to the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire and to the
Shah of Persia. His refusal to produce Baha's Will & Testament for examination by his brothers could
not raise the presumption that it contained Baha's "holy secrets which could not be disclosed."
39-01
PP55-58 cd.
In his Kashful-Hiyal, converted into "Shoghi Effendi's house of existence."
Abdul Baha passed to the mercy of god, survived by his wishful thinking that "high-spirited able men"
were bound to arise in due course. Shoghi Effendi stepped into his shoes. He excommunicated Munira
Khanim, "the woman of Isfahan", his own parents, his brothers and sisters Abdul Baha's descendants
and daughters with the result that on the morrow of his passing there was not left a single member of of
Baha's descendents fit and proper, in Abdul Baha's and Shoghi Efendi's estimation, to worship Baha,
the Centre of the Covenant, which is god alone, Baha who himself covenanted with himself before the
creation of the heavens and the $ that men should worship none save god alone."
P/111, Mirza Jawad's Historical Epitome for the Study of the Babi Religionby Professor Browne.
Shoghi Effendi passed to the mercy of god with Abdul Baha's prophecy about former's lineal
descendants unfulfilled.
Yet, with war instead of peace, with enemity instead of amity, with discord instead of concord, with
dissension instead of conciliation, with hatered instead of love, with intolerance instead of tolerence,
with violence instead of indulgence and stalking through Baha's household, Abdul Baha Abbas, with
Shoghi Effendi in the wake, harped on the note of Baha's lofty word "that all of you are the fruit of one
and the leaves of one Branch".
JAL-39-02
PP. 55-58 cd.
Rift in the lute. A humble lowly and submissive follower of the BAB and of his successor Subh-i Azal,
Baha in his late years claimed to be a “Supreme Manifestation, a pivot of divine manifestation, round
which all past and future dispensations revolve,” pleased to grace the world “once in every five
hundred thousand years,” in which claim he was greatly greatly encouraged by his brother Musa the
‘Interlocutor’, Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, the ‘Servant of God’, and his son Abdul Baha Abbas, of
whom Musa did not survive Baha. The ‘Servant of God’ was denounced as an apostate and renegade,
leaving “my enemy in lurking up my sleeve”. Alive to his own false claim, Baha had a hunch that
Abdul Baha Abbas was up to something. Hopless and hapless, Baha provided for duccession to the
office first to vest in Abdul Baha, and upon his death in Muhammad Ali, and upon his death, in what
Baha termed the “house of jusstice’ (Bayt-al-Adl). Baha passed to the mercy of god survived by a
wishful thinking that his “men of the unseen world were to raise in the fullness of time to destroy
thegolden calf moulded into shape” by Abdul Baha Abbas. Abdul Baha Abbas stepped into Baha’s
shoes. He excommunicated Baha’s family, Baha’s sons, and their descendents. Abdul Baha Abbas did
not however fail to provide fully for his own descendents.

With Muhammad Ali bulldozed out of the way, Abdul Baha Abbas appointed Shoghi Effendi as his
successor with full provision for succession of his lineal descendents, and with Baha’s “house of
Justice”, to quote Avareh.
JAL-39-3
6) Muhammad Ali : entitled Fari’ Munshaib az Asl-I Qadim (the Branch derived from the Ancient
Stock); man-astafa- hullah (He Whom Gid Hath Chosen); Ghusn-I Akbar (the Most Great Branch).
His sons: Shuaullah, Muhammad Amin, and Musa.
His partisans are called Ahlul-Tawhid or Muwahaddin (Unitarians). Muhammad Ali and his sons as
well as his partisans were excommunicated by Abdul Baha Abbas. For this reason he is called Naqiz-I
Akbar (Arch Covenant-Breaker or Violator) and Markaz-I Naqa (the Centre of Sedition) by Abdul
Baha Abbas and his partisans.
For the same reason, Muhammad Ali’s partisans were called Naqizin (covenant-breakers or Violators)
or Mutezalzelin (Vacillators).
7) Ziyaullah entitled: Ghusin-I Athar (the Most Pure Branch); married Thuraiyya Khanum. Both were
excommunicated by Abdul Baha Abbas.
9) Badiullah entitled: Ghusn-I Anwar (the Most Luminous Branch). His children: Sazitch, Salah,
Qamar, Iffat and Ismat.
10) Badiullah, his wife and children all were excommunicated by Abdul Baha Abbas.

39-04
5) Who is Who? Continued
B) Munira Khanum wife of Abdul Baha Abbas Cd.
Payam-I Pedar Cd.
P. 253: In a letter penned in the handwriting of the nearest relative of Shoghi Effendi in Israel and
reproduced in fac-simile, Shoghi Effendi is described as “a worthy of short stature, an impetuous
neurotic, afflicted with syphilis transmitted to him by his father.”
PP. 1930205 & 207-244: Turned out of his home and hearth, treated as an outcast, and deprived of
peternal love as a result of Shoghi Effendi’s excommunication, hounded, and driven pillar to post by
Shighi Effendi’s followers to obstruct his rehabilitation, out to the quick and deeply hurtby his father’s
anguish in his death-bed, torn between love for his son and loyalty to his faith, and denied access to his
father’s grave, Subhi apologizes for having been forced to wash Shoghi Effendi’s dirty linen in public
and to expose those with whom he ate salt one day11.
39-05
5) Who is Who? Continued
B) Munira Khanum wife of Abdul Baha Abbas Cd.
Payam-I Pedar Cd.
PP. 105-111 Cd. Abdul Baha Abbas] like a leech of Edirne.” [Kanah = a tick, a parasite that infested
Edirne during Baha’s exile there]
PP. 143-145: “Shoghi Effendi was possessed of peculiar nature and habit which cannot be properly
described; his manly disposition was inconsiderable; he was continually desirous of cultivating
friendship, and associationg, with robust men and youth!.”
Shoghi Effendi, Dr Ziya Baghdadi and Subhi get up a party at night at Acre at which jokes were
cracked. Subhi absented himself from the room on business. On return he found the couple in
compromising circumstances “with Dr Ziya Baghdadi having committed an indexent act” … “Taken
aback” Subhi said : “Doctor! What is this business you have been doing?” Shoghi Effendi turned the
face toward me” and said: “If you are also a man, prove yourself a male!!”
“I have heard such remarks from, and have witnessed such scenes of, Shoghi Effendi on several
occasions.”
11

Provide an explanation here.

Shoghi Effendi may be categorized “in the category of “hermaphrodites”, in whom opposite qualities
are embodied, …. “requiring surgical operation” for adjustment.
Shoghi Effendi has “no feeling, attachment or devotion” for father, brother, sister, mother or friend. He
“issues orders which no sane man would give.”

39-06
5) Who is Who? Continued
B) Munira Khanum wife of Abdul Baha Abbas Cd.
Payam-I Pedar Cd.
PP. 102-183 and 114 Cd: how proper it is.”
On another occasion “Abdul Baha’s son-in-law Mirza Jalal” and others on their way to Baha’s tomb
ran into Muhammad Ali. “they made gratuitous remarks against him and took liberties with him.” Such
incidents were not infrequent.
PP. 104-105: In his meetings attended by his followers exclusively, Abdul Baha Abbas would dilate on
the “bad conduct” of his brother Muhammad Ali and his adherents to the “delectation” of his audience
and would “work up feelings of his followers against them.”
Apprehensive of the dissemination of Muhammad Ali’s utterances among Bahais, Abdul Baha Abbas,
would sound the alarm that such utterances “were infected with poison which would work into one’s
system” and affect if not afflict, any person however strong and robust one may be. He would say “he
had seen Muhammad Ali flirting with a girl”.
PP. 108-111 “ Baha’s letter, penned in his own handwriting and reproduced in fac-simile in page 109 in
the Payam-I Pedar speaks of Munira Khanum, wife of Abdul Baha Abbas, as “the woman of Isfahan,
who forgetful of her engagement with you [i.e. Samadiyya Khanum daughter of Baha to do chores and
attend on her] has stuck to the Most Mighty Branch.
39-07
5) Who is Who? Continued
B) Munira Khanum wife of Abdul Baha Abbas Cd.
Payam-I Pedar Cd.
Corroborative evidence of Badiullah’s revelations concerning what may be termed Abdul Baha’s
Gestapo12 system to secure strict obedience to him, Baha’s apprisal of Munira Khanum, and Shoghi
Effendi’s antecedents is contained in the Payam-i Padar (the Father’s message) composed by Fayzullah
(or Fazlullah) Muhtadi nicknamed Subhi, former Persian scribe to Abdul Baha Abbas, and “Channel of
Grace between God and his creatures.”
The thread of the discourse is therefore left to Subhi to take it up.
Payam-i Padar:
PP 102-103 & 114 : Baha’s tomb at Bahja abutted on Baha’s palace there wherein Muhammad Ali had
his residence and business headquarters.
“Apprehensive of defection of Muhammad Ali’s party” pilgrims to and from Baha’s tomb were
therefore invariably “escorted” by Abdul Baha’s men “with his secret agents on the look out to report
any case of fraternization with Muhammad Ali or with any of his followers.” A party of pilgrims was
escorted by Shoghi Effendi. After pilgrimage, Shoghi Effendi lined them in front of Muhammad Ali’s
residence and instructed one of them to recite a recitation in vilification of Muhammad Ali. It ran as
follows:
“I swear by god that the Arch-Covenant-Breaker [i.e. Muhammad Ali] has turned more ignoramus than
a horde of lucifers. His pleasure lies in his being the ring-leader of block-heads.” The chorus was
“Bravo, Bravo
JAL-39-8
5) Who is Who? Continued
B) Munira Khanum wife of Abdul Baha Abbas Cd.
Payam-I Pedar Cd.
In the circumstances Abdul Baha Abbas could not compel obedience of his brothers to him as Chief of
the BABis in Acre on the strength of Baha’s Will and Testament held by Abdul Baha Abbas to which

12

Geheime Stadt Politzei (Germany’s secret state police during Nazi regime).

they were denied access. The sincerity of Abdul Baha Abbas was called in question and the appeal to
leading BABis in Iran aborted and Mrs Rosmund Templeton washed her hands out of the affair.
The quotations from Ibn-al-Baha-Badiullah’s memoirs are sensational. His authority is Baha himself.
The quotations reveal the true character, and arrieve-peus’ee13, of Abdul Baha Abbas and his wife
Minira Khanum, the parents of Ziyaiyya Khanum, the half of the “two hollowed and sacred Lote
Trees”, that produced Shoghi Effendi that “wondrous, unique, and priceless pearl that doth glean from
out of the twin surging sees”.
Abdul Baha Abbas appears to have applied to the letter and to the spirit what may be termed his orders
of the day which says: “the Dispensation [of Baha] in its entirety hath averted to this visible place [i.e.
Abdul Baha himself], and it is not [permissible] for anyone to stir save after his permission. P. 77,
Mirza Jawad’s Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of the BABi Religion by Professor Browne.

40-01
Note G. PP. 55-58 Cd.
And spoke with a flourish of trumpets of ‘the Most Great Peace’ which Baha’s mission is supposed to
have ushered in and which has failed to bless even Baha’s own household
Emmulative of Abdul Baha Abbas, and not to lag behind, Mirza Jawad in his Historical Epitome, P.73,
Materials for the Study of the BABi religion by Professor Browne, boasts of Baha’s “elevating
influence” that Bahais “meet to the oppressor with with gentleness, the aggressor with pardon, and the
Vituperator with love,” which assertion compares ill with what is reported in page 309, in the Hasht
Bihisht: Aqa Ali Muhammad of Isfahan carried on business in Istanbul.
Owingto certain discoveries which he had made concerning the conduct and character of Baha, his
faith underwent considerable abatement. Mirza Abdul Qasim the Bakhtiyari robber was consequently
despatched from Acre with instructions “to bleed that block or vermin of heedlessness whose blood
was in excess”.
On arrival there, he played up to Aqa Ali Muhammad of Isfahan. Taking undue advantage of his
unsuspecting host Aqa Ali Muhammad, he broke open his private safe and decamped with L45014. A
part of this sum he retained for himself; with the remainder he purchased clothes and other goods
which he sent to Acre. In acknowledgment of his services, Baha revealed the following verse of mercy
and indulgence: “O Phlebotomist of the Divine Unity! Throb like the artery in the body of the
contingent world, and drink of the blood of the “Block of Vermin of Heedlessness” for that he turned
aside from the aspect of thy Lord, the Merciful”.
Note G. PP. 55-58 Cd.
JAL-40-2
(9) Nabil: His proper name is Yar-Muhammad son of Ghulam Ali son of Husayn-I Arab of Zarand.
(The Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, PP 317-318). He is commonly known as Mirza (or Mulla)
Muhammad of Zarand. He was surnamed Nabil-i Azam by Baha.
He is the author of the chronological poem of the Events in the life of Baha. He is also the author of
Nabil’s History translated into English and published by hoghi Efendi under the name “The DawnBreakers, Nabil’s Narrative of the early days of Bahai? Revelation” wherein Nabil in Introduction and
Epilogue, speak of high and laudable terms of the BABis “from whom “Abdul Baha Abbas, in his
interview with the noted Turkish writer Suleyman Nazif,” disassociated himself even, fleeing from evil
to good, from the devil to god.”
<Turkish Text>
P. 53 Suleyman Nazif in his book entitled the Nasird-Din-Shah va BABiler.
According to Shoghi Effendi’s introduction P. xxxiv, “Nabil’s chronicle was begun in 1888, when he
had the personal assistance of Mirza Musa [i.e. Aqay-I Kalim, see Note E], the brother of Baha. It was
finished in about a year and half, and parts of the manuscripts were reviewed, some by Baha, and
others by Abdul Baha.” According to the Introduction in the same page “the first half of this narrative,
closing with the expulsion of Baha from Persia, is contained in the present volume.”

JAL-40-3
Note G PP. 55-58 Cd.

13
14

Don’t know what it means
Does this mean Lira?

Apparently Nabil is the bearer of the Point’s works referred to in Note G. According to Mirza Jawad’s
Historical Epitome, P. 25, Materials for the study of the BABi Religion by Prof. Browne” Nabil cast
himself into the sea a little while after the feath of Baha.”
According to Kitab-I Subhi, PP. 116-123, Nabil was implicated in the plot to dispose of Mirza Aqa Jan
of Kashan by foul play.
According to Kashful-Hiyal Vol. I. P. 75, “Abdul Baha Abbas became on bad terms with Nabil. He
cast Nabil into the sea, drowned him with his own hands, or through his partisans, and afterwards
spread the rumour that Nabil had drowned himself.”
According to the memoirse of Baha’s son Mirza Badiullah surnamed the Most Luminous Branch
(Ghusn-I Anwar) by Baha, PP. 21-22, typed copy: One year after Baha’s death, Nabil visited Bahaullah
in Haifa. He was distressed. Nabil said to Badiullah: “I can no longer stay at Acre. The situation there
has deteriorated. By dint of violence, abusive language and cursing, one has to act against his own
faith, has to regard and hold the Most Mighty Branch [Ghusn-I Azam, i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] superior
in station to the Blessed Beauty [Janal-I Mubarak, i.e. Baha] has to write corrupted [versions of] all the
holly writings and epistles, and has to vilify and excommunicate [Baha’s] sons, [Baha’s] words and
[Baha’s] family [i.e. all the members of Baha’s household in opposition to Abdul Baha Abbas], failing
which one is branded as as covenant-breaker [Naqiz] or
40-04
Vacillator [Mutezalzil, i.e. opposed to Abdul Baha Abbas and partisan of Muhammad Ali] and
becomes the object of untold calumnies and falsehoods.” Nabil requested badiullah to find him a
suitable room at the foot of Mount Carmel. He went back to Acre to fetch his things. Nothing was
heard of him for sometime. Later “limbs of his body and his clothing” were discovered near the see
shores at Acre. These were collated together and buried. Abdul Baha Abbas “shed crocodile tears”
during the burial service of Nabil, “although he was exceedingly annoyed with him.”
According to the Hasht Bihisht, P. 303, included among the pretenders who declared themselves to be
“He Whom God Shall Manifest” was Mirza Muhammad Nabil of Zarand called the “tongue-tied’
(Akhras).
In footnote 5 in note W, the Traveller’s Narrative, English Translation, Vol II, Professor Browne
quotes a verse from the poems “attributed to Nabil, and written apparently during the period of his
claim:
“I am the uplifted Tree of Life; I am the hidden and apparent Fruit; I am the king of kings of the Bayan,
and by me is the Bayan exalted.”
Apparently, when $ counsels prevailed, Nabil withdrew his claim to godhood and became a staunch
supporter of Baha.
When however, the two brothers, i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas and Muhammad Ali were at loggerheads
consequent upon Baha’s “occultation”, Nabil, to quote from Hasht-Bihisht, page 310, “bethought
himself of advancing a claim since he had a prior claim in this business.”
JAL-40-5
Notice of the claim was given to “god’s “[Baha’s] sons” who despatched two men who “strangled” that
unfortunate $ Nabil “to death and cast his body into the sea”. After several days a “sputious will and
testament” was produced from Nabil’s rooms wherein it was written that “life had become unlawful”
for Nabil after the death of “the Bloved One of Mankind”. For this reason, Nabil had “sacrificed” his
life in the cause of the Beloved One”.
Now read on:
According to alleged Will & Testament of Abdul Baha, the Bahai World 1926-1928, P.87, “His
Holiness, the Exalted One (the BAB), is the Manifestation of the Unity and Oneness of god and the
Forerunner of the Ancient Beauty” [i.e. Jamal-I Qadam, Baha]. His Holiness the Abha Beauty [Jamal-I
Abha, i.e. Baha] … is the day-spring of His Most Divine Essence”.
“All others are servants unto Him and do his bidding”.
According to the lithographed Will and Testament of Muhammad Ali penned in his own handwriting,
copy to be donated to the library in due course, PP. 12-13, “Total or Universal Manifestation” [Tajalli-i
Kulli] signifies “divinity and godd-hood” (partial or minor manifestation) [Tajalli-I Juz’I] represents
“prophethood and saintship”.
Baha’s total or universal manifestation is the pivot of divine manifestations, which manifests
JAL-40-06
Itself once in every five hundred years repeat four hundred thousand years. And round which all
previous and future dispensations revolve.”

According to the Will and Testament of Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah, typed copy P. 12, “the article of faith of
all the members of Baha’s family “during Baha’s “epiphany” was that “the Point [i.e. the BAB] was
“the Universal Manifestation of Divinity and Completion [Mutamim], appearing once in every five
hundred thousand repeat five five hundred thousand years.”
According to the Caravan, Vol xxvi, No. 4 October, 1960 founded in America by Mirza Ahmad
Sohrab, Abdul Baha’s ex-secretary, and Julie Chamler, who both rejected Shoghi Effendi and retained
their allegience to Baha and Abdul Baha Abbas, the station of the Point and Baha is defined as follows:

JAL-40-7
Sayyid Ali Muhammad the BAB
Stations:

The BAB
(The Gate to the Knowledge of God)
Mahdi
Promised One of Muhammad
Qaim
Manifestation of God for Islam

Mirza Husayn Ali
Stations

Bahaullah
Manifestation of God for the whole world

Page 3: “It must, however, be remembered that the role of the BAB is not limited to that of
annunciator. In himself the BAB was a manifestation of god, even though the manifestation was
limited in time to a brief period and was followed so closely by the greater manifestation which it was
his mission to herald.”
Aqccording to the Hasht Bihisht, P. 315, Baha, “not being content with making himself god, an even a
‘creator of gods’ has conferred the latter title “even on his meanest servants”.
It quotes the Bahai poet Nabil saying:
“Divinity entered the plain of his perfection with lacerated bosom;” and:
“Men say that thou art god, and I am moved to anger; Remove the veil and submit no longer the
disgrace of [mere] god-hood”.

JAL-40-8
According to the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, P. 436: “the month of Shawwal, in the year A.H.
1267 (30 July-28 August A.D. 1851” [i.e. long before Baha’s expulsion from Persia, for which date see
quotations from Nabil’s history, PP. 438-474, in Note E page 12], “witnessed the arrival of Bahaullah
in Karbala.” …………..
“It was during that visit to Karbala that Bahaullah encountered, as he was walking through the streets,
Sheikh Hasan-i-Zanuzi, to whom he confided the secret he was destined to reveal as a later time in
Baghdad. He found him eagerly searching after the promised Husayn, to whom the BAB had so
lovingly referred and whom he had promised he would meet in Karbala.” ……..”From that day, Shaikh
Hassan-i Zanuzi became magnetised by the charm of his newly found master [i.e. Baha], and would,

but for the restraint he was urged to exercise, have proclaimed to the people the return of the Promised
Husayn [Imam Husayn] whose appearance they were awaiting.”
N.B. See the Kashful-Hiyal Vol I, pp. 27-28, and 28-42 for the return of Husayn or Hasan.
41-01
A) Before proceeding to deal with Baha’s ‘date of annunciation’ the following terms or expressions
may be noted:
i) Mubashir (Harbringer or precursor): There is no historical foundation for Baha’s allegation that the
BAB was his Mubashir. This point is fully dealt with in pp. 17-23 in Professor Browne’s Persian
Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf to which reference may be made.
In page 11 in his book entitled Qui est le successeur du BAB, A.L.M. Nicholas says: “<French text> “
P. 13 “……… Sayyid Ali Muhammad ………..<French Text>
41-02
A. Terms and expressions Cd.
i) Mubashir
From A.L.M. Nicholas preface to his French translation of the Persian Bayan, Tome Troisieme, pages
V, VI :

«Il n’est peut-être pas nécessaire d’expliquer point par point les différences qui existent entre
le Bâbisme, le Béhaïsme et l’Abd oul Béhaïsme, et de plus, cela ne rentre guère dans notre
programme. Il me suffira de dire que le Bâb, Prophète, plus grand que Jésus, plus grand que
Mohammed – il le dit et le proclame en termes exprès et réitérés – ne saurait être amoindri par
ceux qui se prétendent ses continuateurs.
A. peu près comme nous, les Musulmans out deux sortes de Prophètes – les grands et les
petits –. Ils les divisent en porteurs de Lois religieuses, de Livres révélés – charé’ – et les
simples annonciateurs. Le Bâb est un charé’, il est inutile de le discuter. Il le dit lui-même et,
d’autre part, l’ouvrage que nous traduisons est une partie de son chéri’at. Donc, le représenter
comme un simple annonciateur de Beha Oullah est un mensonge historique. C’en est un autre
que de prétendre à l’universalisation de la religion du Bib par Béha Oullah (Epître an fils du
Loup et autres es du même genre), Jesus, ou du moins ses continuateurs, ont prétendu établir
une religion catholique, c’est à dire, universelle. Les Musulmans sont du même avis en ce qui
concerne MOHAMMED et il est à peine besoin de dire que le Bâb à son tour, réalisation de
toutes les prophéties antérieures et divines, est catholique. »
“It is perhaps unnecessary to explain the differences which exist between Babism, Bahaism
and Abdul-Bahaism on a point by point basis, moreover it is hardly relevant to our topic. It
suffices to say that Bab is a prophet with a more exalted station than of Jesus and
Muhammad. Bab says this and proclaims it in expressive and reiterated terms. His station
could not be reduced to a herald by those who claimed it.
Muslims believe in two types of prophets, the major and minor prophets. They divide them
into those who carry religious laws and reveal books calling them Share’ and those who are
simply Heralds.
Bab is a Share’, it is needless to discuss this. He says this himself and in addition to that the
work that we are translating is part of his sound Shariat (religion).
Therefore, to represent it as a mere Herald of Bahaullah is a historical lie. Another claim is
the universalisation of Bab’s religion (Epistle to the Son of the Wolf and its kind), Jesus or at
least its Continuers by Bahaullah claiming to establish a universal religion such as the
Catholic religion.
Muslims are of the same opinion with regards to Muhammad. It is hardly necessary to
say that Bâb in his turn is the realization of all former and divine prophecies, (and his religion
is universal one) such as the Catholic religion.”
41-03
ii) Qiyamat-i Quran (The resurrection of the Quran), The Persian Bayan, Unity II, Chapter 7:
“And from the moment of the “manifestation” of the Tree of the Bayan [i.e. the BAB] until its
disappearance is the Resurrection of the prophet of god, which god hath promised in the Quran;

whereof the beginning was after two hours and eleven minutes had passed of the night of the fifth of
Jamadi-ul-Awwal, A.H. 1260, which was the year of 1270 of the mission [of Muhammad].
[This was] the first day of the Resurrection of the Quran, and till the disappearance of the Tree of Truth
[i.e. the BAB] the Resurrection of the Quran continueth. For of nothing doth the Resurrection occur till
it reaches the stage of perfection. The perfection of the religion of Islam was consummated ere the
beginning of this manifestation, and from the beginning till the moment of disappearance the fruits of
the Tree of Islam, whatever they are, will become apparent. And the Resurrection of the Bayan is from
the (first) appearance of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’; for today the Bayan is in the stage of seed
but at the beginning of the manifestation of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’ the perfection of the
Bayan.
It will be apparent, when He shall gather the fruits of the Trees which have been planted.”

41-4
iii) Man-Yuzhiruhullah (He Whom God Shall Manifest) or Man-Yazhar (He Who Shall Appear), This
is the Promised One of the Bayan. This point is fully dealt with in pp. 27-31 in Professor Browne’s
Persian Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf to which reference may be made.
See also A.L.M. Nicholas referred to in A4) supra.
10) Ghiyath and Mustaghath: The sum of the letters in these words is 1511 and 2001 respectively
according to the Abjad notation. $ 1511 or 2001 years must elapse between the time of the BAB and
the advent of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest”, the Promised One of the Bayan. The Persian Bayan,
Unity II, Chapter 16, Unity II, Chapter 17 and Unity III, Chapter 15.
See also pp. 17-23 in Professor Browne’s Persian Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf.
V) Sana-at-Tisa’ (The Ninth Year):
The Arabic Bayan, Unity vi, Chapter 15, A.L.M. Nichola’s translation:
“<French Text>”
This interpretation is negatived by A(ii) supra.
For Qaim and Qayyum see my letter of the 12th February 1962, see also the Persian Bayan, Unity I,
Chapter 15.
41-5
vi) Ba’d Hin (after a while)
In his Persian Dalail-I-Sabai (The Seven Proofs), the BAB quotes, among other things as a proof of his
manifestation, Sheikh Ahmad of Ihsa, the founder of the Sheikhi school, see my letter of the 25th June
1962, as saying to his disciples with reference to the signs of the manifestation, “you will know the
news of it after a while” (sa-ta-lamanna nabaihi ba’d hin).
vii) Sana-at-Tis’a (l’annee15 9): Liqa-al-allah (meeting with god).
Le Beyan Persan trandauit par A.L.M Nicholas, Tomme Troiseme, Preface vi-x:

L’argument, tiré do l’Epitre au fils du Loup, me paraît bien précaire. Le Bâb y annonce, diton, l’apparition du nouveau Prophète pour l’année 9. Evidemment les Béhahais tirent leur
argument du l’Epître du Bâb à Mollah Bagher. Cette épître aurait, dit la légende, été écrite en
réponse à une lettre envoyée par ce Mollah Bagher au Bâb sur les instances de Mollah
Houssein Bouchrouyehi, qui ne comprenait rien aux contradictions dont fourmille l’œuvre du
Bâb précisément au sujet de la date de l’apparition du nouveau Prophète.
Quoi qu’il on soit de ce que l’on raconte, cette lettre est loin d’être aussi explicite que l’ou
veut bien le dire, Elle commence ainsi : « En vérité j’ai entendu ton écrit, qui contenait un
joyau, et s’il ne s’y fût pas trouvé, je n’eusse pas répondu à ta lettre. Actuellement je ne donne
pas la réponse qui est contenue dans le monde de l’intime (je ne réponds que suivant ton
intelligence) et combien est plus grande la mention du personna,ge au sujet duquel tu as
interrogé. En vérité, cette question est trop élevée, trop précieuse et trop haute pour que les
cœurs aient le pouvoir de la connaître ; et que les esprits puissent se prosterner devant elles,
que les âmes puissent eu faire la louange et que les corps puissent décrire sa luminosité.
Combien donc est grande ta question, et combien petite ton existence !.. »
« Si tu a’eus pas été de la première Unité, je t’eusse châtié..... »

15

It must be Arabic, but can’t work it out.

«... Et, en vérité, Celui que Dieu doit manifester ne peut être indiqué par mon indication, non
plus que par ce qui a été mentionné dans le Béyân..... »
« Donc, dans la mesure où tu as connu Dieu, connais Celui que Dieu doit manifester, et sache
qu’il est trop haut, trop grand pour être connu par autre que lui-même, ou pour être indiqué
par une indication de Sa, Créature! Et en vérité, moi, qui suis moi, je suis le premier esclave
qui lui ai donné ma
foi !….
«..... Comment donc le pourrais-je mentionner ? puisque tout ce qui le pourrait mentionner
n’est qu’une mention de la part de ses créatures..... En vérité, Celui que Dieu doit
manifester..... ne peut être mentionné par une mention..... »
Excerpts from the BAB’s epistle as quoted as follows:

« Et cependant Dieu, dans le Qoran, a donné a tous la promesse du jour du jugement,, car
c’est le jour où tous viennent en présence de Dieu, ce qui est venir en présence de l’arbre de
la vérité. Tous bénéficient de la vue de Dieu, ce qui est le voir Lui. En effet, se trouver en
présence de l’Essence très sainte est impossible, et l’on ne peut même imaginer de la voir.
Tout ce qui est possible comme présence et comme vue retourne au premier arbre. »
41-06

« En vérité toi, si par hasard tu assistes au jour de son apparition, et si tu le connais par
l’enseignement des oulémas du Béyan, tu ne le connaîtras pas comme il doit être connu... »
«Donc, en vérité, le jour de Sa manifestation est le dernier jour relativement à cette vie
première. Et, si le livre de Celui que Dieu doit manifester n’existait pas, le mien ne serait pas
descendu; si non être n’existait, Dieu ne m’aurait pas manifesté ! Et, en vérité, je suis Lui et
Lui est moi !.... »
«….. Il est à espérer que dans l’année huit, tu vois le jour le Sa manifestation et ce sera, en ce
moment, se trouver eu présence de Dieu ! Si tu ne le vois pas au commencement, tu le verras
à la fin de l’année. Je dis cela, mais sois convaincu que l’ordre est grand au-dessus de toute
grandeur !
Depuis le Promis de Jesus fils de Marie passèrent 1270 ans jusqu’an jour du Béyan et les
croyants aux Evangiles dorment en attendant ! Et c’est cela et non autre chose : viendra à toi
celui au sujet duquel tu as interrogé sur la mention de sa, grandeur et de son ordre.
Il viendra et les gens du Béyan répéteront cette parole ! et ils ne comprendront par sa
manifestation et ils ne donneront pas leur foi à ce Dieu qui les a créés dans la manifestation
précédente..... »
« En vérité..... Sois témoin, oh dieu, que par cette lettre j’ai pris la promesse de la venue de
Celui que tu dois manifester, je l’ai prise de toutes choses avant de prendre la promesse de
mon propre vélayet. Tu es mon Témoin, et cela suffit ! »
« Oh lettre (du Vivant) prends le serment de son vélayet; de tous ceux qui sont du Béyan, de
ceux que tu connais, que tu sais. Prends d’eux un écrit, et c’est là et non autre chose ce que
j’ai commandé dans le Béyan. Quiconque écrit, croit à Lui avant sa manifestation. Donc
préviens quiconque tu peux prévenir affin que sa mention soit consignée dans cet écrit
jusqu’au jour de Sa, manifestation..... » Je livre ce texte aux réflexions du lecteur. Je ne le
commente ni ne le traduis en aucune façon. Libre à lui d’estimer qu’il offre suffisamment de
clartés pour que l’on y puisse accrocher des prétentions au Prophétisme.
41-07

Viii
Unit II Chqpter
Et cependant Dieu, dans le Qorân, a donné à tous la promesse du jour du jugement,
car c'est le jour où tous viennent en présence de Dieu, ce qui est venir en présence de
l'arbre de la vérité. Tous bénéficient de la vue de Dieu, ce qui est le voir Lui. En effet,
se trouver en présence de l'Essence très sainte est impossible, et l'on ne peut même

imaginer de la voir. Tout ce qui est possible comme présence et comme vue retourne
au premier arbre.
And however God, in Qorân, gave to all the promise of the day of the judgement, because it is the day
when all come in the presence of God, which is to come in the presence of the tree from the truth. All
profit from the sight of God, which is to see it Indeed Him, to be in the presence of the very holy
Gasoline ¬est impossible, and one cannot even imagine to see it. All that is possible like presence and
as seen turns over to the first tree.
Ix
Unit II Chqpter XVI

Sinon, si vous entendez dire qu'une manifestation s'est produite avec des versets
(semblables à ceux) d'auparavant, et cela au nombre de Dieu (c'est-à-dire en 1511) 16
entrez-y tous. S'il ne s'est pas manifesté à cette époque, cela aura lieu après 2001
If not, if you heard that a manifestation occurred with verses (similar to those) of before, and that with
the number of [of the name of] God [aqyath] (i.e. in 1511) enter all into His presence. If it did not
happen at that time, it will take place by 2001.
I do not know how Béhahis explain this passage nor if they explain it.
Unit II Chapter 17

S’il se manifeste dans le chiffre 1511, et que tous entrent (dans sa religion), pas un
seul ne restera dans le feu; s'il faut attendre jusqu'à 2001, et qu'alors tous entrent, pas
un seul ne restera dans le feu; tous devenant changés en lumière.
If He (Whom God Will Make Manifest) shall appear in the number of Ghiyath and all shall enter in,
one one shall remain in Fire. If He tarry until [the number of] Mustaghath, all shall enter in, not one
shall remain in the Fire, but all shall be transformed into His Light".
Unit II Chqpter XVI
X

Ainsi ceux qui ont le regard subtil, ont écrit dans leurs propres livres que la
manifestation de l'Altesse est celle de la Vérité demandée, dont il est question dans le
hadis de Qoméïl.
Thus those which have the subtle glance, wrote in their own books that the manifestation of the
Highness is that of the required Truth, in question in the hadis of Qoméïl.
41-08
xi) The Tradition of Kumayl Ibn Ziyad, one of Imam Ali’s chosen disciples. He once demanded of Ali
to explain “what is truth?”. The tradition as set forth in BAB’s Persian Dalaili-Saba (The Seven Proofs)
is as follows:

# 8 ‫ و در‬.
D E ‫ و در‬.

‫ھ نظ ر‬
‫د‬
‫ظ ر‬
‫ا‬
!‫ ده در ا‬# # ‫» و‬
‫ رة‬/‫ ا‬0 ‫ل‬123‫ ت ا‬5 * 67( ‫ در * اول‬.‫ا* ( در & ) ( ' د &ه ای‬
‫ ل‬,.& 3‫ ا‬9CB3 9 & :‫ و در را = !<ب ا‬-3‫) ھ > ا‬3 8 ‫ @ م و در‬3‫ ا‬5A ‫ ھ م و‬3‫ ا‬5
« .‫ ی‬7# ‫ ب‬F ‫ دی و‬G# ‫ د ھ رب‬E H‫ اھ د & ا‬E ‫زل را‬:‫ ا‬J A ‫ ق‬/‫ را‬# .

The Truth is: “the revelation of the splendours of divine majesty without a sign.”
“The effacement of the conjectured and the clearing of the known.”
“The rending of the veil by the triumph of the majesty.”
“The attraction of the Divine Unity through the apprehension of its oneness.”
“Al light shining forth from the mourning of Eternity” [and irradiating the temples of the Unity]”.
The BAB quotes this tradition is support of his manifestation and its development. Mirza Jani of
Kashan, in his Nuqtatul-Kaf, associates ‘a light shining forth from the Morning of Eternity and
irradiating the temple of the Unity” with the appearance, and appointment of Subh-I Azal as successor
to the Point [i.e. the BAB]. By the Point himself, by whom he was entitled “The Morning of Eternity”
[Subh-I Azal] in allusion to the promise connected with this year in the tradition.
42-01
A) Terms and expressions Cd
Tome $ xii) LC Bayan, Unity III, Chapter 8, P. 35:
16

Je ne sais comment les Béhahis expliquent ce passage ni s'ils l'expliquent.

« Les noms excellents sont les preuves de son Paradis, et les noms qui ne sont pas excellents,
qui sont ensevelis dans le feu, sont les spectacles de ce feu. Et ces noms excellents voient au
moment même que le Sultan du Béyân est le spectacle de son nom4 »
“The excellent names are the evidence of its Paradise, and the names which are not excellent, which is
buried in fire, are the spectacles of this fire. And these excellent names even see at the time as the
Sultan of Béyân is the spectacle of his name”
Footnote 4 : C’est en se basant sur cette port,e que les Ezèlis rejettent Béha, disant qu’il doit y
avoir au moins un Sultan Béyâni avant la nouvelle manifestation divine.
It is while being based on this port, E which Ezèlis reject Béha, saying that there must be at least a
Béyâni Sultan before the new divine demonstration.
It is on the basis of this excerpt that Azalis reject Baha by stating that there must be at least a Bayani
Sultan (ruler) before the next divine manifestation.
« Comme il y a une sentence 1, qui est digne que la pureté soit mentionnée sur elle et sur ce qui la
démontre 2 comme des soleils réfléchis dans des miroirs du soleil de sa bienveillance, Dieu les a toutes
1 mises à son ombre et a permis leur pureté.
F.N # 1 : 1. Celle dont tire son origine, Celui que Dieu doit manifester.
F.N # 1 : 2. La semence des lettres du Vivant. »
The summary of this door is that: Like there is a sentence 1, which is worthy that the purity is
mentioned on it and on what shows 2 like suns reflected in mirrors of the sun of its benevolence, God
A all 3 settings in its shade and allowed their purity.
F.N#1 : That from which its origin draws, That that God must express
F.N#2 : Seed of the letters of the Alive one.
F.N#3 : All the seeds, i.e. the human seed All the seeds, i.e. the human seed
When leading BABis argues, among other things, that Baha’s claim to ‘Supreme Manifestation’ was
vitiated by this specific provision in the Bayan on the grounds that his manifestation took place when
he was fifty years old, Baha’s excuse was that it was not for his “Creature” [i.e. the BAB] to challenge
his “Creator” [i.e. Baha].

JAL-42-02
Yet, in a passage in his Lawh-I Nasir, Baha declares that he is the Nuqta-I Ula (The First Point, i.e. the
BAB) returned again, and this manner of speaking he carries so far as to speak of the BAB’s execution
at Tabriz as one of his own experiences: “It hath been witnessed what amongst of cruelty nd perverity
was shown by the people of error, so that none can reckon it but god; until at length they suspended my
glorious body in the air, and wounded it with the bullets of malice and hatred, until my spirit returned
to the Supreme Companion (Rafiq-I A’la), and gazed on the Most Beautous Garment (Qamis-I Abha).
And not one reflected wherefore it was that I accepted this infury from my own servants, for, had they
reflected, they would not have remained veiled from my beauty in my second manifestation by reason
of a name amongst my names.”
In the same Lawh-I Nasir, Baha calls himself ‘Malik-I Sifat’ (The Lord of Attributes = The Divine
Essence made Manifest) and reproves those who are “veiled by a name amongs my names” [i.e. Subh-I
Azal], whom I created by a single letter.”
In another passage in the Lawh-I Nasir, Baha speaking of himself in the third person, says: “O People
of the Bayan, have you not considered that for twebty years [which expression thrws light on Baha’s
date of ‘manifestation’] he has stood up by himself against the enemies?”
In another passage Baha says: “I revealed all the heavenly books in the glorious language of [Divine]
might
JAL-42-03
<Farsi Text>
Lawh-I Nasir was composed by Baha after he hd put forward his claim, the nature of which is of the
utmost possible magnitude and is stated in the most uncompromising manner.

The relevant passage concerning Subh-I Azal is quoted hereunder, pp. 96-97, the Traveller’s Narrative,
English Translation, Vol II, by Professor Browne:
<Farsi text>
“Had they reflected, they would not on my second manifestation have been veiled from my Beauty by
a name amongst my names. This is the state of these men and their rank and station! Cease to mention
them and what flows from their pens and comes forth from their mouths. Although I commanded all
my servants in the tablets of the Bayan not to continue heedless of my subsequent manifestation or be
veiled by the veils of names and signs from the Lord of Attributes, consider now, not satisfied with
being veiled, how many stones of doubt they cast without cessation or interruption of the tree of my
hidden glory! And again this did not suffice till a name amongst my names, whom I created by a word,
and on whom I bestowed life with a breath, arose in war against my Beauty.”

JAL-42-04
When challenged by the specific provision in the “purity of semen”, as is laid down in the Bayan,
which Baha declares it as the BAB’s “Primordial Book” (Ummul-Kitab, i.e. the original scripture,
before it is translated by the process of revelation into any human tongue), Baha, the “Completion’,
reproves the BAB, his alleged “harbringer”.
There is however a vein of humour in his Lawh-I Nasir when he declares he is the BAB
returned.Forgetful of this vein of humour, Baha is found in a paroxysm of anger when his followers
dare put him on the same level and footing as the BAB. Here is the text:
Risala-I Janab-I Jud [apparently Mirza Jawad of Qazwin, author of Historical Epitome, Materials for
the Study of BABi Religion by professor Browne, and surnamed Jud by Baha in reply to Hazrat-I
Samandar, A.H. 1315; page 54:
<Arabic text>

JAL-42-05
xiii) cd
The quotation is from a letter addressed by Baha to one Ismullah [Mahdi] wherein Baha asserts that he
was pleased “to endow an-Nabil before Ali17 [i.e. Sayyid Ali Muhammad the BAB] with speech to bear
witness to my power. My sovereignty and my divine greatness among people.”
It was sheer error on the part of Baha’s “ignorant followers to associate” the BAB “with Baha and
thereby “enact disorders”. The BAB “whom I created by a word from me.” Baha’s followers should
not give peers to god as “verily your lord [i.e. Baha] has not adopted any companion, or partner, or
associate, or peer …. For himself”.
Baha’s ante-manifestation writings are couched in the language of humility, submissiveness and
servitude towards the BAB and his appointed successor Subh-I Azal with denunciation and
condemnation of those who defected from the BAB’s cause. The contrast between his antemanifestation and post-manifestation writings is very striking and interesting.
Nine years after his arrival in Baghdad on expulsion from Iran, Baha, in reply to allegation of his
opostasy from the BAB and his appointed successor Subh-I Azal, issued flat denials of the allegations
and reiterated his allegience to the BAB and Subh-I Azal.
Baha denied having sent out “any messenger to prevent the people from writing the Adored [i.e. the
BAB or Subh-I Azal] and to summon them to worship the $ and Taguth”.

JAL-42-06
xiii) Baha also “denied” having said that “the Bayan was abrogated, that the Mirrors thereof [i.e. those
who manifested themselves from the Point, Le Bayan Persan, Tome $ (Unity II, Chapter 8), P. 33 are
false, and that its [i.e. Bayan’s] prescriptions were obsolete. I laid no claim to any mission or authority
that would have necessitated the despatch of messengers ……….. My tongue, my heart, my soul, my
spirit, my body, my flesh, my brain, my bone, and my skin, bear witness that there is no god but HE;
that Ali Muhammad [i.e. the Point] is the Manifestation of His inspired words ……… and that verily
we all prostrate ourselves in worship before his Face [Wajh, Subh-I Azal, title conferred on him by the
Point, the Epistle in page 10 in the Collection entitled “The Epistles of the Point and His Amanuensis
Sayyid Hysayn] ………” My god smash the mouth of any people of the Bayan who mentions that the
Book [i.e. the Bayan] is void”.
17

It must be Ali before Nabil.

………. “All that was revealed [by the Point] were collected together and transcribed in the blessed
handwriting [of Subh-I Azal].” ………….. “Save servitude, this servant is not bearer of any mission.
…… ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ will surely appear in Mustaqath ……. This servant is proud to
own the duet($) of the blessed comings (or goings) of that Most Great Luminary [i.e. Subh-I Azal], and
every ground is beloved by this servant because it is the place on which the blessed feat [of Subh-I
Azal] tread.

42-07
…………. My ultimate goal is the ground under his [Subh-I Azal’s] foot, and Baha’s body, the ground
on which [Subh-I Azal’s] feet to tread.” Excerpted from Baha’s letter no. I, see infra.
“As His Holiness the First Point and the Most Glorious $ [i.e. the BAB] has stated ……….. he [i.e.
Subh-I Azal] is the Pride of the theophanies …… paramountly distinguished by himself ………
Endevour so that you do not continue heedless of and lag begind his [i.e. Subh-I Azal’s] injunctions
and prohibitions. This frail and lowly servant is at a loss how to carry out the terms of servitude and to
raise aloft the banner of service. Every moment I prostrate myself on every ground in worship of his
[i.e. Subh-I Azal’s] blessed appearance, with every language, I seek, and hope for, his [i.e. Subh-I
Azal’s] mercy ………. I am nothing but a contemptible slave in his [i.e. Subh-I Azal’s] court.
…………. The eyes of this slave are [on the alert] …….. expectant of mercy. This body [i.e. Baha] is
grovelling in the dust of abjection, in expectation of grace. …………… Is there any existence for a
slave worth while to mention in the presence of the Manifestation?! What state is there for nonexistence in the presence of the Manifestation of the sign of pre-existence?! What mention is there of a
mortal before the throne of Immortal?! …….. What rank is there for bond-slave in the eyes of his
Master?”
JAL-42-08
“ ………. I have one expectation from the people of the Bayan and one request to make from them:
They should not mention me neither with love nor enmity nor with hatred or aversion; God’s pleasure
may lie therein … The Kitab-I Nur (The Book of Light composed by Subh-I Azal) has not yet been
returned.”
Baha pressed for the return of the Book and spoke highly of it. For the text of this letter see pp. 38-41,
the Tanbihun-Naimin.
“…… Sing, applaud and say that “verily there is no god, but He; Verily Ali before Muhammad [i.e. the
BAB, see page 114] is the Very Self of God … Muhammad before Ali [i.e. the BAB]18 is the $ of the
Cause of God; …… and the Living Apparition [Tal’at al Hayy, i.e. Subh-I Azal, see glossary attached
to my letter of 25th June 1962] is the sanctuary; and the Living Letters [see glossary referred to above]
are the first who believed in god and in His verses; and verily we all adhere thereto.” Excerpted from
Baha’s letter no. 54, see infra.

‫& و‬#‫ ده ا‬# = ‫& و دم را از دت @ د‬#‫ ر ا‬: #‫ آ‬M# 2 ‫ ده د ( دو ر* ل از ا‬# (‫ ذ‬# ‫» در اول‬
‫&ه و ا ی او ط & و ا م او‬/ P-# ‫& ( ن‬#‫ ا‬CH & @ ‫ از ل ا‬Q ‫@ ذ‬# ‫& و‬#‫ ده ا‬# ‫ ت ا‬0 ‫دت ؟ و ط‬
‫ ام ( ا ج‬/‫&ا‬#
‫ و! ا ی و‬T ‫ * ده ام و ھ‬C# ‫ ر* ل د ری‬UH ‫ ا &ه ھ‬#‫ اول آ‬7H '‫ط‬
ٌ
* # ‫ ام‬-#‫ د دا‬C ‫ ده ام و ا &اد ﷲ را‬/ ‫ د و ا ی او را @&وم‬E U! ‫ د‬UX ‫ م‬Y‫& ا‬A
‫ د و‬/ ‫ر* ل‬
# -( & \ ‫ دت‬/ ‫ و‬.... &#‫ د‬# ‫ اج‬E‫&ی ا‬-! ‫ ا‬Y ‫ از وط‬Z ‫> د‬3 ( [#‫< آ‬E‫د را @& از ا‬
‫<رد ( ا‬G
‫ و‬Y ‫آ‬
& 5 ' ً ‫ ھ وان‬:‫ ا‬3‫ ا‬: ّ# ‫و ! &ی‬
‫ و ؟‬-! ‫و ]ادی و رو و‬
‫و‬
ٌ ‫ و‬Y‫ذا‬
‫ل‬U# '( ‫ ! * !&ون و‬3 '( ّ#‫ و ا‬# - M `3‫ & ذات ا‬7 Z ‫و ورا‬
:‫ ا‬a ‫> * ن‬3< & 7 ‫ و‬Y ( ‫ل‬U
‫&ا‬E & # ‫ ( ب‬P-# (‫ از اھ' ن ذ‬-C# H‫&ا ا‬d Z- ‫ و‬... ‫ن‬
‫ه‬
‫ ء‬7#‫ (' ا‬#‫ و ا‬M ‫ ر‬: c ‫&ه‬
‫ ات‬-3‫ا‬
'(
‫ &ی‬M : ‫ ن‬3‫ &ه ف ا‬Y‫<ی رو و ذا‬3‫ &ه را و ا ا ( &ه را ا ا‬H ‫ & دھ ن‬7
‫ ن در‬H& ‫& و ا‬#‫` ل د‬7 ‫ ل و ! ه‬gC ‫ و‬DC# ‫ د ای‬E ‫ی‬
‫&ا را ( ! = در‬E Z
& .... ‫رض‬:‫وا‬
‫& و‬/ & ! ‫& و‬/ / # ‫ رک‬id ‫ و ھ‬Z ‫ د‬# = ! ‫&ا‬E ‫د‬U# ‫&ه د از‬/ ‫ زل‬# [#‫&ت ا &اء ! = آ‬/
0 :‫و‬
‫ ا‬#‫ آ‬# 8 ‫ و‬.... ‫ د‬# ‫&ارد و ا ط‬# ‫ع‬1‫&ا ا &ی اط‬E U! ( Z ‫ د‬# gC
U ‫ و‬Z ‫ را اط اف * د‬k@
‫ و‬M‫ر‬:c ‫هﷲ‬
‫ ب ن‬3‫ ا‬E‫ & آ‬7Y ‫ و‬... ‫ د‬# ‫' ا ی‬
‫ د‬U! ‫ ھ‬:‫ ا‬3‫ ا‬: ‫<ی‬3‫& وﷲ ا‬
‫ و (' ارض‬Z ‫ ّ ا‬# ‫ اب &وم رک آن‬Y &
‫ر‬d ‫&ا‬
‫&ا ( ا‬d Z- .... ‫ ` ث‬- 3‫ه ﷲ ا‬
‫؟‬
3‫؟ ا = ؟ و ش ا‬
0 ‫ و‬... ‫ د‬7 = ‫ ' ؟ ان ؟ رک وا‬5 ( ‫& ز ا‬
‫د ا‬U# - 5
JAL-43-1
Text of the quotations extracted from the collection containing letters during the Baghdad period:
Baha’s
18

This doesn’t make sense.

Letter No 1:
Farsi text

JAL-43-2
Baha’s letter no. 46.

‫ ر و‬E:‫ ه ا‬2 3 & C ‫ ن‬7 ‫ ر &اه در‬3‫ا اش ا‬
‫ و ط @ ا روح‬3‫ او‬F # [# \ »
‫ د‬2
‫ &* ا‬9 * 3‫' ا‬B 3‫ & و‬3‫&ة ا‬, ‫! اھ ا‬
‫ه ا‬Uّ ‫ ط‬- 3‫ ا‬o 3 ‫ ر و‬:‫ ه ا‬C 3
‫ ل و‬p ‫ ح و ا‬/‫& از ا‬#‫ د‬C ‫ ات‬-3‫رض وا‬:‫ ا‬c3 E ‫&ﷲ‬
‫ ت‬# ,/
‫ & و‬Y‫ &* ؟ ظ را‬3‫ل ا‬
& # # ‫ اھ ز‬# ‫ & و از اوا و‬7# ' 0 ‫ ن‬7(‫ ی ر‬q‫ & ( از ر‬# @* ... ‫ل‬1!‫ اک و ا‬/‫&* & از ا‬
‫ا ازم در‬
&E Z ‫ و‬Z ‫آ‬
‫ د‬i ‫ ا‬/ ‫ از‬# G\ ( Z3U ‫ و‬6 E ( ‫&ا‬d Z- #‫ دا‬# &
‫ا‬
' 3‫& ذ‬
G Z - # ... ‫ ا‬# 7 ‫ ر‬Z ‫ و ا‬Z * ‫ ن‬-3 ' ‫ ن را و‬7(‫ر‬
@ ‫(' آن (' ارض * !&م ط‬
‫ ک‬E 3‫& ذ‬-! ‫ و ا‬... *‫ا‬
‫ر‬
* X ‫ ف‬E ‫ ا &ه از‬Z7\ ‫ و‬... ‫ ن‬7*&
* ‫در‬
&A
‫ن ا* از ای &م‬r/ \ ‫ د‬/ (‫ ئ ظ ر و ؟ ا* ( ذ‬Y 0 ‫ از ای‬2( ‫ ن ﷲ‬5 * ...
‫د‬U# ‫ک در‬
‫ از ای‬\ ‫ و‬...
‫ در ش‬# ‫ از‬- (‫ &م و \ ذ‬3‫( آ ت ا‬
)
Y‫ ء‬Y
‫ م ن‬3‫ا‬
3‫ ا‬3 @ 3‫ &ر ا‬3‫ ا‬Q Z - ‫ ا‬Z8 Z
& *‫ = دارم و ا‬Y > ‫ از اھ' ن‬... >3
‫و‬
Q C( ‫& و‬/ ‫ در ا‬Z‫&اھ‬E ‫ ی‬q‫ ر‬H ‫ ه‬3 : ‫ و‬k` 3 : ‫ د و‬3 : ‫ و‬M53 : #‫ <( و‬:
‫ ر‬- &
C# ‫& اھ ل‬/ `3 ‫( & و‬rY ‫ ر‬‫& ا‬7# ‫ ر ار* ل‬# ‫ً ( ب‬1 (‫و‬
Z8 ‫ &ا‬/ ‫ ! د‬3 Z
&
‫ م آن <ول‬Y‫ در ا‬o
@* &
‫ ات ﷲ‬A & @3‫زم ا* از ای (' اھ' ن ! ب ز ا‬:
Z #‫( ل ا‬
id3‫ ا‬(‫ّ م ان ا‬
‫ ظ و آ ت‬C5 Uّ ‫ ب‬3 #‫رض ا‬:‫ ات وا‬-3‫رب ا‬
‫ @&ون‬BY ‫ &س‬3‫رات ا‬
3‫@ ! ن و ا‬Y ‫<ب‬23‫ * ات ا‬3‫@ &ون ا‬Y ‫ ان‬M53 ‫ ا ؤه‬Z8 ‫ ن‬Y ‫ @ ن ان‬F -Y
«
JAL-43-3
Baha’s letter no. 54 addressed to Mirza Jawad of Kashan:

‫و‬

ّ ‫ و‬6(
ّ ‫رن و‬
ّ ‫ و‬0ّ 6 -3‫ ن ا‬- ‫» و‬
3‫ ا‬# ( ‫ & ذات ﷲ و‬5 ' ً
#‫ ھ و ا‬:‫ ا‬3‫& ا‬3 # ‫دف‬
] ‫@ اول‬3‫و ون ا‬
3‫ ا‬#‫ ﷲ و ا‬Z
@3‫ ا‬9@ ‫&ا و ط‬3‫ ّ ا‬Y‫؟ ا ﷲ و ذا‬
' 5
ّ
ّ
‫ ن‬- Y '( #‫ و ا‬Y v ‫ و‬Q

xiv) In his Will and Testament during the Baghdad period penned in the handwriting of Mirza Husayn,
the Calligraphist, known as Mushking Qalam, or Mirza Hasan of Khurassan [Mirza Jawad], with its
preamble and conclusion in the handwriting of Baha himself , reproduced in fac-simile at the end of the
Tanbihun-Naimin [the Awakening of the Sleepers], Baha once again re-iterates his allegiance of fealty
to the Point and his appointed successor Subh-I Azal:
“……. Hear the call of the Holy Leaf [i.e. Subh-I Azal] ………… speaking unto you from behind the
veils [Subh-I Azal lived in seclusion in accordance with the Point’s instructions] ………… He [i.e.
Subh-I Azal] is the One whom god [i.e. the Point] hath appointed as Qayyum [self-existent, title by
which Subh-I Azal is addressed by the Point in the nomination document in page 1 of the Collection
entitled the Epistles of the Point and His amanuensis
JAL-43-4
Sayyis Husayn] “unto …. He is the Eternal [Azaliyya] liminary ……… whomsoever turns aside from
him doth perish …… He is the White Hand [alluding to the miracle of Moses] in the Mount …. For
Israel of the Bayan …… There is no god but He, the Living, [Al-Hayy, title conferred on Subh-I Azal
by the Point, see flossary attached to my letter of 25th June 1962], the powerful, the self-Existent [alQayyum, see supra]. …. God has ordained in the Book that after the Remainder [Az-Zikr, the name by
which the Point calls himself in the nomination document see supra] one sgould turn himself to the
Qiblah of the Cause [i.e. authority is to vest in Subh-I Azal as dictated in the nomination document, see
supra] ….. ‘O People of the Bayan, can anyone produce verses like unto those revealed in the Book [of
Bayan]? ….. Verily the Remnant of god [Baqiyyatullah, one of the titles of the absent Imam, see my
letter of 25th June 1963; this title was assumed by the Point] in these days is the Aparition of light
[Tal’at-anNur].
Nur is one of the titles conferred on Subh-I Azal by the Point, supra A(xi), p. 89. In his Dalail-I Sab’a
(The Seven Proofs) the Point points out that the term ‘light’ in the passage of the prophet’s tradition
43-05

Of Kumayl “and in the first year thou shall see (fulfilled), there shone forth a light from the Morning of
Eternity, if thou dost not thyself flee away and become troubled,” refers to Imam Husayn, son of AliIbn Abi Talib, as the light is like a lamp that burns itself to illuminate others.
Hence the designation of Subh-I Azal as Nur (light), or Husayn, and the Morning of Eternity by the
Point.
The prophetic tradition of Kumayl concerning the events of five successive years of the Point’s
dispensation is quoted by Baha in his Kitab-I Iqan, in support of the Point’s divine mission, composed
by him in his pre-‘manifestation’ days. This accounts for Baha’s post-‘manifestation’ claim that he is
Husayn returned. See P. 80 notes, pp. 28-42, the Kashful-Hiyal, vol I, and pp. 28-30, the TanbihunNaimin. And the expected Remnant [i..e. He Whom God Shall Manifest] will appear in Mustaghath …
Bear witness that I am a servant who has believed in god and in the Apparition of Light [Tal’at-I Nur,
see supra]. …….. Have you ever heard anything from me but words of servitude? ……. And Reminder
[i.e. the Point, see supra] be upon you and upon those who prostrate themselves in worship of the Face
of God [i.e. Subh-I Azal, title conferred on him by the Point, see Epistle in page 10 of the Epistles of
the Point and his amanuensis
JAL-43-6
Conclusion of Baha’s Will and Testament penned in his own handwriting: “Also god hath appointed
Joseph the Light [Yousuf-an-Nur, i.e. Subh-I Azal] as the king of Truth in the Metropolis of Bayan;
But the people are dead within the veil of their selves. Verily, this document [i.e. Baha’s Will and
Testament] is a proof of my servitude to His Face [i.e. Subh-I Azal, see supra], if you know it.
Otherwise destroy it in the Shat [al-Arab] perchance by contingent world many believe in the verses of
god, their lord.”
XV) The question in A(XIII) and (XIV) are specimens of Baha’s writings during the Baghdad period
and reference to the Point and his appointed successor Subh- Azal, Baha’s benefactor, whom Baha, in
his $ of post-manifestation, claims “to have created by a word and on whom he gave life with “breath”,
he “grovelled in the dust of abasement”, “craving’ their “favours and graces.”
The “Kitab-I Nur” which Baha pressed for its “return” is Subh-I Azal’s work wherein Subh-I Azal
appointed Baha to administer his affair on his behalf and this delegation of authority is quoted
JAL-43-7
In Baha’s letter reproduced in p. 88 in the Tanbihun-Naimin.
The circumstances in which Baha went to voluntary exile in Suleymaniyya soon after his arrival at
Baghdad on expulsion from Iran, and in which he was brought back to Baghdad at the behest of Subh-I
Azal, forgiven and pardoned by him, are fully set forth in my letter of May 6th 1924, May 18th, 1962,
and May 30th 1962, to which reference may be made. In the letter of May 18th 1962, a quotation was
made from Subh-I Azal’s letter addressed to Mirza Muhammad Husayn, Mutawalli Bashi of Qum,
concerning the circumstances of flight and recall of Baha. In the other portion of the letter to Mutawalli
Bashi, Subh-I Azal deals with the delegation of authority and says that he “instructed Baha “with the
mantle of guidance directing the BABis to follow Baha in the furtherance of “Subh-I Azal’s “mission
as the Point’s appointed successor as Baha had turned over a new leaf and “had turned aside from
being vicious.” Baha, Subh-I Azal continues, “waxed high gradually “on the basis of this delegation of
authority till he wanted “to devour and bite me.”
“Whilst on my guard, I was not in favour of breach with, or public exposure of, him (i.e. Baha) having
forgiven him for god’s sake, and having pardoned his sins” concludes Subh-I Azal. For Subh-I Azal’s
suffering at the hands of Baha, reference may be to P. 33 the Tanbihun-Naimin.

43-8
Confirmation of the delegation of authority with Baha’s attempt to unsurp Subh-I Azal’s rights is
inherent in the following passage from Professor Brown’es Introduction to the Tarikh-I Jadid (The
New History) composed by Mirza Husayn of Hamadan, pp xxi-xxii : “ …………….. Subh-I Azal, a
peace-loving, contemplative, gentle soul, wholly devouted to the memory of his beloved Master [i.e.
the Point], caring little for authority … Even while at Baghdad, he lived a life of almost complete
seclusion, leaving the direction of affairs in the hands of his half-brother Bahaullah, a man of much
more resolute and ambitious character, who thus gradually became the most prominent figure and the
moving spirit of the sect. For a considerable time Bahaullah continued to do what he did in the name,
and ostensibly by the instructions, of Subh-I Azal, but after a while, that at what precise date is still
uncertain, the idea seems to have entered his mind that he might as well become actually, as he

allegedly was virtually the pontiff of the church whose doctrines he controlled. It was not however, till
the BABis had been for two or three years at Adrianopole that, most probably in the summer of 1866,
he threw of all disguise, publickly proclaimed himself to be “Him Whom God Shall Manifest”, and
called upon Subh-I Azal and all ……… to acknowledge his supreme authority and to accept
44-01
Him as god’s word the revelations which he forthwith began to promulgate.”
XVI) Le Bayan Persan, Unity VII, Chapter 10, p. 26, Tome
« C’est pourquoi il est ordonné à tous, du moment où la semence pénètre dans la matrice, de porter
cette table sur soi, et que sur elle soit inscrit le nom de Moustaqass. Du moment de la manifestation à la
manifestation suiuante, Dieu sail combien il s’écoulera de temps 1 ; mais cela ne durera pas plus
longtemps que le nom de Moustaqass si Dieu le veut. »
A.L.M. Nicholas Footnote 1 in page 26: Mustaghath = 2001”
A.L.M. Nicholas Footnote 1 in page 26 :
Que pense Béha Oullah de cette affirmation !!
Unity VII, Chapter 10, P. 26 continued:
L’époque du Qoran, depuis son commencement jusqu’à son retour, a vu s’écouler le nom « Egfer »
(1281) en diminuant le nom de « Hou » (11). Dans le Béyân Dieu sait jusqu’à quelle époque cela
arrivera, car il u’y a là aucune supputation possible”
A.L.M Nicholas Footnote 2 in page 26 :
« Comment dès lors dire qu’il a prédit aussi exactement la date de la venue de son successeur ? »
44-02
B) Baha’s date of annunciation.
i) Baha laid claim to “Supreme Manifestation” and sought to link up his claim with the BABi mission.
His reliance on the BAB’s ketter referred to in A (VII, P. 84) supra speaks for itself and A.L.M
Nicholas observations are endorsed by the BABis. Baha’s letter to the Son of the Wolf was written
during the last days of Baha. His claim that the BAB was his harbringer or precursor is ngeatived by A
(i), P. 81 supra.
ii) In page 13 in the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative reference is made to “Bad Hin” referred to in A
(VI) P. 84 supra. A footnote in the same page, apparently made by Shoghi Effendi reads as follows:
“According to Abjad notation, the numerical value of the word “Hin” is 68. It was in the year A.H.
1268 (A.D, 1852) that Bahaullah, while confined in the Siyah Chal of Teheran for complicity in the
attempt on the then Shah’s life] received the first intimations of his Divine mission. Of this he hinted in
the $ which he revealed in that year”.
Shoghi Effendi speaks of him with reference to Baha’s date of annunciation while Abdul Baha Abbas
and Muhammad Ali speak of Ba’d Hin with reference to Baha’s date of annunciation.
As the latter date is fictitious (see infra) Shoghi Effendi has advanced the date of ‘Hin’ instead of “Ba’s
Hin”, in a desperate effort to link up Baha’s claim with the BAB’s mission. The same Nabil, in his
Chronological poems on the events in the life of Baha, makes no mention of “the first intimations of
Baha’s “divine mission”.
See A (VI) P. 84 for “Ba’d Hin”.

44-3
iii) In his Traveller’s Narrative , P. 81, Persian text, vol I. Abdul Baha Abbas states: “When he [i.e.
Baha] reached Baghdad and the crescet moon of the month of Muharram of the year [A.H. one
thousand and two hundred and] sixty nine (which was termed in the book of the BAB the year of “after
a while” and wherein he had promised the disclosure of the true nature of his religion and its mysteries)
shone forth from the horizon of the world. This covert secret, as is related [i.e. that Bahaullah was
although the Promised One of the Bayan, who declared his mission upon his arrival in Baghdad and
that nominal supremacy of Subh-I Azal, was a precautioned diversionary treaties designed to save the
skin of Baha during his continuance in Persian territory, PP. 79-88 (the Traveller’s Narrative, Persian
text, vol. I, see my letter of 26th April 1962 which explodes this allegations) became apparent amongst
all within and without [the society].”

The year of “a while” (Sana-I Hin) is 68 according to the Abjad notation, and the year of “after a
while” therefore corresponds to 69, which is the number after 68. There is however no mention of “the
year of” preceding “after Hin” either in the BAB’s Dalail-I Sab’a (The Seven Proofs) or in Nabil’s
Narrative.
Baha’s date of arrival at Baghdad as given by Abdul Baha in the Traveller’s Narrative is fictitious, as
Baha was imprisoned in Teheran for four month for complicity in the attempt on the then Shah’s life
which took place on 28 Shawwal A.H. 1268 = 15th August A.D. 1852. According to
44-4
Nabil’s Narrative, P. 470, Baha left Teheran for Baghdad on the first day of Rabi-uth-Thani 1269 = 12th
January 1853. According to Mirza Jawad’s Historical Epitome, P. 1, Materials for the Study of the
BABi religion by Professor Browne Baha was born on 2nd of Muharram A.H. 1233 = November 12,
A.D. 1817. Nabil in his Chronological poem of the events in the life of Baha, stanza 6 states that “at
thirty-seven the Monarch of Grace [i.e. Baha] arrived at Baghdad.”
Baha would therefore appear to have arrived at Baghdad in A.H. 1270 = A.D. 1853. There is no
mention in the Chronological poem that Baha declared himself as “He Whom God Shall Manifest” on
arrival at Baghdad from Teheran.
Abdul Baha’s statement that Baha declared himself as “He Whom God Shall Manifest” on arrival at
Baghdad is further nagtived by Baha’s own book, the Kitab-I Iqan composed by him in “A.H. 1275”
(A.D. 1858-1859) = A.H. 1864), to quote from the Iqan itself, at Baghdad after his return from his
voluntary exile in Suleymaniyya, and years after his arrival in Baghdad from Teheran, see my letter of
6th May 1962, wherein he speaks of the Bayan as the “last revelation”, and admits his “submission to
the authority of Subh-I Azal”.
Abdul Baha is at great pains to manipulate Baha’s date of arrival at Baghdad to link up Baha’s claim
with the BAB’s mission.
Abdul Baha’s allegation that the BAB was Baha’s harbringer is negatived by A(i) P. 81 supra.
44-5
In his Introduction to the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, page xxviii, Shoghi Effendi states: “the
second and greater manifestation of god was proclaimed in accordance with the prophecy of the BAB
at the date on which he had foretold. Nine years after the beginning of the BABi dispensation, that is,
in 1853.
Bahaullah, in $ of his odes, alluded to his identity and his mission, and ten years later, while resident in
Baghdad, declared himself as the promised one to his companions.”
Shoghi Effendi bases his statement on a foot-note made by himself as referred to in B (ii) p. 85, supra
and draws conclusions from his own foot-note. The prophecy, as is set out in A (VI) p. 8$ is traced to
Shaikh Ahmad of Ihsa, founder of Sheikhi school, which the BAB quoted in his Dalail-I Sab’a (the
Seven Proofs) in support of his own mission, and its subsequent development through his appointed
successor Subh-I Azal.
The second paragraph of Shoghi Efendi’s statement that Baha declared his mission ten years later while
resident in Baghdad, i.e. in 1863 nails to the counter Abdul Baha’s patent lie that Baha declared his
mission on arrival in Baghdad from Teheran in A.H. 1269 or A.H. 1270. Whether or not Baha did
declare his mission while resident in Baghdad remains to be seen and will be dealt with infra. Nabil, in
his Chronological poem on the events in the life of Baha, makes no mention of Baha’s declaration of
mission while resident in Baghdad. The whole attempt is to link up Baha’s claim with the BAB’s
mission, and to curtail and eliminate Subh-I Azal’s authority as the appointed successor of the BAB.
44-6
In the lithographed copy of his Will & Testament penned in his own handwriting, signed by him and
dated A.H. 1344 (A.D. 1925) Muhammad Ali sates:
P. 6: Sayyid Ali Muhammad the BAB declared himself to be the ‘Mahdi’ or ‘Qaim’ whose advent is
expected in Islam. With all his ‘power & might’, he “set himself down as a harbringer, heralding the
advent of a more perfect temple “[Haykal : This word means ‘body’, ‘form’, ‘temple’, and ‘altar’; in
this passage it means the corporeal ‘temple’ which the Diety $].
In his consumerate wisdom, he kept the name [of the more perfect temple] secret and named it “He
Who Shall Appear”.
PP 7-8 : “The statement of His Holiness the Harbringer [i.e. the BAB] that ‘Et dans le neuvienne anniu
vous attcindrey a tout le dieu” and that “you will meet with god in the year nine”, becomes apparent
and also the statement of the eminent [Sheikh Ahmad] of Ihsa that “You will know learn the news of it
‘after a while’ became manifest. The year Nine which is [one thousand two hundred and] sixty-nine

synchoronised with ‘after a while’ and the two glad tidings conjoined and ‘He Whom God Shall
Manifest’ of the Bayan removed the veil from his radiant face on the day of the resurrection of the
Furqan [i.e. the Quran]. But this was private manifestation. In (the year of one thousand and two
hundred and] eighty general manifestation took place; Verses [Ayat] were revealed and evidences
[Bayyinat] became apparent.”
44-7
P. 9 : “His [i.e. Baha’s] blessed manifestation is the Most Mighty of the Manifestations and is the Pivot
of the cycle of manifestations of names and attributes. ……… In the Quran he is referred to as the
“manifestation of divinity”, and in the Bayan as “He Who Shall Appear”, “He Whom God Shall
Manifest”, and “the Remnant of God” (Baqiyyatullah).
P. 13 : “….. and likewise there shall appear someone in Mustaqath who will testify to his [i.e. Baha’s]
oneness and divinity”.
Muhammad Ali’s :
1) allegation that the BAB was Baha’s harbringer is negatived by A(i) supra;
2) allegation that ‘He Who Shall Appear’ is identical with Baha is negatived by A(iii) supra;
3) interpretation of “same as above French text” quoted in full in A(v) supra, is negatived by A(iii),
4) interpretation of “meeting with god < anniu 9>” is negatived by A(vii) supra;
5) interpretation of ‘after a while’, is negatived by A(vi) supra;
6) allegation that Baha’s “private” declaration of mission took place in A.H. 1269 corresponding to
‘after a while’ $ to the abjad notation is negatived by the observations in B(i), (ii), (iii) & {iv) and by
A(viii) & (xiv) supra:
44-08
7) allegation that ‘on the day of the resurrection of Furqan [i.e. the Quran] ‘He Whom God Shall
Manifest’ of the Bayan removed the veil from his radiant face in the person of Baha in A.H. 1269, is
negatived by the express provision of the Persian Bayan, Unity II, Chapter 7, quoted in full in A(ii)
supra, according to which the day of resurrection of the Bayan was 5th Jamadi-al-Ula A.H. 1260 = May
24 A.D. 1844 when the Point declared his mission. “The Bayan is at its stage of seed’ and the
resurrection of the Bayan will took place at the time of appearance of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’
in Ghiyath or Mustaghath (see A(iv) when the Bayan shall have reached “its ultimate perfection”.
8) allegation that Baha’s ‘general’ manifestation was in A.H. 1280 will be dealt with infra.
In his Traveller’s Narrative, Abdul Baha Abbas speaks of one manifestation of Baha.
9) allegation thatsomeone will appear in Mustaghath to testify to Baha’s divinity will be dealt with
infra.
The whole attempt is to link up Baha’s ‘manifetstaion’ with the Point’s mission by hook or crook.

45-01
VI) The following excerpts are from the Book entitled Bahaullah, composed by Ibrahim George
Khayrullah and Howard $ (Chicago 1900). According to Professor Browne’s Introduction to the
Materials for the Study of the BABi religion P.x “Khayrullah’s Narrative (pp. 134-5) of the threats
addressed to him on account of his opostasy from Abbas Effendi Abdul Baha by Mirza Hasan-I
Khurasani, ………. read like extracts from the history of the Assassins of Alamut and “the old man of
the Mountain”.
The Book entitled Bahaullah was composed before his apostasy, when he $ in the smiles($) of Abdul
Baha Abbas and enjoyed the titles of “the Shepherd of god’s floks in America “, and “Baha’s Peter, the
conqurer of America”. Mirza Jawad’s Historical Epitome, Materials (P. 101). Excerpts from the book
entitled Bahaullah:
P. 395 : “Attempt is being made to prove that the he [i.e. point] was not “Lord of the Age”, or “the
Manifestation of god”, but the “gate” of the manifestation. “He said, when he nominated his successor
[i.e. Subh-I Azal], “if He Whom God Shall Manifest” should appear in his power in thy time, abrogate
the Bayan.”
45-02
Page 410-411 : “Soon after the appearance of the “BAB”, in 1844, Bahaullah allied himself with the
new faith, and arose in His Mighty Power to uphold the message revealed by the forerunner of the
Kingdom of God.”

Page 412: “After his [i.e. Baha’s] arrival in Baghdad, the glory of his name spread …….. in the
beginning of the year 1853, he [i.e. Baha] revealed himself to his circle of believers, as “He Whom
God Shall Manifest”. …….. This manifestation of his divinity, corresponds exactly with the time
appointed by the BAB who said that he would reveal himself after the numerical value of the word
“Hin” which means “a while”, that is to say in the year A.H. 1269 (1853) A.D)”
P. 413 : “ …….. In 1863, after receiving a summons to Constaninopole from the Sultan, Bahaullah
revealed himself to his followers as the manifestation of god. This general manifestation to his people
took place in a grove or garden [i.e. the Garden of Ridvan] ……”
P. 419 : “The third manifestation of Bahaullah by which he announced to the whole world, his coming
and kingdom, took place in Adrianopole in $.
45-03
P. 418 : “………….. all these prophecies were fulfilled literally in Subh-I Azal a brother of Bahaullah
who had been appointed by the BAB as his successor, but who, after the death of the BAB refused to
acknowledge ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest” [i.e. Baha according to Khayrullah]”.
1.
2.

the allegation that the BAB was Baha’s harbringer is negatived by A(i) supra.
Khayrullah admits the nomination of Subh-I Azal by the BAB as his successor. The nomination
document reproduced in fac-simile in page 1 of the Collection
“God is Most Great with the Uttermost Greatness. This is a letter on the part of God, the Protector, the
Self-Existent, to God, the Protector, the Self-Existent. Say, ‘All Originate from God’. Say ‘All return
unto God’.
“This is a letter from “Ali before Nabil, ]Nabil is numerically equivalent to Muhammad, the sum of
each according to Abjad, being 92; so that “Ali before Nabil” is simply another way of saying “Ali
Muhammad”], God’s Reminder unto the Worlds, unto him whose name is equivalent to the name of
the One [Wahid = 28 = Yahya, Subh-I Azal’s name], God’s Reminder unto the worlds.”

45-4
“Say, ‘Verily all originate from the Point of Revelation [Nuqtatul-Bayan, i.e. Sayyid Ali Muhammad,
see my letter of the 12th February 1962].
“O Name of the One [Wahid = Subh-I Azal, supra] keep what hath been revealed in the Bayan, and
what hath been commanded , for verily thou art a mighty way of Truth.”
[Sealed] “Verily I am the Proof of God and His Light.”
[For the Selas of the Point, see my letter of 19th January, 1962]
The nomination took place in the Point’s lifetime and notice was given in writing by the Point by the
issue of 361 epistles addressed by the Point to the Living Letters and leading BABis. Some of these
writings are reproduced in PP. 25-32, 35-36, 48-51, 61-62, and 78-83 in the Tanbihun-Naimin as well
as in the Collection entitled the Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Sayyid Husayn.
The Epistle addressed by the Point to 238, namely Mirza Husayn Ali [i.e. Baha] according to the Abjad
notation, is reproduced in full in page 32 of the Tanbihun-Naimin.
Commenting on this epistle in P. 317, in the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, Nabil states that “that
communication [i.e. the epistle]
45-5
$ the People of the Bayan [i.e. Followers of Subh-I Azal, footnote 2] have misconstrued as an evidence
of the exaggerated claims which they have advanced in favour of their leader [i.e. Subh-I Azal].”
Footnote 3 in the same page reads as follows: “The claims of this young man [i.e. Subh-I Azal] were
based on a nomination document $ in the possession of Prof. Browne, and have been supported by a
letter given in a French version by Mons. Nicholas. Forgery, however, has played such a great part in
written document of the East that I hesitate to recognise the genuineness of this nomination. And I
think it very improbable that any company of intensely earnest men should have accepted the document
in preference to the evidence of their knowledge respecting the inadequate endorsment of Subh-I Azal
……… the probability is that the arrangement already made($) was further sanctioned, viz, that
Bahaullah was for the present to take private direction of affairs and exercise his great gifts as a
teacher, while Subh-I Azal (a vain young man) gave his name as ostensible head, especially with a
view to outsiders and to agents of the government.” (Dr T.K. Cheyne’s “the Reconciliation of Races
and Religions”, pp. 118-119.).
45-6

Dr Cheyne has jumped to conclusions without examining and sifting all available documentary
evidences to which he had no access. The Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Sayyid Husayn
prove that his conclusions are threadbase and devoid of foundation. The absurdity of the arrangement
he speaks of, or rather Baha’s so-called diversionary tactics is fully set forth in my letter of 26th April
1962, to which reference may be made. If Dr Cheyne had access to Baha’s writings quoted in A(xiii)
and supra, he would have found out that the shoe is on the other foot.
3. Khayrullah’s quotation in P.395 is misquoted. The misquotation appears to be from the Point’s
Epistle addressed to Subh-I Azal and reproduced in the preamble to the Supplement to the Persian
Bayan by Subh-I Azal.
The Epistle, among other things, reads: “Exhort to those who believe in me and in my words that they
disgrace noy touching the Religion of God, [for them] shall, they stray away from the path. And if God
cause one like unto thee to appear in thy days, then he it is to whom shall be bequeathed the authority
on the part of God the Single, the One [Wahid which term stands as equivalent to Yahya [i.e. Subh-I
Azal]. But if [such an One] appears not, know for a surety that God
45-7
hath not willed to make Himself known, and render up the authority to God. Your Lord, and the Lord
of the Worlds, all ……..
Celui [i.e. the Point’s amanuensis Sayyid Husayn] “French Text”
And if God causes grandeur to appear in thy days, then make manifest the Eight Path [i.e. the
unrevealed eight units of the Bayan] ….. “French Text”
45-8
The Point’s Arabic Bayan CONSISTS OF 11 Units of 19 Chapters each. The Point’s Persian Bayan
ends at Unity 9, Chapter 10. In his Supplement to the Persian Bayan, Subh-I Azal wrote from Unity 9,
Chapter 11 up to Unity 11 Chapter 19, inclusive, so that both Bayans end at Unity 11 Chapter 19.
The composition of the remaining eight Unities, referred to in the Point’s Epistle as Eight Paths, by
Subh-I Azal was subject to the time being propitious. Subh-I Azal does not appear to have written the
remaining eight Unities.
Commenting on the Point’s Epistle referred to above in J.R.A.S, July 1892, pp. 478-479 Professor
Browne states that “not only that the BAB regarded Subh-I Azal as his sole vicegerent, but that he did
not contemplate such a contingency as the appearance of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’ in Subh-I
Azal’s time and that the BAB intentionally left the [Arabic] Bayan incomplete only publishing 11 of
the 19 Wahids [i.e. the Unities] .. conferring on Subh-I Azal the right of completing it if the time be
propitious.”
The full text of the Point’s epistle appears in the preface to the French translation of the Arabic Bayan
by A.L.M. Nicholas, PP. 52-66.
46-01
A.L. Nicholas comments on the Point’s Epistle are as follows:
PP. 52 – “<French Text>
46-02
<French Text>
An onlique and cursory reference is made to the Point’s epistle in question in page 460 of the DawnBreakers, Nabil’s Narrative, where Nabil, speaking of the “Point’s amanuensis Sayyid Husayn of
Yazd” says that “and was his knowledge of the teachings of the faith that the BAB in a tablet [i.e. the
Epistle in question] addressed to Mirza Yahya [i.e. Subh-I Azal], urged the latter to seek enlightenment
from him in whatever might pertain to “the sacred writings” [of the BAB], [i.e. the passage ‘Celui
<French Text> ‘, see supra], while the contents of the Point’s epistle is suppressed as it is detrimental
to Baha’s claim.
46-03
In the light of the foregoing quotations from the Point’s Epistle addressed to Subh-I Azal, there is
nothing to support Khayrullah’s contention that the Point had said, when he nominated Subh-I Azal as
his successor, ‘if He whom God Shall Manifest’ should appear in His power in thy time, abrogate the
Bayan.” On the contrary, Subh-I Azal was instructed to maintain and complete the Bayan. Khayrullah’s
quotation would appear to be from Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul-Kaf and has not been quoted in

full by Kahyrullah. His quotation should not therefore be read out of its context. The full text thereof is
quoted hereunder to set doubts at rest.
Pages 381 and 382 appendix II to the Tarikh-I Jadid (The New History) of Mirza Husayn of Hamadan,
translated into English by Professor Browne.
In Page 374, with which Appendix II opens Professor Browne states: “We now come to what is
without doubt the most interesting and most important portion of Mirza Jani’s History, to wit, the
account of Mirza Yahya Subh-I Azal, his election as a successor and vicegerent to the BAB and his
relations to his half-brother and subsequent rival Mirza Husayn Ali Bahaullah. This portion, needless to
say, has been entirely suppressed by the compilers of the Tarikh-I Jadid, whose sympathies, as has
clearly been shown, were entirely with Baha; and
46-04
and it is more than any other cause has probably conduced to the extreme reality of Mirza Jani’s most
precious history, even, amongst the BABos; for we can hardly doubt that the Bahais would do all in
their power to suppress a book which would place so formidable a weapon in the hands of their
opponents the Azalis.”
Appendix II, pp. 38: “Now, when the letters of Janab-I Azal [i.e. Subh-I Azal] came to His Holiness
“the Reminder” [i.e. the BAB], he rejoiced exceedingly, and thenceforth began the deadline of the Sun
of ‘the Reminder’ and therising of the Moon of Azal. So he [i.e. the BAB] sent of his personal effects,
such as pen-cases, paper, writings, his own blessed $, and his holy rings, [see the Point’s personal
Diary, forwarded under cover of my letter of 19th January, 1962], according to the “number of the
Unity [Wahid = 19], that the outward form might correspond with the inward reality.
He also wrote a testamentary despositin, explicitly nominating him [i.e. Subh-I Azal] as his successor
[Wali], and added, ‘Write the eight [unwritten] Wahids [Unities] of the Bayan, and if “He Whom God
shall manifest” should appear in His Power in thy time, abrogate the Bayan; and put into practice
which we shall inspire into thine heart.’ Now the mystery of
46-05
his bestowing his effects on Azal according to the ‘Number of the Unity” is perfectly evident, namely
he intended the inner meaning thereof, that it might be known to all his followers that after himself
Azal should bear the divine influences. And his object in explicitly nominating him as successor also
was to re-assure the hearts of the weak so that they might not be bewildered as to his real nature, but
enemies and friends alike might know that there is no intermission in god’s grace and that god’s
religion is a thing which he made manifest. And the reason why [the BAB] himself refrained from
writing eight [unwritten] Wahids of the Bayan, but left them to Azal, was that all men might know that
the Tongue of god is one, and that He in Himself is a soverign Proof. And what he meant by ‘Him
Whom God Shall Manifest’ after himself was Hazrat-I Azal and none other than him, for there may not
be two “Points” [see my letter of the 12th February, 1962] at one time. And the secret of the BAB’s
saying, ‘$ thus and thus,’ while Azal was himself also a ‘Proof’ was that at this time His Holiness ‘the
Reminder’ was the Heaven of Volition, and Azal was accounted the Earth of Devotion and the product
of purified gift, wherefore was he thus addressed.”
46-06
“In short, as soon as this time had come the ‘Eternal Fruit’ [Thamara-I Azaliyya] had reached maturity,
the Red Blossom of Reminder-hood [i.e. the BAB] casting itself from the branch of the Blessed Tree of
the Qarmate19 (which is neither of the East nor of the West’ [Quran, xxiv, 35) to the simoon-wind ($)
of the malice of foes, destroyed itself, and prepared to ascend from the outward and visible ‘world of
dominion’ to the inward realm of the mystery of god $.
Therefore it was that the accessories of his martyrdom appeared in the world; for it is sufficiently
obvious that, had he not himself been content with martyrdom, none would have had proven to harm
him.’
On the strength of the quotations from the Nuqtatul Kaf, Khayrullah’s misquotation is misleading and
his contention in p. 418 of his book that Subh-I Azal who refused to recognize Baha qua ‘He Whom
God Shall Manifest’ is absurd.
The nomination is corroborated by the nomination-document (supra) and the provision for Subh-I Azal
to write the unwritten eight Unities is supported by the Point’s Epistle addressed to Subh-I Azal,
containing his Testamentary Disposition (supra).

19

What is this?

46-7
Mirza Jani has ‘identified’ ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ with Subh-I Azal in the sense that “there
may not be two Points [i.e. the Manifestations of the Primal Will, for the definition of the term Point
(Nuqta) see my letter of the 12th February] at one time.’
No documentary evidence has been traced to uphold Mirza Jani’s statement that Subh-I Azal “was to
abrogate the Bayan if ‘He Whom God ShallManifest’ should appear in His Power in thy time, and to
put into practice that which we shall inspire into thine heart.”
Authority is however for the passage ‘to put into practice’ in the Epistle of the Point addressed by him
to Subh-I Azal and reproduced in fac-simile in page 3 of the Epistle of the Point and his amanuensis
Sayyid Husayn wherein the Point authorize $$
On the authority of the Epistle, Subh-I Azal composed in Baghdad his Mustayghidh (‘Sleeper
Awakened’) as a commentary on the Points Ahsanul Qisas (the Best of the Stories, see glossary
attached to my letter of June 25th, 1962) wherein he commented on, and explained, the Point’s
Ahsanul-Qisas, quoted documentary evidence from the Point in support of his appointment as
successor of the Point and denounced all pretenders to the office of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’.
46-8
4) Kahyrullah’s allegation that Baha revealed himself to his ‘circle of believers’ as ‘He Whom God
Shall Make Manifest’ in A.H. 1269 (A.D. 1853) in Baghdad on the basis of the word ‘Hin’ is negatived
by A(vi), and by the observations in B(i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) and by A(xiii) and (xiv) (see supra).
5) Khayrullah’s allegation that Baha revealed himself to his followers for the second time as the
manifestation of god in the garden of Ridvan in A.D. 1863 on the eve of his departure from Baghdad
will be dealt with infra.
6) Khayrullah’s allegation that Baha’s third manifestation took place in Adrianopole in 1867 will be
dealt infra.
Vii) Mirza Muhammad Jawad of Qazwin, in his Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of the
BABi Religion by Professor Browne:
P.16 : On the 3rd of Dhul-Qada 1279, on April 20, 1863, in the afternoon, he [i.e. Baha] set out from
old Baghdad, wherein was the most great House set apart for His Holiness our Master [i.e. Baha], for
the garden of Najib Pasha, called Ridwan, and situated in the new quarter of Baghdad. He crossed the
Shatt [ul-Arab] in a boat, entered the above-mentioned
47-01
garden, and abode there for thwelve days, which are called Ayyamur-Rizwan ……..
In those days His Holiness our Lord Bahaullah declared his mission in his writings; and this is
reckoned as a second declaration, as is fully set forth in more lengthy treaties on this matter.”
P. 21 : “ ……. Until in A.H. 1280 (A.D. 1863) there was promulgated [by Baha] (in Edirne) the
“Tablet of Command” (Lawh-Amr), which openly gladdened all men in the Bayan; and His Reverence
the Servant [of god] (i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan) bore the above-mentioned Tablet, which was in the
writing of the Holly Pen, according to the instructions of our Master Bahaullah, to Mirza Yahya [i.e.
Subh-I Azal], and read it to him. Mirza Yahya did not openly reject the Tablet.”
PP. 24-26 : Open rupture between Bahaullah and Subh-I Azal, or the “Supreme Separation” according
to Mirza Jawad, appear to have taken place “on 26th of the Second Rabi A.H. 1284 (August 26, 1867).”
47-02
Same as 47-01
47-03
PP. 7-8 : According to Mirza Jawad Baha left Teheran “on the 10th February 1269” (October 12, 1852).
Mirza Jawad’s version of Baha’s date of departure from Teheran for Baghdad is at variance with that of
Nabil’s (see supra).
Mirza Jawad makes no mention of Baha’s date of arrival at Baghdad which is alleged to be the
fulfilment of the word ‘Hin’.
Mirza Jawad makes no mention of Baha’s ‘first declaration’ alleged by Abdul Baha Abbas and
Muhammad Ali. Mirza Jawad makes a cryptic reference to alleged “second declaration of Baha in his
writings,” of which Abdul Baha and Muhammad Ali make no mention.
Even this version is at variance with that of Khayrullah’s who alleges that Baha revealed himself to his
followers for the second time as the manifestation of God “in the garden of Rizwan”.
For Avareh’s explanation in his Kashful-Hiyal of Baha’s ‘first and second declaration’ see infra.

Baha’s
47-04
VIII) According to the Istidlaliyya (Evidences), otherwise known as Risala-I Ayyubiyya (‘The Epistle
of Jud) composed by Mirza Abul-Fazl of Gulpaygan in the year A.H. 1303 (AD. 1887-1888), a work
intended to prove by qutations and arguments drawn from the Old Testament that Baha is the
promissed messiah and deliverer of Israel, the date of Baha’s ‘manifestation’ is given as A.H. 1285
(A.D. 1868).
The relevant passage read as follows:
<Farsi Text>
IX) According to Nabil’s Chronological Poem of the events in the life of Baha, stanza 10, “when the
age of that wonderful lord [i.e. Baha] was fifty, he tore from his face the veil”. As Baha was born on
the second of Muharram A.H. 1233 (Nov. 12th A.D. 1817). If this date is to be credited, he would attain
his fiftieth year in Muharram A.H. 1283 (May-June AD. 1866).
47-05
Commenting on the chaotic state of affairs prevailing about Baha’s date of annunciation. Prof. Browne
says: “It is curious tat in two works [i.e. Istidlaliyya and Abdul Baha’s Traveller’s Narrative]
composed by the Bahais within short time of one another, and both intended for more or less general
circulation, so glaring a discrepancy should have been allowed to appear, more especially as both are
used evidentally.”
In another passage Professor Browne says: “Amongst the Bahais themselves, $, there is as much as
fourteen years difference as to the date of so important event as the “manifestation or annunciation of
the divine mission of Baha!”.
Was there any need on the part of Baha to serve a copy of his “tablet of Command” on Subh-I Azal to
acknowledge his alleged authority. If the latter was not de facto and $ the appointed successor of the
Point with full power to act as he wished!
47-06
In his coverage of several interviews he held with Baha at Acre between the year A.D. 1886 and A.D.
1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kirman one of the co-authors of the Hasht Bihisht, quotes Baha as saying
(with reference to the existing state of affairs amongst the BABis at Baghdad on his return from his
voluntary exile in Suleymaniyya and with reference to the rift between him and Subh-I Azal at Edirne):
“The BABis had degenerated to such extent that they laid claim to god-hood [i.e. to be ‘He Whom God
Shall Manifest’]. Any consideration for retributive ordinances of the divine law had ceased to exist;
There was no sense of security for one’s son, wife or daughter. Robbery, and appropriation of one’s
property were reckoned good works. I experienced considerable trouble in making them $ to the law
….. in Edirne, a number of mischief-makers erected a rift [between me and Subh-I Azal]. My brother
[i.e. Subh-I Azal] took them at their word out of naiveté.
I replied that the religion of the Bayan was threatened with total extinction and destruction. I had an
inward converse [munajat] with God and suddenly, the Promised Manifestation became apparent and
the lights of ‘He Who Shall Appear” became manifest.”
47-07
X) “I uttered the word, which all avoided indulging the overseers ($) and the $ (nujaba).” [according to
Al-Jorjani in his definition (cd. Fluegel, p. 266) “Nujaba are those who have discovered the Inward
Name so that they look into the hearts of men and discern secret thoughts, because for them veils are
withdrawn from the face of mysteries. And they are of these kinds: Superior souls, which are
embodiment of [divine] commands; Inferior Souls, which are $; and Intermediate souls, which are
human essences. And in end, one of them God (Exalted is He) hath a trust deposited which comprises
mysterious divine and $. And they are [in number] three hundred.”
Concerning the Nujaba he says (P. 259): “They are forty in number, and engaged in bearing the
burdens of creatures, generally such accidents as human strength cannot cope with. And this [they do]
by reason of their abundant natured pity and mercy, neither do they desist [therefrom] save for the sake
of another, for no increase of advancement is [$] to them save by this channel.” The Traveller’s
Narrative, Vol. II, p. 303, English Translation].
[“the overseers and Helpers constitute two grades of a spiritual hierarchy whereof the members are
called generically “men of the Unseen World (Arabic text), and at the head of which is the ‘pole’
(Arabic text), Professor Browne in same page]

47-08
“The word is this: “He [i.e. God] is apparent in my raiment. He is the Hidden and the Visible, the
speaking through Me, although for sometime in Baghdad, in Istanbul and in the early period Edirne the
manifestation of ‘He Who Shall Appear’, like the sun from under the clouds, was sometimes apparent
and sometimes hidden. But in Edirne all of a sudden, it became apparent and manifest as clear as the
sun at noon-day without veil and mask; and verses became resplendent [i.e. were revealed by Baha].
Then I sent the verses and thr evidences of the ‘manifestation’ to my brother [i.e. Subh-I Azal] by hand
of the Interlocutor [Kalim, to wit, Baha’s brother Musa surnamed as such because he spoke with God,
Baha] and the Servant of the Presence [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, Baha’s amanuensis]. Instead of
giving thanks, and believing, he turned aside [from the manifestation, i.e. Baha]. Whereas, according to
the express provision of the Bayan, no one else but ‘He Who Shall Appear’ may advance this claim;
and the mere appearance of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’, no one may ask why and wherefore; and
out of regard for his illustrious name, one may not deny him, if one does not believe in Him. Had I
been false, how is that I have advanced the claim for several years and have held my own, proclaiming
this great call”
48-01
before notables. In the event of falseness, it behoved God to declare me false and crush me. Whereas
day by day, my cause is gaining strength and is on the ascent. New creation has been created under the
shadow of my word.”
The Persian text of the words uttered by Baha (see supra page 134) reads as follows:
<Persian Text>
With the allowance for the fact that reporter was none other than Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, an Azali
BABi and son-in-law of Subh-I Azal, with the allowance for Mirza Aqa Khan’s denunciations filled
with quotations from the Quran which are interpreted in a sense far from flattering to Baha and his
followers, and with due allowance for Mirza Aqa Khan’s personal impression of Baha to be quoted
infra, Mirza Aqa Khan’s report of his several interviews with Baha on the schism between Baha and
Subh-I Azal, is $. Baha does not $ matters; He makes no mention of “the first intimations of his divine
mission” alleged “to have been hinted by him in his odes whilst imprisoned in Tehran in A.H. 1268
(A.D. 1851-2)”; He does not split hairs about the word “Hin”;
48-02
He makes no mention of his “first manifestation on arrival at Baghdad from Teheran”; He makes no
mention of his “second manifestation in the garden of Ridvan”. All these things of which no mention is
made by Baha are an afterthought to link up Baha’s claim with the Point’s mission and to eliminate
Subh-I Azal as far as possible. Baha states that the Religion of the Bayan was about to peril and this led
him to address a a silent and fervent person to God in Edirne. He found the deity inhibiting Baha’s
corporeal body; overnight, Baha became “He Whom God Shall Manifest” of the Bayan and began to
reveal verses; When he applied himself to Subh-I Azal, which appellation undermines Baha’s own
claim and maintains Subh-I Azal’s claim to be the Point’s appointed successor, calling upon him to
acknowledge his authority which Subh-I Azal rehected. Baha admits that there were other pretenders to
the office of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest” who preceeded him in their claims. Baha argues that
Subh-I Azal should not have denied him even if he did not believe in him ‘out of regard for the name of
‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ on the authority of Bayan. If this argument of Baha were to hold good,
then the pretenders who preceeded Baha would have had a prior claim.
48-03
Just as Subh-I Azal denounced other pretenders, he had to denounce Baha for his bogus claim. The
relevant passage in the Bayan, to which Baha refers, reads as follows:
The Persian Bayan, Nichola’s translation,
Unity VI Chapter VIII, page 105
« On est, en effet, enfermé dans ce dilemme: ou cette personne est celui que Dieu doit manifester, et il
est, en v6rité, impossible qu’autre que lui fasse sortir de sa nature même des versets, et, dès lors,
pourquoi aller accuser la vérité de mensonge? surtout quand nuit et jour on a prié dans l’attente de sa
manifestation et qu’on a agi pour elle? ou bien, quoique cela soit impossible, il s’agit de quelqu’un qui,
mensongèrement, prétend être Celui que Dieu doit manifester. Qu’on laisse à Dieu le soin de le juger.
Ce n’est pas à la créature qu’une telle sentence appartient à cause du respect du|. au nom dont cette
personne s’est investi. »

In his own words, Baha regarded the Point as the ‘very self of god’ and Subh-I Azal as the ‘Vessel of
God’s authority,’ A(xiii supra).
“There may be no two Points at One time”. The Nuqtatul-Kaf B(vi) (3) supra. Subh-I Azal “had full
powers to interpret the Point’s Law” in his absolute discretion,” B(vi) (3). Hence the denunciation for
the bogus claim advanced by Baha, who like the other pretenders who preceded him in their claims,
claimed the signs of his god-hood, to wit, verses spontaneously uttered [ayat-I fitru], flew from his lips.
48-04
Several other pretenders, referred to by Baha in the interviews. Indeed, according to Subh-I Azal, the
Hasht Bihist, PP. 302-303, and Professor Browne’s Persian Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf, P. 38,
“Mirza Asaddulah Dayyan, Mirza Abdullah called Ghawgha, Husayn of Milan, commonly known as
Husayn Jan, Sayyid Husayn of Isfahan (or of Hamidan), Mirza Muhammad ‘Nabil’ of Zarand [author
of Nabil’s Narrative and Chronological Poem of the events in the life of Baha] ending, to quote from
Subh-I Azal, with ‘Mirza’ or ‘Pretender of Acre’ [i.e. Baha].
To quote from the Hasht Bihisht, P. 303:
“….. Until the matter came to such a pass that everyone awakening from his first sleep in the morning
adorned his body with this pretension”.
“When Mirza Husayn Ali [i. Baha] behold matters in this disordered state, he btought himself of
advancing the same claim (considering that from the prominent position which he held as praxtical
director of affairs, he stood a better chance of success than any previous claimant, and in this idea he
was greatly encouraged by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan. Little by little his resolution took more definite
shape, and he fell to thinking how he might encompass the destruction of such of the BABis as were
likely to oppose his contemplated action. Professor Browne in Note W, Traveller’s Narrative, Vol. II,
English translation.
48-05
As it will be seen from the quotation from the Hasht Bihisht, the delegation of authority by Subh-I Azal
to Baha, quoted in a(xv), P. 102, as well as in Baha’s letter reproduced in Tanbihun Naimin, P. 88, was
used by Baha as a vantage-ground to subvert the Point’s mission and to sabotage Subh-I Azal’s
authority. The presence however at Baghdad of leading BABis was a stumbling-bloc to the realisation
of Baha’s ambitions. With the removal of Subh-I Azal, Baha, and some of the BABis to Edirne, Baha
found a golden opportunity to materilise his ambition. In Edirne, at a late period, Baha “threw of all
disguise” and declared himself to be ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’.
The campaign of terror and assassinations which ensued is fully set forth in the Hasht-Bihisht, PP. 304306, Professor Browne’s Persian Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf, PP. 40-44 and in my letter of 20th
May 1962. See also Subh-I Azal’s version quoted in note G ($) P. 142.
This accounts for Baha’s assertion that he had been able to “hold hos own”.
48-06
6. Baha’s appreciation of Subh-I Azal:
Excerpted from Nuqtatul-kaf of Mirza Jani of Kashan, Appendix II to the Tarikh-I Jadid of Mirza
Husayn of Hamadan, translated by Prof. Browne. PP. 374-376:
“Now, the remainder of the history of His Holiness the ‘Reminder’ [Zikr, i.e. the BAB] (may my life
be his sacrifice) is as follows. After the martyrdom of Hazrat-I Quddus [see glossary to my letter of
June 25, 1962] and his companions, the Master ($) was filled with sadness, until such a time as the
writings of Janab-I Azal [i.e. Subh-I Azal] met his gaze, when through the violence of his delight, he
rose up and sat down several times, pouring forth his gratitude to God whom he worshipped. As for
Janab-I Azal, the following is a brief epitome of much that might be said. He is a $ 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, she being also of distinguished parentage. His father thereupon
entrusted him to the keeping of his honourable spouse [Foot note 2 by Professor Browne Farsi Text, i.e.
his second wife, or rather, as appears from what immediately follows, his lawful concubine($) <Farsi
text>], saying, ‘Do you take care of this child and see that your handmaids attend to him properly.’ The
concubine, actuated by a sense of her own importance, paid no attention to this; Until one night in the
world of Actuality [i.e. the world of dreams]
48-07
She saw His Holiness the Opostle of God and the king of Saintship [i.e. Ali ibn Abi Talib] enter her
house with all dignity and majesty, and bid her bring the child to them. When she had brought him they

kissed him and placed him in her hands, saying ‘this child is ours, guard him well, that he may come to
the hands of our Qaim.’ This believing woman, thus continued the narrative. ‘When it was morning,
and I arose from this dream of $, and sought the child, I perceived such a love for him had arisen in my
heart as I had never experience towards my own children.
So I continued to minister the child with the utmost faithfulness and reverence until he reached his
fourteenth year when the manifestation of His Holiness [the BAB] took place.’
This woman’s beautiful spirit in that same year was joined with god’s mercy and this narrative [above
given] was related by Hazrat-I Azal’s brother who was her son. He too is a man of excellence,
thoroughly versed in the doctrine of Divine Unity; endowed with all good qualities and laudable
attributes, and entitled Janab-I Baha. In brief he related as follows: ‘I busied myself with the instruction
of Janab-I Azal, the signs of his natural excellence and goodness of disposition were apparent in the
mirror of his being. He ever lived gravity of $, silence, coutesy, and modesty, avoiding the society of
other children, and their behaviour.’ I did not however know that he become the possessor of
48-08
[so high] a station. He studied Persian, but made little progress in Arabic. He wrote however a good
Nastalik hand, and was very fond of the poems of the mystics and initiates of the Doctrine of the
Divine Unity.’
b) Subh-I Azal’s version of Baha’s apostasy.
Before proceeding to the subject, it should be borne in mind that the Bayani Era, as is explained in my
letter of 19th June 1962, starts not from the 5th Jamad-I-ul-Awwal, A.H. 1260 = May 23, 1844, the date
on which the BAB’s mission commenced but from the 5th Jammadi-ul-Awwal A.H. 1266 = 21st March
1850, the date on which the BAB declared himself to be the Point’ [Nuqta, i.e. the manifestation of the
Primal Will].
Summarised with quotations from Subh-I Azal’s letter dated 21st March 1911 in reply to sundry
questions addressed to him by [Mons. A. Bloche Wafraq($)] of La Bibliotheque Nationale, Pari, France
concerning the BABi religion and the schism:
‘The Pretender of Acre’ [i.e. Baha] had advanced his claim in about the fourteenth year “of the Bayani
era. His first utterance was that “I have dreamt that there was no God but Me.” Several other
‘pretenders’ had already preceded him in identical claims (see 8(x) supra, p. 138)
49-01
“The notorious Mirza [i.e. Baha] by reason of his connection with ‘subh-I Azal’ made out a stronger
case” Baha wrought utter destruction of the Cause” [i.e. the BABi religion].
“At the outset, the Pretender’s [i.e. Baha’s] pretention was concealed although some were privy to it.”
“In Edirne” Baha “sent Abu Jahl [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, Baha’s amanuensis] [to Subh-I Azal]
and summoned this servant [i.e. Subh-I Azal] to idolatory.” Baha then “set about murdering the friends
[i.e. BABI believers who adhered to Subh-I Azal] of whom he killed a great many.”
In the end. Baha “passed awaysurvived by his evil deeds.”
The main dispute arose out of Baha’s “claim” and his “utmost lie” that “he was God and that the Point
was his herald.”
“For a time there was some doubt about this claim that it may be a lie.” But he published there leaflets
with the superscription that :there was no God but Me.”
“Despite this stupidity”, Baha wrote to say that “the person to appear in Ghiyath and Mustaghath” was
to speak “on behaf of” Baha. (See G(3) p. 157 $ supra).
Baha’s “pretentions notwithstanding,” Subh-I Azal “would not suffer anything prejudicial to” Baha.
49-02
“I simply wanted him not to talk too much (or intrusively) and thereby compel me to denounce him.”
But Baha “would not contain himself; and with the taking of an overdose of opium, he trumpeted the
vessel of his pretensions on the roof-top of his house, gulled by the scald-headed [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of
Kashan] and abetted by his brother’ [i.e. Mirza Musa entitled Kalim because he talked with God, to
wit, Baha].”
In the end, Baha “repaired to his abyss” and “the scald-headed to his Gehenna($).”
49-03
Note by pp. 55-58 cd
E) Bahai Faith in Encyclopedia Britanica:

“Bahaullah’s fundamental teachings are: that God is unbeknown except through His manifestation, the
Prophet; that divine revelation is continuous and progressive, man’s spiritual and social evolution
proceeding in cycles of approximately 1000 years; that while outwardly different as to human
personality the manifestations are in essence one being and reveal one evolving truth.”
The teachings attributed to Baha are of the Point’s. They are explicitly in the Point’s writings. Baha
appropriated the writings and ideas of the Point and passed them off as his own.
The Point’s Dalail-I Sab’a (the Seven Proofs) written by him during his imprisonment in Maku
contains an excellent summary of these teachings. They are also contained in the Persian Bayan.
The Kitab-I Iqan (the Book of Assurance) written by Baha during the Baghdad period in support of the
Point’s mission underline these teachings.
Summarised from the Point’s Dalail Sab’a by Prof. Browne, J.R.A.S, October 1899: “The Unchanging
and Unchangable Essence of God has existed from Eternity of Eternities in unapproachable Glory and
Purity. No one has known It as It should be known, and no one has praised It as It should be praised. It
is above all Names and free from all likenesses or Similitudes. All things are known by It, while It is
more glorious than that It should be known through aught else. From it was produced Its Creation,
which has had no beginning”
49-04
“in time and shall have no end. This Emanation or Creation was produced by the Primal Will
(Mashiyyat-I Ula) and though eternal in duration, is subsequent to the latter as to causation. Since it is
improbable for created beings to know the divine Essence, the Primal Will has, for their guidance and
instruction incarnated itself from time to time in a human form. These incarnations are known as
“Prophets” and there have been endless numbers of them. That which spoke in all the prophets of the
past, now speaks through the BAB (or the Nuqta = Point) and will speak through “Him Whom God
shall manifest,” and after him, through others, for there is no $ to these manifestations. The Primal Will
is like the Sun, which rises and sets day after day, but is always the same sun in reality ……. So is like
manner, though we may, in common language, speak of Adam, Nova, Moses, David, Jesus and
Muhammad as distinct, in truth that which spoke in each of them was One, viz, the Primal Will.
This is the meaning of the saying of Muhammad “Arabic Text” (But as to the prophets, I (am $). The
last manifestation of the Primal Will took place 1270 years ago (counting not from the Hijra, but from
the first revelations received by Muhammad till the beginning of this Zuhur, i.e. manifestation) and it
has now incarnated itself in Mirza($) (Sayyid] Ali Muhammad, the Point (Nuqta) and speaks through
him.”
49-05
Commenting on Bahai claim in his preface to the Persian Bayan, , page vi, A.L.M. Nicholas says:
« Nous ne lui avons jamais reproché d’avoir annoncé son retour en la personne de Celui que Dieu doit
manifester. Nous l’en avons, au contraire, hautement félicité. Mais peut être l’a-t-il annoncé en laissant
à en imposteur trop de facilités pour usurper la place qu’il indique lui-même comme devant être
occupée par un plus grand que lui. Se n’en veux pour témoin que la Porte VIII, de l’Unité VI, que l’on
trouvera dans ce volume.
L’objection fondée sur le fait que sa religion serait inapplicable pour l’ensemble de l’Humanité, n’en
est pas une. Ou cette religion est divine, ou elle ne l’est pas.
Si elle est Divine, de quel droit la juge-t-on? si elle ne l’est pas, comment Beha oullah, Prophète de
Dieu, procède-t-il d’elle ?
Où, l’humanité, si ce n’est sous l’influence de Satan, puise-t-elle l’audance de critiquer l’ouvre du Très
Haut ? Il nous appartiendrait donc à nous, hommes, auxquels il est interdit d’interroger Celui que Dieu
doit manifesfer, sur sa mission, de demander des explications à Celui que Dieu à manifesté, sur la
sienne ! »

49-06
F) Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman’s personal impression of Baha.
Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman is one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht (The Eight Paradises). He
held several interviews with Baha. His impression of Baha, included in his coverage of the several
interviews is reproduced in page 329 of the Hasht-Bihisht.
His impression of Baha is as follows:
He was admitted to Baha’s audience-chamber. “When I was come there, and behold upon that Archidol, that Greatest Talisman, that personified Revolt, that rebellious Lucifer, that envious Iblis, I saw a
form on a throne and heard the lowing of the calf’ [in allusion to the Golden Calf, to the worship of

which Samiri seduced the Children of Israel]. Then did I see how the light of the Most Great Name had
shone on Ahriman the accursed, and how the finger of the demon wore the ring” [in allusion to the
theft of Solomon’s magic ring by one of the demons, who, by its aid, exercised for some times the
supreme power]. For they had written the name of Baha-al-Abha in divers writings and called it ‘the
Most Great Name.’ $ these came to my mind this verse of [Persian Poet Hafiz] the Tongue of the
Unseen:
‘Efficient is the name Divine; be of good cheer, O heart!
The div becomes not Solomon by guibe and cunnings ant.’ Professor Browne’s translation.
49-07
G) BABaism in Encyclopedia Britanica
“BABism, the relegion of BAB (the Gate), initiated by his proclamation at Shiraz, Persia, on May 23,
1844 ………. Had he confined his aim and effort to the reform of morals and worship within the
framework of traditional Mohammenanism, the BAB might not have aroused the implacable hatred of
the ecclesiastics nor awakened the fear of government itself. It was his action in revealing a new Holy
Book, and in abrogating the religious law of the Quran, which led to the charges that he was the
destroyer of religion and the source of rebellion against the state. ….
The BAB’s own words, however, made it clear that while his authority was equal to that of
Muhammad, he was likewise the herald of a succeeding and greator manifestation, “He Whom God
Would Manifest”, ………… and the BAB himself was executed by a regiment of soldiers in the public
square of Tabriz on July 9, 1853. ….. After the martyrdom of the BAB a few of his followers sought to
maintain a permanent ‘BABi’ movement and the sect became known as Azalis, from their leader,
Subh-I Azal. The majority, however true to the fundamental character of the BAB’s mission, bevame
Bahais.
The cycle of the BAB’s religion was the period of nineteen years, from 1844 to 1863, when Bahaullah
was accepted as the manifestation heralded by the BAB…” The BAB and Bahaullah are held by the
Bahais to be the co-founders of their faith.”
49-08
The glaring misrepresentations that have crept into the articles on the Bahai faith and BABism in the
Encyclopedia Britanica are unfortunate. It is presumed, their author did not have access to all the
material on the subject.
There is no historical foundation for the allegation that the BAB was Baha’s herald [see A(i) supra,
pages (81-81A)].
There is no historical foundation for the allegation that “after the martyrdom of the BAB, a few
followers sought to maintain a permanent BABi movement under their leader Subh-I Azal.”
The appointment of Subh-I Azal as the BAB’s successor by the BAB himself took place during the
life-time of the BAB. (see B(vi) (x) pp. 114-116 and B(vi) (3) pp. 119-125).
All the BABis recognised the appointment, including Baha himself until his defection in Edirne. The
BABi religion was officially proscribed in Persia. After this defection, Baha proscribed access to BABi
literature to improve his claim. Therefore the acceptance of Bahaullah by “the majority” is not in itself
a proof that he was in fact ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ of the Bayan.
The author of the articles does not account for the lacuna which he terms ‘the cycle of the BAB’s
religion was the period of 19 years, from 1844 to 1863.”
50-01
The author of the acticle on the Bahai faith quotes Baha as teaching that “Man’s spiritual and social
evolution proceeds in cycles of approximately 1,000 years.” How does he account for his allegation
that “the BAB’s mission,” which brought “a new Holy Book and abrogated the religious laws of the
Quran,” was for a “cycle of nineteen years,” although he asserts that “the BAB’s authority was equal to
that of Muhammad”. In the presence of the express provision of the Bayan that the BAB’s dispensation
is “in the stage of seed” (see A(ii) supra P.82) and that its “ultimate perfection will become apparent at
the beginning of the manifestation of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’,” whose advent, in the words of
the BAB as contained in the Bayan, will be in “Ghiyath” [=1511] or “Mustaghath” [=2001] [i.e. within
this number of years after the ‘Manifestation of the BAB]. See A(iv) supra, page 83, and see also infra.
Can then be two Points at one time (see (vi) (3) supra p. 124)?
Can two Gods be conceived one for Islam and one for the whole world as alleged by the Caravan (see
the Caravan, supra, pp. 78-79)?

There is no historical foundation for the allegation that Baha is a co-founder of the religion initiated by
the BAB. This allegation is negatived by Baha’s own statement. (see A(xiii) supra pp. 91-92; See also
A(i) supra p. 81a). The whole thing is a poor attempt to connect Baha’s claim with the BAB’s mission.
50-02
H) Baqiyyatullah (The Remnant of God)
The title of the Abscent Twelfth Imam, i.e. Muhammad son of Imam Hasan Askari and Narjis Khatun,
of the ‘Church of the Twelve, are Baqiyyatullah (The Remnant of God), Hujjataullah (the Proof of
God). Imam Mahdi, Qaim-iAl-I-Muhammad (He Who shall arise of the family of Muhammad) and
Sahibu-z-Zamman (the Lord of the Age). See my letter of June 25th, 1962.
The Ahsanul-Qisas (the Best of Stories), also called Qayyumal-Asma, a commentary on the Sura-IUsuf (see glossary attached to my letter of June 25th 1962), was composed by the Point at the beginning
of his mission. It referred to in the Persian Bayan, Unity iv, chapter 18 and Unity vii, chapter 1.
The Ahsanul-Qisas is also known as the Kitab-I-Awwal (the First Book), being the first book written
by the Point. It is referred to as the Kitab-I-Awwal in Subh-I-Azal’s Succint Account of the BABi
movement (Majmal-I Badi Dar Qaqay-I Zuhur Mani’).
In the course of one of his conversations with Professor Browne in Cyprus in March 1890, Subh-I Azal
incidentally mentioned “that at one time the Point, for some reason or other, issued a general order that
such of his followers as had in their possession copies of his Commentary on the Sura-I Yusuf should
“wash them out” or obliterate them. Between their love for their Masterand their love for his book, the
BABis found themselves in a dilemma, from which “
50-03
“the majority of them sought escape by expunging a single page of the Commentary.”
Now in a passage in the Ahsanul Qisas, the Point says: “Oremnant of God! I am wholly sacrificed to
thee; I am content to be reviled in thy way; I crave naught but to be slain in thy love; and sufficient
witness Unto Me is God, the Exalted, the Protector, the Ancient of Days 1”
<Arabic Text>
The title assumed by Sayyid Ali Muhammad such as BAB, the Point, the Mahdi, the Qaim, etc. are set
forth in my letter of 13th February 1962, on the authority of the Persian Bayan Unity I, Chapter 15.
In his Dalail-I Sab’a (the Seven Proofs) the Point says (quoted from the French translation the Bayan
by A. L. M Nicholas,
« L’altesse attendue a condescendu 1 à se présenter sous l’aspect de la Porte qui conduit à la
connaissance du descendant caché de Mohammed. Dans son premier livre 2, il a parlé au nom des Lois
du Qoran, afin que les hommes ne fussent pas troublés par le nouveau texte et la Loi nouvelle ; afin
qu’ils pussent se convaincre que ce texte et cette Loi sont en relation avec leur propre Livre 3, afin
qu’ils ne restassent pas dans l’obscurité.... »
50-04
<French Text> continued.
In footnote 1 A.L.M Nicholas states:
Ici, le Mehdi (car le Bâb n’expliquera son véritable rang que plus tard) et non plus la Porte qui conduit
au descendant caché de Mohammed. Et encore, sous la plume du Bâb, le Mehdi ne signifie-t-il plus ce
que pensent les Chiites auxquels il s’adresse. En effet, Jésus a promis de revenir, et il est revenu sous
les traits de Mohammed ; Mohammed a affirmé qu’il était le dernier des Prophètes, et cependant il a
annoncé l’arrivée du Mehdi. C’est que le cycle du Prophétisme est fermé en sa personne et que
commence celui de « Ceux que Dieu doit manifester. » Et, jusqu’à aujourd’hui, le Bâb est le premier et
le seul de ceux-là. Nous le verrons au cours de cet ouvrage, annoncer, comme l’out fait les autres
Prophètes, mois plus nettement, l’arrivée du second. Il n’est plus l’envoyé de Dieu, qui parle en son
nom, il n’est plus le lieutenant, il est le miroir qui le reflète, le Dieu visible, promis par 1e Qoran.

In his book entitled the Kitab-I Iqan. (The Book of Assurance) composed by him at Baghdad in support
of the BABi religion, Baha quotes in full the passage from the Ahsanul-Qisas quoted in P. 153 supra,
with the following preface:
“Glory be to God! In the $ of his books, which he [i.e. the Point] named Qayyum-al-Asma [i.e. the
Ahsanul-Qisas], and which is the first, the greatest, and the chiefest of all books, he [i.e. the Point]
foretells his own martyrdom, and in one passage, writes the following: ………… “

50-05
Without prejudice to the position of originality, i.e. the bearer of a New Revelation inherent in him as
the ‘Nuqta’ or ‘Point’ from the outset, Unity I, Chapter 1, and Unity I, Chapter 15, the Persian Bayan,
Sayyid Ali Muhammad in the early period of his mission as set out in his First Book, and aloborated in
his later book entitled the Dalail-I Sab’a (The Seven Proofs) supra, claimed that he enjoys a special
spiritual communication with the abscent Twelfth Imam, called the Imam Mahdi or Baqiyyatullah (see
letter of 25th June 1962), and assumed the title of “BAB” or “Gate,” speaking more freely as his
followers became more receptive of divine Mysteries, he asserted his identity with the Imam Mahdi
and Baqiyyatullah Qaim and declared himself to be the “Nuqta’ or ‘Point’ [i.e. the manifestation of the
Primal Will].
Therefore the passage quoted in P. 153 bears reference to the Abscent Twelfth Imam.
The Bahai hierarchy has never attempted to explain the true significance of the title ‘Nuqta’ assumed
by the BAB. In his Will & Testament during the Baghdad period, Baha identified Subh-I Azal with
Baqiyyatullah (A (xiv) p. 99 supra). With Baha’s defection from the BAB’s Cause, the relevant
passage in the Ahsanul-Qisas
50-06
or the First Book was misconstrued to further the private ends and personal ambition of Baha!
Abdul Baha’s Traveller’s Narrative, Persian text; vol I, P. 3:
The relevant passage from Ahsanul-Qisas is prefaced as follows in the Traveller’s Narrative: “Now
what he [i.e. Sayyid Ali Muhammad] intended by the term BAB [Gate] was this, that he was the
channel of grace from same great person [i.e. Baha] still behind the veil of glory, who was the
possessor of countless and boundless perfections by whom will he moved, and to the bound of whose
love he clung. And in the First Book which he wrote in explanation of Sura-I Yusuf, he addressed
himself in all passages to that person unseen from whom he received help and grace, sought for aid in
the arrangement of his preliminaries, and craved the sacrifice of life in the way of his love.”
In the Dawn-Breakers, P. 10, Nabil’s Narrative, page 10, Nabil prefaces the relevant passage as
follows: “It was He, the BAB, who in His first, His Most weighty and Exalted Book, revealed this
passage concerning Bahaullah: …”
In the Glossary annexed to the Dawn-Breakers, Shoghi Effendi explains the term “Baqiyyatullah (the
Remnant of God)” as a “title applied both to the BAB and to Bahaullah”.
In his Will and Testament (A(V) supra PP. $), Muhammad Ali identifies Baqiyyatullah with Baha.
50-07
In his Kashful Hiyal (the Uncovering of Deceptions) Abdul Husayn Ayati nicknamed Avarah states:
The Kashful Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, P. 32 or the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, p.52:
“The Bahai allegation that the BAB intended the term ‘O Remnant of God, I am wholly sacrificed to
thee” for Baha is without foundation and contrary to the truth.”
50-08
I) Ghiyath and Mustaghath (see A(iv) supra P. 83)
The following quotations are from A. L. M. Nicholas French translation of the Point’s Persian Bayan.
Unity II, Chapter 16, P. 122 Vol I. inja
« Sinon, si vous entendez dire qu’une manifestation s’est produite avec des versets (semblables à ceux)
d’auparavant, et cela au nombre de Dieu (c’est-à-dire en 1511) 1 entrez-y tous. S’il ne s’est pas
manifesté à celte époque, cela aura lieu après 2001. »
Unity II, Chapter 16, P. 123, Vol I :
« Et si vous n’avez pas entendu (qu’une manifestation de ce genre se soit manifestée), alors gémissez et
priez, afin que le bienfait de Dieu ne se sépare pas de vous jusqu’à 200l ans, Si vous entendez dire
d’ici, 2001 ans que s’est, manifesté Celui qui est mon ami et le vôtre, Celui qui est mon Seigneur et le
vôtre, alors n’hésitez pas, ne fut-ce que l’espace d’un souffle; entrez tous dans l,’ordre de Dieu et ne
dites pas « pourquoi ? » ni «comment ? » Ceci est le plus haut des ordres que je vous donne. Par ce
que je vous permets, je vous délivre du feu de l’éloignement de Dieu.
0 gens du Béyân, soyez tous parmi ceux qui remercient ! Que si quelqu’un (d’entre vous) hésite
l’espace d’un souffle après 2001 années, sans aucun doute, il n’est pas dans la religion du Béyân et est
entré dons le feu, à moins que dans cet espace de temps, la manifestation de Dieu ne soit, pas
manifestée : alors tous ont le devoir de pleurer et de gémir 1. »
51-01

Unity II, Chapter 17, Vol. I, PP. 139-140
« S’Il se manifeste dans le chiffre 1511, et que tous entrent (dans sa religion), pas un seul ne restera
dans le feu ; s’il faut attendre jusqu’à 2001, et qu’alors tous entrent, pas un seul ne restera dans le feu ;
tous devenant changés en lumière.
Il faut demander ce bienfait à Celui que Dieu doit manifester, car le bienfait le plus haut, et le don le
plus sublime C’est qu’il ne reste pas de traînards comme dans les autres religions. Par exemple, les
lettres de l’Evangile : deux autres livres descendent de Dieu, et ils sont encore dans l’attente de Celui
qui doit venir et dont le nom est Ahméd.
S’il ne se manifeste pas jusqu’à. ces deux noms (1511 et 2001), forcément il se manifestera ; il ne peut
y échapper. »
Unity III, Chapter 13, Vol II, PP. 54-55:
« Car, de la manifestation d’Adam, jusqu’au début de la r Manifestation du l’oint du Beyân, il n’a passé
que douze mille deux cent dix ans de la vie de ce monde. Il n’y a aucun doute qu’avant (Adam) il n’y
eut eu pour Dieu des mondes et des hommes à l’infini, et autre que
Dieu n’en peut compter le nombre. Dans aucun de ces mondes il n’y avait de spectacles de la volonté
que le point du Béyàn, le maître de sept lettres …. »
« Je suis » exactement cette semence descendue de tel ciel sur « telle terre » …. C’est pourquoi le
Point du Béyân ne dit pas aujourd’hui c’est moi les spectacles de la volonté depuis Adam jusqu’à
aujourd’hui, ce qui serait exactement la même parole (que cele qu’aurait dite l’enfant de douze ans). »

51-02
Il en est de même si tous les croyants au Béyân croient à Celui que Dieu manifester ; pas un seul
d’entre eux ne restera dans le feu, et l’ordre de non croyant ne sera lancé contre aucun d’entre eux.
Attendez, la manifestation afin que l’espace d’un souffle ne s’ecoule pas entre le moment de la
manifestation et celui où donneront leur foi tous ceux qui croient au Béyân, car il n’est pas digne
qu’elle se fasse attendre durant « Moustaqas » (c’est-à-dire 2001 ans). S’ils prennent le pas de la probe
de la circonspection, cette circonspection était et est dans le feu. Quoique notre espoir en. Dieu très bon
et très bienveillant soit ceci qu’au moment de sa manifestation, par Ses ordres élevés dans Ses écrits Il
réveille tous ses esclaves de leur sommeil et ne permette pas que, suivant l’ordre formel de son Béyàn
qui est « de qias à moustaqas » ils restent fans le feu ; car enfin, personne autre que Dieu ne connaît la
date de la manifestation.
51-03
Unity III, Chapter 15, Vol. II, PP. 63-64 Cd:
Quand elle a lieu, il faut que tous affirment le Point de la Vérité et remercient Dieu, quoique nous
espérions en Dieu qu’il n’y aura pas à attendre jusqu’à a moustaqas et qu’avant cette date s’élèvera la
parole de Dieu.
La preuve de Celui que Dieu doit manifester sont ses versets, et la preuve que e’est bien Lui qui i’est,
c’est Lui-même. En effet, autre que Lui est connu par son intermédiaire et Lui ne peut être connu que
par Lui. Dieu est fort au-dessus de ce que lui attribuent les hommes.
Unity VII, Chapter 10, Vol III, PP. 25-27
« Parmi les noms de Dieu aucun nom n’égale en nombre le nom de « Moustaqass » 1. Il est donc le
plus haut des fruits des noms arrivés au plus extrême degré de la manifestation. Il ne s’y manifeste que
l’Unité Primitive et dans l’Unité Primitive il n’y que l’Unité Primitive (le Point) qui, dans le Qoran est
le Prophète de Dieu, dans le Béyân, le maître des sept lettres: avant le Qoran, Jésus et après le Béyân,
Celui que Dieu doit manifester. Les formes, dans les différentes manifestations, sont diverses, mais
celui qui revêt ces formes est pur des éléments humains, et c’est »
51-04
Unity VII, Chapter 10, Cd
« la Volonté Primitive que les formes ne peuvent influencer. Aucun nom de Dieu n’est plus élevé en
nombre que le nom de « Mustaqass » dans le rang des noms. Si tu multiplies chaque unité du nom de
Allahoummé par une unité de dix-neuf (106 X 19 = 2014), le chiffre du mot Ahad sera à diminuer du
chiffre obtenu par le nom de « Moustaqass = 106 X 10 = 2014, or Moustaqass = 2001 et Ahad = 13. Si
au lieu du nom Moustaqass tu comptes le nombre Elmoustaqass, le nombre du nom du vivant se trouve
ajouté à Moustaqass (Elmoustaqass = 2032). Au jour du jugement le spectacle de ce nom C’est
manifesté et il démontrait Dieu.

C’est pourquoi il est ordonné à tous, du moment où la semence pénètre dans la matrice, de porter cette
table sur soi, et que sur elle soit inscrit le nom de Moustaqass. Du moment de la manifestation à la
manifestation suiuante, Dieu sail combien il s’écoulera de temps 1 ; mais cela ne durera pas plus
longtemps que le nom de Moustaqass si Dieu le veut.
L’époque du Qoran, depuis son commencement jusqu’à son retour, a vu s’écouler le nom « Egfer »
(1281) en diminuant le nom de « Hou » (11). Dans le Béyân Dieu sait jusqu’à quelle époque cela
arrivera, »
51-05
Unity VII, Chapter 10 Cd
car il u’y a là aucune supputation possible” : en effet, la distance de temps qui sépare l’Evangile du
Qoran n’est même pas de mille années.
F.N 1. Que pense Béha Oullah de cette affirmation !!
F.N. 2Comment dès lors dire qu’il a prédit aussi exactement la date de la venue de son successeur ?
In the Abjad notation:
Mustaghath
Allahumma
Adad-I Ahad (Number One)

<Arabic Text>
<Arabic Text>
<Arabic Text>

=
=
=

2001-12-17
106 X 19 = 2014
13

Al-Mustaghath
Allahuma

<Arabic Text>
<Arabic Text>

=
=

2032
108 X 19 = 2014

Adad-I Hayy

<Arabic Text> <le nombre vivant> The Living Number
=
18 +

Ghiyath

<Arabic Text>

=

1511

51-06
<Same As 51-05>
51-07
M. A. L. M. Nicholas preface to his translation of Bayan, Vol. IV :

PREFACE
M. Huart, dans la Revue de l’Histoire des Re1igions, critique avec une grande bienveillance le premier
volume de ma traduction du Béyân persan.
Son cœur d’ancien élève et de professeur actuel de l’Ecole des Langues Orientales vivantes l’induit à
l’indulgence envers ce qui sort de la plume d’un ancien élève. Enfin, ex-drogman lui-même, il connaît
les difficultés matérielles et morales auxquelles se heurte celui qui dans cette carrière désire travailler
un peu et sa sympathie va forcément à ceux qui cherchent, n e fût-ce que de loin, à imiter son exemple.
Il veut bien prendre la peine de demander un mot d’explication sur le nombre 1511 donné par le calcul
numérique des lettres composant le nom de Dieu ; et je suis tout honteux de constater que c’est à mon
imprécision que s’adresse cette demande. Je ne dis pas, en effet, quel est le nom de Dieu dont il s’agit
Le texte porte ..... et cela au nombre de Dieu, ELAGHIEC …. Et s’il n’est pas manifesté cette époque,
cela aura lieu après EL MOUSTAQAC.
EL Aghiec : Elif = l, Ghaïne = 1000, Yè = 10, ce = 500, ce qui produit 1511.
Mr. Huart, in the Review of the History of Re1igions, criticizes with a great benevolence the first
volume of my translation of Persan Béyân. Its heart of former pupil and current professor of the School
of the alive Languages Eastern the armature with indulgence towards what leaves the feather of a
former pupil. Lastly, ex-drogman itself, it has the material problems and morals facing that which in
this career wishes to work a little and its sympathy goes inevitably to those which seek, N E was this
that by far, to imitate its example.
It wants to take the trouble well to ask a word of explanation on the number 1511 given by numerical
calculation of the letters composing the name of God; and I am very ashamed of noting that it is with
my inaccuracy that addresses this request. I do not say, indeed, which is the name of God of which it all
is the text carries..... and that to the number of God, ELAGHIEC.... And if it is not expressed this time,

that will take place after EL MOUSTAQAC
51-08
Duplicate of 51-07
52-01
The figures 1511 & 2001 years referred in the foregoing quotations represent respectively the sum of
the letters in the words Ghiyath & Mustaghath according to the Abjad notation.
In the Point’s view, every one thousand years of the age of the Universe equals one year in the life of a
manifetstation and its evolution.
For this reason, the Point compares Adam to semen, himself to a youth of twelve years of age, and ‘He
Whom God Shall Manifest’ to a youth of fourteen years of age. Since, in the Point’s view, man’s
spiritual and social evolution proceeds in cycles of approximately 1500 or 2000 years, 1511 or 2001
years must elapse between the dispensation of the Point and the advent of ‘He Whom God Shall
Manifest’.
On the authority of the Bayan, ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ could not come until the Point’s
religion had obtained currency, and the law laid down in the Bayan had been $. It was an impossible
thing that one revelation should soon be abrogated by another and that so brief a period should separate
the two manifestations.
These conclusions are further supported by the Point’s Epistle reproduced in page 20 of the Collection
entitled ‘Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Sayyid Husayn’.
52-02
These conclusions are inherent in Baha’s letter (A (xiii) supra, PP. 83-90), Baha’s Kitab-I Iqan, Baha’s
Will & Testament in Baghdad (A(xiii) supra PP. 98-99) and Muhammad Ali’s testament (B(V) supra
PP. 109-110), wherein stress is laid on the Mustaghath, as conceived by the Point.
When Baha “threw off disguise” in Edirne and claimed himself to be ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’,
he had to resort to subterfuge to put on a new contention on the word ‘Mustaghath’ which was a
stumbling block to his claim.
Since the link of Baha’s claim with the Point mission hunges on the word ‘Hin’ or after ‘Hin’, and
since Baha is alleged to have “received the first intimations of his divine mission in A.H. 1268” or to
have “declared himself to be ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ in A.H. 1269 on arrival from Baghdad”
(B(ii) supra P.105, and B(iii) supra P. 106), approximately eight years after the execution of the Point,
the word ‘al Mustaghath’ was construed to stand not for not what the Point had intended, as is laid in
the Bayan, but for eight years on the grounds that al-Mustaghath consisted of eight letters.
In a passage in his Sura-I Haykal Baha censures a particular BABi in the following terms: “And
amongst the infidels is he who disbelieved within his soul and arose in war, saying ‘these verses are
spurious’: thus “
52-03
“in bygone time said men who have passed away, and lo! In hell-fire do they [new] cry for help
(Yastaghithin ”they cry for help”, in allusion to the Mustaghath (He from Whom Help is Sought).
As no headway was made until this construction, or rather misconception, another subterfuge had to be
resorted to, to link up Baha’s claim and the Point’s mission:
The Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, PP. 220-221: “The BAB expressed his desire” that some of his
companions should “compose a treatise, and seek, by the aid of verses and traditions, to establish the
validity of his mission.” Mirza Asadullah’s treatise won the unqualified admiration of the BAB.” The
BAB bestowed on him the title of ‘Dayyan’ and “revealed in his honor the Lawh-I Hurufat (‘The
Tablet of the Letters’).”
“The People of the Bayan [i.e. followers of Subh-I Azal], who utterly misconceived the purpose
underlying that tablet, thought it to be a mere exposition of the science of Jafr (science of divination).
When, at a later time, in the early years of Bahaullah’s incarnation in the prison city Akka, Janab-I
Mubaligh made, from Shiraz, his requestthat he [i.e. Baha] unravelled the mysteries of that Tablet,
there was revealed from his pen an explanation which they who “
52-04
“misconceived the words of the BAB might do well to ponder. Bahaullah adduced from the statements
of the BAB irrefutable evidence proving that the appearance of the ‘Man Yuzhurullah’ [i.e. He Whom
God Shall Manifest, to wit Bahaullah $ footnote 2] must needs occur no less than nineteen years after
the declaration of the BAB. The mystery of the Mustaghath had long baffled the most searching minds

among the People of the Bayan, had proved an unsurmountable obstacle to their recognition of the
promised One [i.e. Baha].
The BAB had himself in that Tablet unravelled that mustery; no one however, was able to understand
the explanation which he had given. It was left to Bahaullah to unveil it to the eyes of all men.”
This ingenious interpretation of the Mustaghath accounts for Baha’s “general manifestation in A.H.
1280” and for the misstatement in the article under Bahaism in the Encyclopedia Britanica that “the
cycle of the BAB’s religion was the period of nineteen years to 1863 …..”.
Neither the “Lawh-I Hurufat” nor Baha’s “explanation” to the unnamed questioner is repsoduced in
Nabil’s Narrative to uphold “the irrefutable evidence”.
52-05
There is however no need to call for the production of the “irrefutable evidence”. Baha is hoist with his
own petard: A copy of Baha’s letter in his own handwriting as well as a copy of the same letter in
legible hand penned in the handwriting of Baha’s son Muhammad Ali, reproduced in fac-simile and
transmitted herewith for historical record, nails Baha’s alleged “explanation” to the counter;
In the letter, Baha aqdmits that ‘He Whom God Shall Appear’ or ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’,
named as such in the Bayan, will “appear in the Mustaghath” [i.e. 2001 years hence reckoning from the
date of the Point’s Dispensation].
This admission is incontrovertible evidence proving the falsity of Baha’s pretension that he was “He
Whom God Shall Manifest’ of the Bayan.
For Avareh’s evaluation of Baha in the Kashful-Hiyal see infra.
A portion of Baha’s letter in question is reproduced in page 18 of the Risala-I Janab-I Jud, exhibit 5.
52-06
In his comments in J.R.A.S October, 1889 on the document of great historical interest viz. the
appointment of Subh-I Azal by the BAB as his successor “the whole question on which the BABi
schism hinges is therefore this: “Is Baha ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ or not? If he is then Subh-I
Azal’s appointment ceases to be valid. If not, then Subh-I Azal is undoubtedly BAB’s chosen
successor”.
The People of the Bayan [i.e. Subh-I Azal’s followers have all along been well aware of Baha’s bogus
claim. Baha’s own admission answers the question put by Professor Browne and unveils Baha’s bogus
claim to the eyes of all men.
Commenting on the state of affairs from the date of Subh-I Azal’s nomination onwards Professor
Browne in his Introduction to the Tarikh-I Jadid (The New History) by Mirza Husayn of Hamadan, PP.
XVIII-XX says: “Now a year before his martyrdom, on the fall of Shaykh Tabarsi and the death of
Hazrat-I Quddus (1849) [see glossary attached to my letter of June 25th, 1862] the BAB nominated
Mirza Yahya (then a lad of nineteen) to succeed him under the title of Subh-I Azal (“the Morning of
Eternity”), or Hazrat-I Azal (‘His Holiness the Eternal”).
The nomination was explicit and notorious, and on the death of the Founder in July 1850, the youthful
vicegerent”
52-07
“at once received the almost anonymous recognition and homage of the whole BABi community
(Footnote 1 : Cf Gobineau’s Religions et Philosophis dans l’Asie Centrale, PP. 277-8). Till the
catastrophe of September 1852, which proved fatal not only to Mirza Jani but nearly all the principal
apostles of the new faith who survived the earlier persecutions, he remained for the most part in the
neighbourhood of Teheran in the Summer, and in the district of Nur in Mazandaran in the winter,
actively occupied in arranging, transcribing and circulating the BABi books, preaching and expounding
the BABi doctrine, and comforting and edifying the BABi church. …. The evidence that at this period,
and for some considerable time afterwards [i.e. till Baha threw off disguise in the latter period of exile
in Edirne], Subh-I Azal, now living in almost solitary exile at Famagusta in Cyprus, a province of the
British Government, held undisputed and absolute sway over the BABi church is absolutely
conclusive.”
52-08
J) The Point’s Writings
1) Professor Browne’s Version:
Introduction to the Tarikh-I Jadid by Prof. Browne, P. XXVII :

“From the moment that his [i.e. Baha’s] claims were generally recognised by the BABis, however, the
whole of the earlier literature of the sect, including the writings of the BAB himself, began to suffer
neglect and sink into oblivion. Without admitting the assertion made by the Azalis, that Baha and his
followers deliberately destroyed, or fundamentally tampered with, the books belonging to the older
dispensation on a large scale, it is clear that conditions which could alone secure the continual
transcription and circulation of these books had ceased to exist.”
2. Baha’s Version:
From Baha’s letter written by him nine years after his arrival at Baghdad from Teheran (A(XIII) supra
PP. 93 & 96): “All that was revealed [by the Point] were collected together and transcribed in the
blessed handwriting [of Subh-I Azal] ………”
This letter is contained in the Collection of Abha’s Epistles before, and soon after, his “manifestation”
and bears the number One.
53-01
From Baha’s letter No. 140 written by him from Acre addressed to Sayyid Ali Akbar known as Sayyid
Mahdi surnamed by Baha Ismallah-al-Mahdi and contained in the Collection of Baha’s Epistles before
and soon after his “manifestation” (Note F P. 22 supra):
“With considerable inconvenience and patience” Baha “succeeded in collecting together the writings of
His Holiness the Supreme “[i.e. the Point] which he “turned over to Yahya [i.e. Subh-I Azal] the
wicked for transcription by him” during the period of exile “in Irak”. Besides being of no avail Subh-I
Azal’s transcriptions contained “interpretations inserted by him.” For this reason, Subh-I Azal’s
transcriptions “are to be left as they are in the same box.”
The Point’s “writings penned in the handwriting of [his amanuensis] “Sayyid Husayn” are
distinguishable “whether bound or not are to be delivered to Nabil before Ali” [See Note F. P. 32
supra] “for secret conveyance to the Most Holly Seat [i.e. Acre], “the underlying purpose of which is to
have them copied and to make their originals available. Yahya’s transcriptions, distinguished by his
miserable handwriting and mostly bound by Kalim [i.e. Mirza Musa, Baha’s brother, surnamed Kalim
because he talked with God, Baha] are not to be mistaken”.
53-02
“The [Point’s] writings penned in the handwriting of [his amanuensis] Sayyid Husayn must be
forwarded”. Had facilities and fit scribes been available Baha would have had the writings transcribed
there. “Although this servant [i.e. Baha] does not perceive in himself the ability to reveal verses [i.e.
inspired words] not to speak of [inability] to probe into those writings”. Yet as the writings belong to
the previous dispensation, Baha seeks divine guidance so that once again time may be spent to have the
writings deciphered and transcribes by scribes sanctified from interpolations of slanderers”.
<Farsi Text>
53-03
<Farsi Text Continued>
From the Epistle to the Son of the Wolf by Baha translated by Julie Chamler 1928:
PP. 127-128: “God is witness that I have not read the Bayan, nor its propositions; but it is indubitably
clear that the BAB has made of it his promised Book …”
I have always lived in turmoil, and have not had the tranquillity necessary to study the Books of His
Supreme Highness [i.e. the BAB], or other Books.”
P. 129 : “…….. To this end, I had chosen a few people to collect the writings of the Point [i.e. the
BAB]. When this was done, I brought together Mirza Yahya [i.e. Subh-I Azal] and Mirza Wahhab
Khorasani known by the name of Mirza Jawad. Conferring with my instructions, these men prepared
two complete series of the works of His Highness the Point. I have been so preoccupied by my
relations with the whole world that I have never read these books, nor, with my own eyes,
contemplated the works of the Point.
The writings remained in the hands of these two persons, and it was agreed that when the time came for
me to leave Baghdad, Mirza Yahya
53-04
should take them to Persia, where he would publish them …….. In short, he abandoned the works of
the BAB at Baghdad ……… For a time I was reacked with infinite grief, until through means which
god alone knows, I was enabled to send the writings into another country. God protected them and
brought them to a place which he had chosen.”

The Epistle to the Son of the Wolf was written by Baha towards the end of his days. How do the
transcriptions of the Point’s works “in the blessed handwriting” of Subh-I Azal turn overnight into
“miserable penmanship” of Subh-I Azal?
Baha’s claim that he “never read, or write $ his own eyes, contemplated any of the Point’s works”, and
his accusation against Subh-I Azal “of having tampered with them” in his transcriptions cannot be
reconciled.
Baha’s reticence over the fate of “the Point’s works conveyed secretly to Acre at his own instance,”
tends to support the BABi assertion that Baha destroyed or suppressed them in order “to render his own
works more attractive.” to quote from Subh-I Azal (see infra).
53-05
3. Abdul Baha Abbas Version:
In his Traveller’s Narrative, Abdul Baha Abbas, who, according to Avareh in his Kashful-Hiyal (the
Uncovering of Deceptions) “ personated himself as an unknown traveller and named the book
“Maqala-I Shakhs-I Sayyah ki dar Qaziyya-I BAB neveshteh ast”, (A Traveller’s Narrative written to
illustrate the Episode of the BAB), to cite himself as authority for himself in espousal of his father’s
cause Baha, has the following scanty remarks to make about the Point’s writings:
The Traveller’s Narrative, Vol I, Persian Text, PP. 69-70:
“Of the BAB’s writings many remained in man’s hands. Some of these were commentaries on, and
interpretations of, verses of the Quran; Some were prayers, homilies, and hints of [the true significance
of certain] passages; others were exhortations, admonitions, dissertations on the different branches of
the doctrine of the Divine Unity, demonstrations of the special prophetic mission of the Lord of
existing things [Muhammad], and (as hath been understood) encouragements to amendment of
character, severance from worldly states, and dependence on the inspiration of god. But the essence
and purport of his compositions were the praises and descriptions of that Reality soon to appear which
was his only object and aim, his darling, and his desire.”
53-06
4) The Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, P. 430:
“The seventh Naw-Ruz after the declaration of the BAB fell on the sixteenth day of the month of
Jamadiy’l-Avval, in the year A.H. 1267 (A.D. 1851), a month and half aqfter the termination of the
struggle of Zanjan. That same year, towards the end of spring, in the early days of the month of
Sha’ban (1-30 June A.D. 1851), Bahaullah left capital for Karbala. I was [i.e. author Nabil], at that time
dwelling in Karmanshah, in the company of Mirza Ahmad (-I Katib otherwise known as Mulla Abd al
Karim of Qazwin] the BAB’s amanuensis who had been ordered by Bahaullah to collect and transcribe
all the sacred writings [of the BAB], the originals of which were, for the most part, in his possession.”
Professor Browne’s Footnote 1 in PP. 41 of the Traveller’s Narrative, Vol. II English Translation = P.
53, Persian Text Vol. I:
“Mulla Abd al Karim was also known amongst the BABis by the name of Mirza Ahmad-I Katib (the
Scribe), inasmuch as he acted as amanuensis of the BAB and later to Mirza Yahya, Subh-I Azal. He
was one of the twenty eight victims put to death in August 1852 in Teheran, apparently without having
undergone the previous torture which he had much feared and wherefrom he had prayed frequently to
be delivered.”
53-07
6. Subhi’s Version:
Fazlulah (or Fayzullah) Muhtadi nicknamed Subhi is the author of the Kitab-I Subhi. In his new book
entitled ‘The Payam-I Padar (“The Father’s Message”) he says:
P. 184: “A few years after the death of Abdul Baha Abbas when Shoghi had taken over the reins of
administration of Bahai affairs, his maiden directive was that any letter and documents penned in the
handwriting of the BAB and Baha must be recovered and forwarded to him for retention, the
underlying purpose of which was to withhold from the public, and suppress, any letter or document
calculated to be detrimental to the Bahai faith.”
7. Avareh’s version:
The Kashful Hiyal (The Uncovering of Deceptions) by Abdul Husayn Ayati, nicknamed Avareh, Vol
III, 3rd impression, PP. 210-212:
“Because they lived without working or their living free, practice of letter or verse writing is a hobby
which members of Baha’s family are apt to ride.” The example was set by “Baha himself who practised

verse-writing for twelve years to be able to write something like the BAB, as regards the style,
composition and penmanship.”
53-08
Duplicate of 53-07
54-01
Avareh’s version continued.
“How many epistles and documents of the BAB were destroyed by Baha because they were deleterious
to Baha’s interest! How many spurious epistles and documents, product of Baha’s fertile mind, were
made public and palmed off on the BABis as the BAB’s!”
After Baha’s death, Abdul Baha Abbas applied the same tactics “as regards the epistles of his father
Baha.” Under the pretence or pretext that they are required at his headquarters at Acre, Abdul Baha
Abbas “recovered and destroyed some of these epistles.” “He forged some others and foisted them on
his followers.” Shoghi Effendi is now “in footsteps” of Abdul Baha Abbas.
“Asked about his casting into the Shat-al-Arab the documents containing the verses revealed to him at
Baghdad, Baha said: “These are divine bounties destined for the fish in the Tigris as their share or
portion.”
For Baha’s practice of verse-writing see Note F. P. 20 supra.
54-02
The Kashful Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression P. 50 or the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression P. 68:
“The BAB’s works contained no indication of the appearnce of another divine manifestation except
after the elapse of about two thousand years reckoning from the BAB’s dispensation. Further the
BAB’s works made no provision for Baha’s vicegerency. On the contrary, they made specific provision
for Subh-I Azal’s vicegerency. This accounts for Baha’s recourse to any artifice and stratagem to
destroy the BAB’s works. Baha was bent upon destroying the Bayan. But he met with failure.”
54-03
8. The Tanbihun Naimin’s (The Awakening of the Sleepers) version:
PP. 16-17: Acting ostensibly on behalf of Subh-I Azal, Baha in Baghdad addressed circular letters to
the BABis in Persia calling upon them to return to him the Point’s writings in their possession,
including Baha’s own letters wherein he acknowledged Subh-I Azal’s authority as the Point’s
successor and offered his allegience to him. Having received some of the documents, he despatched to
Persia his wifeMahd-I Ulya, his own son Muhammad Ali and an attendant who went about the country
and collected the Point’s writings. Laden with two chests containing the Point’s writings, they returned
to Baghdad and delivered the writings to Baha.
9. Subh-I Azal’s Version:
The Traveller’s Narrative, English Translation, Vol II, PP. 335-347:
“On October 11th 1889, I (i.e. Prof. Browne) received a letter from Captain Young (dated September
30th) endorsing a letter and sundry other documents from Subh-I Azal. Amongst these documents was a
list of some of the writings of the BAB and Subh-I Azal written out by the latter ….”
54-04
“In the letter accompanying this list Subh-I Azal wrote as follows concerning the fate of the BAB’s
works generally and of those above enumerated in particular:
“As to what you asked concerning the existence of certain epistles, it is even as you have heard, leaving
out of account that which from first to last passed into the hands of strangers, whereof no copy was
preserved. At the time of the martyrdom [of the BAB] at Tabriz, as they wrote from thence, many of
the original writings passed into the hands of persons belonging to the country of your Excellency or to
Russia, amongst these being even autograph writing of his Highness the Point [i.e. the BAB].
Search is necessary, for to read the the originals is difficult. If this humble one be applied to, copies
thereof will be sent. What I myself arranged and copied out while at Baghdad, and what was
commanded ($) to be collected of previous and subsequent [writings] until the day of martyrdom [of
the BAB] was nigh upon thirty volumes of bound books. I myself wrote them with my own hand, and
up to the present time I have written many. The originals and copies of these together with what was in
the writing of others, sundry other [books] written in proof of this religion by certain learned friends,
and what I myself wrote and compiled annonated to numerous volumes, as [regard in] the list thereof
[which] I have sent. For some years all these were in a certain place in the hands of a

54-05
G) The Point's Writings
9. Subh-I Azal's version cd.
"as a trust. Afterwards they were deposited in another place. Eventually I entrusted them to my own
relatives, [Prof. Browne's Footnote: By his "relatives" Subh-I Azal means his half brother Bahaullah
and those of his kindred who followed him. I never heard Subh-I Azal allude to Bahaullah and his
followers by name. When he spoke of them at ll (which he did but rarely) it was as his "relatives," "the
people at Acre," or "the Mirzais,], [on whose keeping] they were preserved for a whole; for, insasmuch
as the friends of this recluse [i.e. myself] had attained unto martyrdom through the equity and justice of
the suppresors of the age, who consider themselves as seekers after truth and just men, there was no $
but thatthis humble one [i.e. myself] should make his relatives his trustees. So did this humble one; and
whatever [was mine] of books and epistles was [deposited] in their house. The vicissitudes of the world
so fell out that these also unsheathed the sword of hatred and wrought what they would.
They carefully put to the sword the remnant of [my] friends [see my letter of 29th May 1962] who stood
firm, and making sternous efforts, got into their hands such of the books of His Highness the Point as
were attainable, with the idea of destroying them, and [thereby] rendering their own works more
attractive. They also carried off my trust [i.e. the books above referred to be committed to their care],
and fell not short in anything which can be effected by foes."
54-06
In his Introduction to the Tarikh-I Jadid (The New History) by Mirza Husayn of Hammadan, P.
XXXVIII, Professor Browne writes:
“Besides this many of the older writings of the time of the schism were probably preserved only at
BABi headquarters in Adrianopole, where, as we have seen, Subh-I Azal was left entirely without
supporters. What he could, he saved, and bore with him to Cyprus; but there can be no doubt that the
lion’s share fell to Baha, and was conveyed by him and his followers to Acre. And, from my own
experience, I can affirm that, hard as it is to obtain from the Bahais in Persia the loan or gift of BABi
Books belonging to the earlier period of the faith, at Acre it is harder still even to get a glimpse of
them. They may be, and probably are still preserved there, but for all the good the enquirer is likely to
get from them, they might almost as well have suffered the fate which the Azalis believe to have
overtaken them.”
54-07
K. Avareh’s evaluation of Baha, Abdul Baha Abbas & Shoghi Effendi:
The Kashful-Hiyal by Abdul Husayn Ayati nicknamed Avareh:
Vol I. Sixth impression, PP. 118-122:
“The House of Justice or the House of Existence of Shoghi Effendi:
One of the biggest “frauds practised by Baha & Abdul Baha Abbas” was the dangling before their
followers the vision of the so-called “House of Justice” as a sop “in which, after the death of Abdul
Baha Abbas & Muhammad Ali, were to vest administration of Bahai affairs, and to which were to be
credited all Bahai funds and properties.” Inasmuch as “Baha’s Godhead” was of “Abdul Baha’s
making” he considered himself as perhaps or perhaps Abdul Baha’s daughters and sons-in-law who
knew in their heart of hearts that Baha’s protector of god $ and Abdul Baha’s practice of $ to Baha
“were fake deemed themselves, entitled “to introduce, and did introduce, changes” in the provision for
the so-called House of Justice that “it turned out to be in fact Shoghi Effendi’s House of Existence with
Bahai funds and properties vested in Shoghi Effendi.”
54-08
Compiler’s Note:
1. Baha went by the name of “Dervish Muhammad” during his two years stay in Suleymaniyya
in the northern Iraq, Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s memoirs, typed copy, P. 13.
2. Mirza AbilFazl of Gulpaygan was a noted Bahai controversialist who composed the
Istidlaliyya (‘the Evidences’), otherwise known as the Risala-I Ayyubiyya in defence of the
Bahai cause. In the end he appears to have found out that he was bamboozled. (See infra, and
Note A, P.1 supra).
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol I, 6th impression, P. 146:

Asked to account for his silence about Abdul Baha Abbas, Mirza Abul Fazl of Gulpaygan sighed and
said: “Leave me alone, the master [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] is a politician, we have been taken in by his
sanctimony.”
In reply to a question why “the god [i.e. Baha or Abdul Baha Abbas] to whom “making” he had as
much contributed had now left him in such distressed circumstance Mirza Abul Fazl of Gulpaygan
said: This business [of god hood] flourished thanks to me. Now, that money is flowing into the lap of
Effendi [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] like sand he only
55-01
pays me four Pounds a month as hush-money.”
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, P. 90 or the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, PP. 107108:
“Dishonesty of Mirza Abul Fazl of Gulpaygan.”
Mirza Abul Fazl of Gulpaygan “composed books in Bukhara under the name of Sheikh Fazlullah of
Iran and cited from them in $ as authority for his arguments.” In Hamadan he went by the name of
“Mulla Abdullah” and carried a rosary to create the impression that he was a devout Moslem.
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, PP. 108-112:
Abdul Baha Abbas exhibited in a room in his house at Acre such articles as a horn, a skin-rug, a battlearc, a rosary, a Dervish’s crown, a hookah, and an outer-robe or gown, $ $ which to quote Abdul Baha
Abbas, were Baha’s outfit when he sojourned in Suleymaniyya under the name of Dervish
Muhammad,” and which were preserved in tact “out of considerations of expediency.” Abdul Baha
Abbas said: “despite the fact that the Ottoman authorities were strict with the blessed Beauty [i.e.
Baha], yet the power of the Blessed Beauty was such”
55-02
“that by means of the horn, etc. he proved himself to be god who could do what he willed.”
Avareh’s conclusion:
Just as the Blessed Beauty [i.e. Baha] impersonated himself as Dervish Muhammad, so Mirza Abul
Fazl held himself out as Mulla Abdullah, and as Abdul Baha Abbas represented himself as an unknown
traveller. Just as Abdul Baha Abbas cited the Traveller’s Narrative, so Mirza Abul Fazl ‘invoked
Sheikh Fazlulah of Iran. Just as Mr God (“Mirza Khoda, to wit, Baha] sounded the horn and pretended
himself to be the guide (‘Murshid’) of Dervishes in the presence of the Ottoman authorities, so Mirza
Abul Fazl carried a rosary and made a show of performing his devotions in the presence of comers, and
as Abdul Baha Abbas attracted attention in Mosques performing to be a Sunni.
That this practice of deceit and hypocrisy should be interpreted as a show of power is not only
ludicrous but also shameful.”
Compiler’s Note: In his new book entitled the Payam-I Padar (‘The Father’s Message’) Fazlullah (or
Fayzullah) Muhtadi nicknamed Subhi, PP 55-59, confirms that the author of the Traveller’s Narrative
was none other than Abdul Baha himself.
55-03
Commenting on the authority of the Traveller’s Narrative in J.R.A.S October 1892, Professor Browne
says: “……. From the perusal of certain letters written by Bahaullah’s son Abbas Effendi, I was led to
surmise that he might perhaps be the author of this history, the peculiar style of which appeared very
similar to his. This conjecture, however, till recently lacked positive confirmatory evidence. But few
weeks ago I received a letter from a Persian BABi of Jewish extraction …. Accompanied by a $
containing ……. A lithographed copy of this same Traveller’s Narrative, published, as it would appear,
in Bombay ….. My correspondent, who at the time knew no more of my edition of the work than I
knew of the Bombay edition, wrote concerning it as follows:
“…… of these two volumes, one is a history containing the observations of His Holiness the Mystery
of God [Hazrat-I-Sirrullah = Footnote 1 : the title of Abbas Effendi] (May my personality be his
sacrifice!) which he sets forth as made by “a traveller.”
55-04
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, second impression, PP. 66-71 or

The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, third impression, PP. 84-88:
Baha’s Fictitious Date of Birth
The BAB was born on the 12th of Muharram A.H. 1235 = October 20st 1819.
On dit Baha was born on the 2nd of Muharram A.H. 1233 (November 12, 1817).
Before he embraced the Bahai faith, Avareh had heared from elderly Moslems that “Haji” Mirza
Husayn or “Haji” Mirza Husayn Ali of Nur [i.e. Baha] had laid claim to Godhead.
Avareh’s attention was riveted on the word “Hajii”. Upon embracing the faith, Avareh noticed that
there was no mention of the title “Haji” for Baha. When, before his recantation, he began to write the
history of the Bahai faith entitled the Kawakib-al-Durriyya, Avareh probed into the question of “Hajji”
and to his surprise, he found out that Baha was born not in the month of Muharram but in the month of
Zil Hijja. Baby boys born in Zil Hijja were given the title of “Hajji” by way of meriting or attaining a
blessing. This fact accounted for Baha’s being called “Hajji” which was completely suppressed for
obvious reasons:
By shifting his date of birth from Zil Hijja to Muharram, Baha’s date of birth came near to
55-05
that of BAB’s and both anniversaries could be celebrated together in the month of Muharram. To quote
Baha “in the eyes of God both these dated [i.e. the BAB’s and Baha’s dates of birth] are reckoned as
one day.” Avareh gives Baha full marks for the ingenious manipulation of his date of birth.
Baha’s retrograde step towards childhood.
Baha was older than the BAB by about two years. The BAB’s Bayan forbade teachers to beat a pupil
lest he may turn out to be a potential ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ of the Bayan. In the BAB’s view,
the religion founded by him was to receive official recognition and the laws laid down in the Bayan
were to attain currency. According to the BAB, next divine manifestation was to appear after 2001
years represented by the sum of the letters in the word “Mustaghath”.
Baha claimed to be ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ foretold by the BAB. Baha was a man of thirtytwo years of age when the BAB made his utterances about “He Whom God Shall Manifest’. How did
they come true in the person of Baha, unless it is assumed that he took a retrograde step towards
childhood!
55-06
Baha was twenty-seven years old when he heard of the BAB’s call. History does not record the
circumstances under which Baha came to embrace BABi religion. He might have believed in the BAB
in good faith at the outset. However he soon found out that he had made a mistake, but he had already
burned his boats($). For this reason, he was all out to exploit, and to make full capital out of, the
sacrifices of the BAB’s followers.
The Tunkomani policy or the policy of the gentlemen who had a drubbing, adopted by Baha and Abdul
Baha Abbas:
From the time when Baha lit upon the idea of divinity, he adopted the Tunkomani policy or the policy
of the gentleman who had a drubbing:
Not to leave any traces behind, Turkomani robbers, on their way back from a marauding expedition
pulled off shoes of their horses and had them shod on the reverse. To shoe on the reverse has acquired
notoriety.
As for the gentleman who had a drubbing, a gentleman censured severely, and used scurrilous language
towards his groom for the latest ($) failure to groom his horses properly in his stable.
55-07
With his patience taxed to the point of exhaustion, the groom laid his hands on his master, floored him
on the litter in the stable and gave him a second thrashing. Upon hearing sounds of footsteps
approaching the stable door, the groom released($) his master got on his feet, assumed the airs of a
wronged person and addressed his master as follows: “Why are you so thrashing me! Is this the reward
of my services?” The master who had the thrashing was unable to speak the truth in front of a third
person. To save his face, he retorted back as follows: “any groom who does not render proper service is
bound to be thrashed; If you like it, stay and be thrashed; otherwise clean out.”

Abdul Baha Abbas copied this tactics as regards the Ottoman authorities, in any case in which they had
the upper hand, or in which something untowards had happened, he would reverse the true facts of the
case, make a show of success out of it with a flourish of trumpets and celebrate the occasion.
Throughout their lifetime, Baha and Abdul Baha Abbas adopted the Turkomani policy and followed in
the wake of the gentleman who had a drubbling.
55-08
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, PP. 66-71 and
the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, PP. 84-88 and
the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, P. 17.
Baha’s alleged general manifestation and production of inspired words in the garden of Ridvan:
“The first indications of Baha’s Turkamoni or gentleman who had the drubbing, policy appeared in the
garden of Najib Pasha, called the garden of Ridvan, where Baha was kept in custody for a period of
twelve days for conveyence to Istanbul. The detention exposed Baha to no danger. Rejoicing for
Baha’s release from detention were transformed into the festival of Rizvan when it was alleged that
Baha had a general manifestation and had produced inspired words, and the festival of Ridvan was
foisted upon the people of Baha.
In fact, those twelve days were the days when Baha stood in the shoes of the gentleman who had a
drubbing; There was no general manifestation and no inspired words produced by Baha at the time;
This frame-up was Baha’s product years after at his ease and free from care and anxiety and after
collusive consultation and advise.”
56-01
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, PP. 112-113 and the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression,
PP. 121-122 and the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, P. 128-129.
Sana-at-Tisa (the ninth year) and Mustaghath as interpreted by Baha (see A(V) supra P.83 and I) supra
P. 157 and P.166)
When Abdul Baha Abbas discovered that Baha’s business of Godhead was stagnating, he took
remedial measures for the business to pick up:
“Into friends, he infused his father’s miracles with the arts of finesse; to non-sympathisers, he stressed
the Moslem faith professed by the grand Sheikh and denied the rumours; then he treated his father’s
utterances as inspired words; have he beheld his father as a follower of the Hanafi school of Sunni law;
there he flourished the sleeves and grandeur [of Baha]; here he shook off the dust of accusation from
the shirt [of Baha].”
The BAB is reported to have said: “you will apprehend all the good in the ninth year.” This statement
is construed as Baha’s dispensation in the ninth year reckoning from the BAB’s manifestation.
56-02
If Baha’s “manifestation” did take place in the ninth year, then the festival of Ridvan, which constitutes
the date of the gentleman who had a drubbing, is wrong, as the festival of Ridvan, or the policy of the
gentleman who had a drubbing, took place in the eighteenth Bahai year.
Under the provision of the Bayan, 2001 years must elapse between the time of the BAB and the advent
of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’. In Baha’s interpretation, the period of 2001 years boiled down to
nine or nineteen years. Frivolous proofs are adduced by Abdul Baha Abbas to substantiate this
interpretation. Abdul Baha argues as follows:
All the events of the day of Resurrection were related to the BAB’s dispensation and were realized
simultaneously. A priori the Bayani’s 2001 years expired within a space of nine years and a new
manifestation took place in the person of Baha.
In his Kitab-I Aqdas (‘The Most Holy Book’) Baha says: “Whosoever layeth claim to a [new]
dispensation before the completion of a full thousand years is a liar and prevaricator ….”
Materials for the study of the BABi Religion by Professor Browne, P. 76.
On the analogy of Abdul Baha Abbas, Avareh adds, it may be argued that the period of 1000 years
provided in the Kitab-I Aqdas ran out in the space of several years by the independent dispensation of
Ayati [i.e. Avareh] who has abrogated the Kitab-I Aqdas and Baha’s religion.
56-03
Note J PP. 55-58 cd

K) Avareh’s evaluation of Baha, Abdul Baha Abbas and Shoghi Effendi
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, PP. 96-98 and the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, PP.
113-115.
Baha’s method of revealing (See Note F, supra, PP. 83($) and difference between Azalis and the
Bahais:
Remoteness of the Bahai hierarchy’s center of activities in Acre from Iran, ignorance of the followers
and Bahai hierarchy’s undertaking not to conduct Bahai propaganda in the Ottoman territories gave a
fillip to Baha’s practice of Godgead and encouraged BABis to seek contact with the Bahai hierarchy by
correspondence.
One of the time-honoured tricks practiced by the Bahai hierarchy was to set aside a resident Bahai to
pump up a visiting pilgrim as to his antecedents and wishes. The information so elicited was conveyed
to Baha. The pilgrim was later received by Baha who made a statement, or revealed an epistle in his
honour. When the pilgrim went back to the Pilgrim’s House, he spoke in his terms of Baha’s so-called
miracle or prophecy. Upon his return to Persia, with these fancies imprinted in his brain, the pilgrim
publicized these fancies whereby another gullible person like himself was won over to the Bahai cause.
56-04
Baha’s method of revealing verses Cd.
The majority of the BABis were won over to the Bahai cause in this manner save those who stood firm
in their alegience to the BAB and to his appointed successor Subh-I Azal.
In certain aspects, the Azalis are more sincere and frank because they believed that whatever the BAB
had said would materialise and consider the Bahais treacherous persons who betrayed the BAB’s
divine law and its guardian Subh-I Azal.
In certain aspects, the Azalis are more discerning or clear-sighted: if, in hastey they gave their hearts to,
and believed in, the false Mahdi, they recognised the bogus Mr God [“Mirza Khuda, to wit, Baha] and
offered him no obedience. Avareh concludes: As such, a practising Azali is one who has been fooled
once, and a true Bahai is one who has been fooled twice.
56-05
Note J PP. 55-58
K. Avareh’s evaluation of …continued
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression, P. 45:
Baha’s Pretentions:
“Baha was a disciple of the BAB during the life time of the latter; after the execution of the BAB, he
became a follower of the BAB’s successor Subh-I Azal (who was a brother of Baha); Afterwards he
disobeyed Subh-I Azal and the BAB’s Cause and became headstrong; Contrary to the provisions of the
BAB’s Book, first he claimed to be the return of Hsayn [i.e. Imam Husayn]; then he claimed to be the
Messiah returned; then he claimed to be God; In the end, he claimed God & prophets and held up the
prophets to ridicule and said: “All the prophets prostrate themselves in worship of my threshold and all
gods are created beings at my behest!!”
He died of dysentery after twenty-two days of illness at Acre in the year A.H. 1309 (A.D. 1892).”
56-06
K) Avareh’s evaluation ….
The Kashful-Hiyal, Vol III. 3rd impression, PP. 79:
Baha’s claim independently of the Bayan:
For seven years after he had embraced the Bahai faith, Avareh was unaware of the real cause schism
between Subh-I Azal and Baha. Taking Baha’s and Abdul Baha Abbas’s writings as gospel truth,
Avareh laboured under the misapprehension that Subh-I Azal’s claim was devoid of foundation. His
contacts with the Azali leaders in Iran however served Avareh as an eye opener: If the BAB’s saniy,
Avareh $, is not to be doubted, then the Azalis have taken the right course and the Bahais have
deliberately and erroneously strayed from the right course. It is an indisputable fact that the BAB had
Subh-I Azal in mind and appointed him as his successor on the BAB’s conclusive documentary
evidence. Baha himself submitted to the authority of Subh-I Azal.
Despite the destruction wrought by Baha into the BAB’s works and Epistles evidencing Subh-I Azal’s
appointment, surviving documents written by the BAB and Baha himself and held by the Azalis bear
witness to Subh-I Azal’s nomination as the BAB’s chosen successor and vicegerent.

56-07
Baha’s claim independently of the Bayan Cd.
Disturbing the rights of his brother Subh-I Azal and harbouring designs of setting up a standard on his
own account, Baha set about sabotaging Subh-I Azal’s appointment as the BAB’s chosen successor,
failing which he tried another: Baha proceeded to destroy the fundamental basis of the BABi cause and
claimed to be the Promised One independently of the Bayan, the Promised One who is to appear 2001
years hence reckoning from the date of the BAB’s dispensation. To support his pretensions, Baha
adduced ridiculous and frivolous proofs which may be read for one’s delectation.
(See Supra Sana-at-Tisa and Mustaghath PP. 193-194)
56-08
The Kashful-Hiyal Vol III 3rd impression, P. 173.
Plagarisms of Baha, Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi:
In his Commentary on the “Unity” (Sura CX11 Quran) Subh-I Azal cited from Islamic works the
words “Spirituality” (‘Rayhan’) and ‘Paradise’ (‘Haziratul-Quds’). Followers of Baha imagine that
these words were originally revealed from the Heaven of Trinity, Viz., Baha and his successors.
On the other hand, Baha, Abdul Baha Abbas and Shoghi Effendi vilify Subh-I Azal, and on the other
hand, they appropriate, and give out as their own, Subh-I Azal’s writings and thus pride themselves
upon playing the sycophant to Subh-I Azal.
The Kashful Hiyal, Vol III, 3rd impression, PP. 202-206 Cd.
Abdul Baha’s death and Baha’s Cypher.
Abdul Baha Abbas died suddenly in A.H. 1340 (A.D. 1921). His unexpected death took his relatives
and followers unawares. His death was unpalatable to them much less to Abdul Baha himself. He had
given so many promises that he was not true even to one of them.
57-01
Note J PP. 55-58 Cd.
Avareh’s evaluation … Cd.
Abdul Baha’s death cd.
It was unpleasant for his followers to realize that their god had his day and went his way without
taking the least notice of his promises which remained unfulfilled:
Whatever Abdul Baha Abbas foretold turned out to be otherwise, he foretold that the United States was
to enter the world war; his prophecy misfired; he foretold that Persia was not to have a constitutional
government, as the clergy was involved therein, his forecast came to naught; He foretold that
Muhammad Ali Mirza was a just Shah, fully provided for in Baha’s Kitab-I Aqdas (the Most Holly
Book) and that it was incumbant upon Bahais to offer obedience to him; that tyrant was deposed and
turned out; He predicted that able Shahs from the Qajar dynasty were to appear to make up for the
opposition made to the BABis by Nasirud-Din Shah and to sponsor the Bahai faith, nothing of the sort
happened and the dynasty itself became extinct; He predicted that the Czar of Russia was to become
King of Kings; His prediction aborted.
He foretold that Russia, England, and God had certain intentions of their own towards Persia; Abdul
Baha’s followers interpreted
57-02
Abdul Baha’s death Cd.
God as referring to Abdul Baha Abbas and were under the illusion or delusion that he had colluded
with the United States or Germany. Whereunder Persia’s Monarchy was to reside in Abdul Baha Abbas
or in some other person chosen by him.
Abdul Baha died and his intentions did not materialise. In fact the intention of this God was never
disclosed. Abdul Baha Abbas promised to lead the service in the Bahai temple in Eshgh-Abad. He
promised not to die unless and until he had constituted in fact the ‘House of Justice’ (Baytul Adl) and
he promised to visit India. Some of these promises were conditioned that “God’s promises are not
false.”
Abdul Baha Abbas contracted fever, a physician was called in, who administered a “shot” to God to
bring down his fever. One night there was improvement in his indisposition, next night he passed away
without giving notice and without bidding farewell.
With the sudden passing of Abdul Baha Abbas lies were woven round his death, fabricated and bruited
abroad by his surviving spouse Munira Khanum daughter of a Sayyid of half-size Mullah of Isfahan, a

woman already skilled in the practice of frauds at the hands of her modernist Mullah, Abdul Baha
Abbas.
57-03
Abdul Baha’s death Cd.
The most glaring of her fabrications was her request to Avareh to include in his history of the Bahai
faith alleged swan song of Abdul Baha Abbas to the effect that he had asked her “to cable to Shoghi
Effendi in London to return home as otherwise he will not be able to attend even the funeral services of
Abdul Baha Abbas.”
A draft of the alleged swan song was submitted by Avareh for approval but it was turned down by the
other members of Abdul Baha’s family as a notorious lie.
The underlying purpose of Munira Khanum was to shift the responsibility for her opposition to Baha’s
Epistle providing for the setting of the “House of Justice” (Baytul Adl) from her shoulders and to plant
it on Abdul Baha Abbas. Under the terms of this epistle, a house of justice is to be constituted in every
city to administer the Bahai affairs.
The number of its members must be “according to the number of Baha” which will be eight20 and not
nine as assembled by the Bahais if one takes the values of the letters in the word.
Now, in the early days, Mirza Husayn Ali wanted to introduce himself as Baha but he dared not to
express himself as such. Hence his use of the cipher 152 as his signature.
57-04
K) Avareh’s evaluation Cd.
Abdul Baha’s death Cd.
According to the Abjad notation, the letter BA stands for two, the letter Ha for five, and the Alif for
One. But this numerical signature, or this cipher 152 prefixed to Baha’s letters of the early period, is
not read as two, five, and one agreeably to Baha’s wishes but is read as one hundred and fifty two
which defeats the purpose for which it was intended.
The sum of the letters in the word Baha is eight and not nine. But the Bahai hierarchy constructed the
sum of the letters in the word Baha as representing Nine and prefixed it to Baha’s epistolary writings
and compositions. This accounts for nine members of which a Bahai house of justice is to be
composed.
57-05
L) Attempted Fratricide
The charge of attempted fratricide and the charge of bringing a false accusation of the same is brought
by both factions of the BABis, Bahais & Azalis, against the chief of the rival faction. Both versions are
quoted hereunder:
Bahai version:
1) Extracted from Baha’s Sura-I Haykal, the Traveller’s Narrative, English translation, Vol II, by
Professor Browne, PP. 368-369, Note W:
“Then tell them we chose out one from amongst our brethren($), and sprinkled upon him drops
from the depth of the Ocean of Knowledge, then we arrayed him in the raiment of one of the
[divine] names, and upraised him unto [such] a station that all arose to praise him; and we
presented him from the hurt of every hurtful thing in such wise as [even] the powerful cannot do.
We were alone against the swelers in the heavens and the earth in the days when all men arose to
slay me, and we were in their midst in commemoration of god and His praise, and steadfast in His
affair, until the word of god was realized amongst His creatures, and its tokens became public, and
its power waxed high, and its dominion shone forth; whereunto testify favoured servants. Verily
my brother, when he saw that the matter had waxed high discovered in himself”
57-06
Bahai version Cd
“pride and error; then he came forth [from] behind the veils, and warred with me, and contended with
my signs, and denied my proofs, and repudiated my tokens; neither was the $ of the glutton sated till
20

The numerical value of the letters in the name ‘Baha’ is 8. The ‘Hamzeh’ at the end is not considered
as a letter but has the numerical value one. If the emphasis is on the letters in the name ‘Baha’, then the
sum of the value of the letters is 8, even though the name ‘Baha’ itself has the total numerical value of
9.

that he desired to eat my flesh and drink my blood, whereunto bear witness those servants who fled into
exile with God, and beyond them those brought nigh. And herein he took counsel with one of my
attendants, tempting him unto this. Then God helped me with the hosts of the Invisible and the Visible,
and preserved me by the truth, aqnd revealed unto me that which withheld him from what he purposed,
and brought to naught the device of those who denied the signs of the Merciful [God] are they not a
people unbelieving? And when that whereunto his $ [had] seduced him was divulged, and those who
[had] fled into exile became aware thereof, outcry arose from these, and attained such pitch that it was
within a $ of being published throughout the city.
Then we restrained them, and revealed unto them the word of patience, that they might be of those who
are patient; And by God, than whom there is none other god, we were assuredly patient in this, and
enjoined patience and self-restraint on [god’s] servants, and went out from amongst these, and dwelt in
another house, that the fire of hatred might
57-07
Bahai Version cd.
Be quenched in his bosom, and he might become of those rightly directed. Neither did we interfere
with him nor see him afterwards; We sat alone in the house watching for grace of God, the Protector,
the Self-Subsistent. But he, when he became aware that the matter had become publickly known, took
the pen of falsehood, and wrote unto the people, and attributed all that he had done to my peerless and
wronged Beauty, seeking mischief in himself, and the introduction of hatred into the breasts of those
who [had] believed in God, the Mighty, the Loving. By Him in whose hands is my soul we are amazed
at his device, nay rather all being, invisible and visible is amazed! Yet $ he rested not in himself till he
committed that which the Pen cannot set down, that whereby he dishonoured me, the Potent, the
Mighty, the Promised. Should I describe that which he did unto me, the sees of the earth would would
not complete it were God to make them ink, neither would all things exhaust it were God to turn them
into Pens.
Thus do we $ that which hath befallen us, if ye [will] know it.”
57-08
L) Alleged Fratricide cd.
Bahai Version cd.
The Arabic text, Traveller’s Narrative Vol II, English Translation, PP. 366-367, Note W:
<Arabic Text>
58-01
L) Attempted Fratricide cd.
Bahai Version cd
2. Abdul Baha’s Traveller’s Narrative makes no mention of the attempted fratricide alleged by Baha.
3. The Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, makes no mention of the alleged fratricide alleged by Baha.
‘as the first half of his narrative, closing with the expulsion of Baha from Persia, is contained in the
present volume.” Shoghi Effendi’s Introduction to the Dawn-Breakers. P. XXXIV.
4. Mirza Jawad’s Historical Epitome, Materials for the study of the BABi Religion by Professor
Browne, PP. 22-23:
“Mirza Yahya [i.e. Subh-I Azal] one invited His Holiness our Master to his house to drink tea with
milk, according to the custom of Persians; and he had arranged this before the arrival of Bahaullah, and
he had set apart certain special cups for His Holiness. So when one of the cups above mentioned was
offered to him, our master drank some of it and gave the remainder to one of the wives of Mirza Yahya
who was present. She drank of it, and subsequently there appeared in her symptoms of poisonong,
though the poison was not in sufficient quantity to threaten her life. After the above mentioned event
the health of His Holiness our Master was greatly disordered. …”
58-02
Duplicate of 58-01.

58-03

4. Mirza Jawad cd.
“The illness of His Holiness Our Master continued for a long while, but eventually his health was
restored for the accomplishment of the thing predestined, while while was the completion of the Proof
of the Dispensation promised in the former scriptures.”
“….. One day Mirza Yahya entered the bath attended by Master Muhammad Ali of Isfahan the Barber,
according to custom. And in the bath Mirza Yahya endeavoured to persuade his attendant to kill his
holiness our Master Bahaullah, sating: “When thou waitest upon His Holiness Bahaullah in the bath
and art preparing to shave his throat, cut it.”
58-04
L) Cd
Baha’s statement of claim is couched in general terms such as “he desired to eat my flesh and to drink
my blood” and boils down to “And therein he took counsel with one of my attendamts, tempting him
unto this …” the attendant is identified by Mirza Jawad as Master Muhammad Ali of Isfahan, the
barber, who, on the strength of the evidence of Mirza Jawad himself set in page 55 of the Materials for
the Study of the BABi Religion by Professor Browne, was one of the assassins who assassinated the
Azalis at Acre in January, 1872; As such the credibility of this witness is called in question.
Avareh, who personally interviewedUstad [i.e. Master] Muhammad Ali, the barber of Isfahan in IshqAbad, touching the murder of the Azalis at Acre, gives a report of his interviews in his Kashful-Hiyal,
Vol III, 3rd impression, PP. 125-126:
The barber of Isfahan: “When I firmly resolved upon the murder of the opponents, I applied to Baha for
authorisation;”
Baha, “smiling and joking”said: “What would you do if I refuse permission?”
The barber of Isfahan: “Even if you withhold your permission I will take part in their murder;”
Baha, “smiling” : “Are you not afraid of God?”
The barber of Isfahan: “There is no God but you so that I may be afraid of!”
58-05
L) Attempted Fratricide cd.
Baha, “happy and smiling”, God bless you, may you meet with success (through dvine guidance]”
This is the man whom Baha produces as a witness to corroborate his allegation of attempted fratricide.
According to the Tanbihun-Naimin (The Awakening of the Sleepers), P. 65, Baha suffered from
shaking palsy which had affected his hands.
In the Kashful-Hiyal, Vol I, sixth impression, PP. 78-79 Avareh says: This bodily defect of Baha is
admitted by the Bahais as it can be detected in Baha’s writings penned in his own handwriting/
But Abdul Baha Abbas has offered a queer of excuse for this which was swallowed by the Bahais:
Azal “poisoned” Baha; Baha “did not want to break his heart;” So Baha “took the poison;” but the
“Blessed Will” of Baha “would not consent to the poison to take effect;” hence Baha “escaped death”
and “only the Blessed hand remained affected.”
Avareh adds: “This is a lame excuse intended to conjure away Baha’s defect.” Avareh continues:
Presuming Abdul Baha Abbas told the truth and Azal did poison Baha, since God (i.e. Baha) knew it
was poison and was powerful enough to take it and not to die, it would have been a good thing if he
had not left any traces thereof in his corporal temple.”
58-06
In his Kashful-Hiyal, Vol III, 3rd impression, P. 231, Avareh reproduces Shoghi Effendi’s letter
addressed to the Bahais, wherein Shoghi Effendi repeats the allegation of ‘poisoning’ which Avareh
dismisses as “falsehood”.
As for Baha’s allegation in his statement of claim that “he committed ….. that ehereby he dishonoured
me …”, from the days of Baghdad Subhi Azal remained for the most part secluded from the eyes of
men, while the business of interviewing disciples and enquiries on correspondence with the BABis was
chiefly undertaken by Baha who merely acted on behalf of Subh-I Azal. Even the food of Subh-I
Azal’s house was supplied by the house of Baha.
To quote Fazlulah (or Fayzullah) Muhtadi nicknamed Subhi, onetime “channel of grace between God
[i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] and his creatures”, in his book entitled the Payam-I Padar (‘The Father’s
Message’) P. 12, prior to his defection, “Baha was Subh-I Azal’s general factotum, who bore his
orders, carried out his instructions, called himself openly a follower and a guard of Subh-I Azal and
humbled himself before him.”

58-07
L) Continued.
This state of affairs was maintained in Edirne until Baha’s defection where he cut off supplies and
means of subsistence to Subh-I Azal in a forlorn hope to starve him and members of the family into
submission. In his footnote 1 in P. 99 in the Traveller’s Narrative, Vol II, English Translation Professor
Browne writes: Subh-I Azal appears to have been almost left without supporters in Adrianopole, so that
according to his own account, he and his $ boy were compelled to go themselves to the market to buy
their daily food.”
In one of his Persian writings, Subh-I Azal states that “one of the members of my family called on the
district authorities, and complained without my permission.” This accounts for Baha’s outburst in his
statement of claim that “he dishonoured me ….”
Mirza Jawad refers to this matter in his Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of the BABi
Religion by Prof. Browne, P. 24; but he suppressed entirely the true facts of the cause and gave a
different slant to it.
58-08
Azali Version:
5. The Hasht-Bihisht (“the Eight Paradises”), PP. 304-305:
“The first juggle and trick of sorcery which he [i.e. Baha] outlined was this, thathe brought to Hazrat-I
Azal [i.e. Subh-I Azal] a dish of plain food, with one side of which he had mixed with some poison,
intending to poison His Holiness. For hitherto the apportioned breakfast and supper of His Holiness the
Fruit [Hazrat-I Thamara, one of the titles conferred on Subh-I Azal by the Point] had been from the
house of Mirza Husayn Ali [i.e. Baha].
When that poisoned dish was placed before His Holiness, Mirza Husayn Ali pressed him to partake of
it. By a fortunate chance the smell of onions was perceptible in the food, and His Holiness, being
averse to taste it. Mirza Husayn Ali continued to press him urgently to eat. He replied, “it smells of
onions, I will not eat it; if it is so good, eat it yourself. From this answer Mirza Husayn Ali supposed
that His Holiness had divined ($) his evil design, and, simply $ the view of disguising the truth and
putting a better appearance on the matter, ate a little from the other side [i.e. the unpoisoned side] of the
dish, in order that the suspicion of His Holiness might perhaps be dispelled and he might eat the
poisoned side. But His Holiness, becaue of the smell of onion would not eat.”

59-01

PART B
JL-09-07
Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s Memoirs
PP. 35-42
Baha’s family and sons branded as covenant-breakers, Satan, Balaam; Munira Khanum becomes wife
of god and custodian of the keys of Paradise and Hell; Muhammad Ali pictured as a bear, with the birth
of a male issue to Mirza Hadi and Ziyaiyya Khanum the mask is off: Campaign of calumny and
Vilification set in motion against Baha’s family and sons; Abdul Baha imposes censorship to black out
news of Baha’s family and sons; Baha’s sons burnt in effigy; Munira Khanum administers love-potion
to Abdul Baha to maintain her domination over him; Abdul Baha’s espionage system; Abdul Baha’s
attempt to starve Baha’s family and sons into submission; Laying of fake information to involve Baha’s
sons in trouble.
PP. 48-52
Failure of the good offices of the elders and notables of Acre and Haifa to bring about an understanding
between Abdul Baha and his brothers.
PP. 76-78
Colonel Badri Beg, her step-daughter, and Abdul Baha: Passion of love.
JL-09-08
Ibn-al-Baha’s Badiullah’s memoirs
PP. 5-9
Munira Khanum’s intrigues to create a successor to Abdul Baha in her issue; Baha’s rejection of
Munira Khanum’s allegation that she was bonne bouche of the Point [i.e. the BAB] and she was
betrothed to Abdul Baha from the day of the creation; Baha’s claim that Munira Khanum was adept in
diabolical malignity and that she would stick at nothing to realize her ulterior motives;
P. 8
Baha’s stern warning to Abdul Baha.
P. 11
Baha says his enemy is lying in wait up in his sleeves.
P. 14
Baha categorizes Munira Khanum in the same category as Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan [the
murdered Azali at Acre].
P. 14
Measures to safeguard medicines intended for Baha against being tampered with by interested persons
during his illness; Baha’s statement that Munira would provoke an upheaval in the Bahai cause and
carve a golden calf.
PP. 21-22
Nabil’s sad fate.
P. 26
At the request of Abdul Baha himself, Muhammad Ali, his brother, entertained three European ladies at
the palace at Bahja. Later Abdul Baha accused him of having entertained three prostitutes.
PP. 78-81
Mrs Rosmund Templeton and her abortive mediation to reconcile Abdul Baha and his brother.

JL-09-06
TO
Badiullah’s Testament

JL-07-07

JL-07-06
Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s Will & Testament
P.12 Baha’s family article of faith during Baha’s epiphany: The Point [i.e. the BAB] herald of Baha;
Baha supreme manifestation of god, and Completer (Mutammim) [i.e. Supplementary and
Complementary to the BAB], gracing the world once in every five hundred thousand years.
P. 13
Baha’s epistle admitting that “He who shall appear”, or “He whom God Shall Make Manifest”, the
Promised One of the Bayan is due to appear in Mustaghath, to wit, 2001 years hence reckoning from
the BAB’s date of dispensation according to the Abjad notation.

JL-07-05
(1)
Confidential
41, Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
27th November 1962
Mr E. J. Lorch,
Acquisition Department,
The Jewish National & University Library,
P.O. B 503
Jerusalem Israel,

Dear Mr Lorch,
I am directed to refer my letter of November 5, 1962 and to donate to library a typed copy in Persian of
Ibn-al-Baha’s memoirs and Will & Testament.
Badiullah was the youngest son of Mirza Husayn Ali commonly known as Bahaullah by whom he was
surnamed Ghusn-i Anwar (The Most Luminous Branch). Selected passages from memoirs and the
Testament were incorporated in the $ attached to my letter under reference. Pp. 46-66 & p.78 & 76.
JL-07-04
(2)
The manuscript was sent to me some years ago for printing and publication. No such facilities are
available here. Barring the original, it is the only copy extant in the world.
It has been deemed advisable to donate it to the library at the disposal of interested readers.
The expression [(Ghusn-i Anwar) Farzand-i Husayn Ali Bahaullah] and [Badiullah (Ghusn-i Anwar)
Farzand-i Husayn Ali bahullah] appearing in ink in page 1 of the memoirs and in the preamble of the
Will & Testament do not appear in the original.
The original expression Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah should stand. The copy has been collated with the
original and saving typing mistakes, it is in order. The copy was originally received in its present
condition.
Marginal marks in lead pencil as well as marks under lines were made for the purpose of notes.
Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s sensational revelations in the memoirs regarding Abdul Baha and his wife
Munira Khanum indicate that history repeated itself in the case of Abdul Baha Abbas and his brothers.

JL-07-03
(3)
Abdul Bahaists have a dear interest in the memoirs as they belie the gospel of peace, love, unity,
concord, conciliation and truthfulness preached by Abdul Baha at home and abroad.
Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s authority is Baha himself.
The importance of the memoirs need not be stressed. Bearing in mind the sad fate which overtook
Mirza Jani’s Nuqtatul-Kaf at the hands of philistines nearly one hundred years ago, I am to suggest that
you would be good enough to take good care of this rare document gifted to the library for historical
record.

A short index of the memoirs and the Will and the Testament is transmitted herewith. The manuscript
constitutes item 7 of the literature to be gifted to the library and referred to in my letter under reference.
Kindly acknowledge.
Yours Sincerely,
Jalal S. Azal

JL-07-02
The Conveyance document.
JL-07-01
(1)
41, Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
12th February 1963.
Mr. E.J. Lorch
Acquisition Department
The Jewish National & University Library
Jerusalem, Israel
Dear Mr. Lorch,
I am directed to donate to the library the original of the document of conveyance whereunder Mirza
Musa son of Haji Muhammad Hadi al-Jawaheri of Baghdad conveyed, and delivered possessions of all
his immovables, movables, species, sum of ready money and debts receivable, to Mirza Husayn Ali
commonly called Bahaullah.
The conveyance is drawn up in Persian and Arabic in legal form, duly executed and witnessed.
In the conveyance, the grantee is described as Mirza Husayn Ali without the appellation Bahaullah.
The grantor was a BABi resident of Baghdad and the grant was made during the sojourn of the BABi
exiles in Baghdad between the years 1854 and 1863.

JL-06-08
(2)
The document of conveyance was handed down to the heirs of Baha and found its way to me. By
reason of historical interest, I have been directed to donate it to the library for historical record.
The grant under the conveyance includes the house tenanted by Baha in Baghdad, for the loss of title to
which Shoghi Efendi blames Husayn Afnan, grandson of Baha, P. 28 notes, for his alleged “deliberate
misrepresentation of facts”, which resulted “in the inflation of humiliation upon defenders of the House
of Baha in Baghdad”. P. 34 Notes attached to letter of November 5, 1962.
According to Abdul Baha’s memorials of the Faithful in Persian, the grantor did in fact offer his
properties to Baha but the latter refused the offer. No mention is however made of the document of
conveyance in the memorials.
According to Tanbihun-Naimin, P. 33, it was the sinews of war($) secured under the grant which
enabled Baha “to raise the banner of opposition openly”, against Subh-i-Azal and “to saw the seeds of
intrigue, discord, and dissension in the BABi cause”.

JL-06-07
(3)
In Bahaullah’s Will & Testament quoted in Bahaullah’s son Muhammad Ali’s Will & Testament, letter
of 19th November, 1962, we are told that “no ornament of gold were available in Bahaullah’s holy court
to require an executor for division.”
“Again in Abdul Baha’s Will & Testament, the Bahai World 1926-1928, P. 86 and P. 87, Bahaullah is
designated as “the Supreme Manifestation of God and the Day-spring of His Divine Essence”, and “the
Hands of the Cause of God”, are commanded to be, at all times, and under all conditions, sanctified and
detached from earthy things”.

Confronted with the document of conveyance, Baha’s claim that he owned no earthly things rings fake.
Confronted with the document of conveyance, Abdul Baha’s version of the grant in the memorials and
Abdul Baha’s commandment to Bahais “to eschew “earthly things”, from which “the supreme
manifestation of god”, himself was not “sanctified and detached”, stands hypocritical and hollow.
Fortunately and by the merest accident, the document of conveyance survived destruction at the hands
of the Bahai hierarchy
JL-06-06
(4)
and sees the light of day for the first time.
There appears to be nothing wrong or objectionable in the grant itself, it is the deliberate
misrepresentation of facts and the Bahai hierarchy’s “mammonism”, to quote Avareh in his KashfulHiyal (The Uncovering of Deceptions), P. 130, Vol. I, 6th impression, which the document of
conveyance brings into bold relief.
Kind regards
Yours Sincerely
Jalal S. Azal

PART-C
JL-06-05
Portrait of Mirza Husayn-Ali of Nur
JL-06-04
<<A photograph of Mirza Husayn Ali>>
JL-06-03
<<A photograph of Mirza Husayn Ali>>
JL-06-02
(01)
41, Princess Elizabeth Street,
Famagusta,
Cyprus
19th March 1963.
Mr. E. J. Lorch
Acquisition Department,
The Jewish National & University Library,
P.O.B. 503, Jerusalem Israel.
Dear Mr. Lorch,
I am directed to donate to the library a portrait of Mirza Husayn-Ali commonly called Bahaullah for
historical record.
Apparently the portrait was taken during his exile in Edirne between the year 1863 and 1868.
In Iran
Born of Moslem parents, he was named Husayn-Ali of Nur. According to Bahai sources, he was born
in the month of Muharam A.H. 1233 = November 1817.
According to Moslem sources, he was born in the month of Zil Hija A.H. 1232. As baby boys born in
this month received honorary title by way of meriting or obtaining a blessing, he was called Haji Mirza
Husayn-Ali of Nur or

JL-06-01
(02)
Haji Husayn-Ali of Nur. Avareh’s Kashful-Hiyal (The Uncovering of Deceptions), Vol. II, 2nd
impression, pp.66-67, or Vol. II 3rd impression, pp. 84-85.
Sayyid Ali Muhammad the BAB declared his mission in May 1844. He was executed in July 1850.
Mirza Husayn-Ali was one of those who embrace the BABi faith, and became a BABi.
Both Bahai and Moslem sources are reticent as regards the date on which, and the person by whom, he
was awarded into the BABi faith. Avareh’s Kasful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, pp.68-69, or Vol. II,
3rd impression, pp. 86-87.
The title of Baha was conferred by the BAB on the noted BABi poetess Quratul Ayn, otherwise known
as Janab-i Tahira. Document in P. 31, the Epistle of the BAB and his amanuensis Sayyid Husayn. In
the same document reference is made to the BAB’s epistle addressed to 238, which according to the
Abjad notation, stands for Husayn-Ali. The text of the epistle appears in P. 32 of the Tanbihun-Naimin
(The Sleepers Awakened). The same epistle addressed to 238, to wit, Mirza Husayn-Ali, is referred to
in page 2 of the BAB’s diary, dated March 1850.
These entries indicate that as far as the BAB was concerned, there is no historical foundation that the
title of Bahaullah was bestowed upon Mirza Husayn-Ali by the BAB.

JL-05-08
(03)

In the Badasht conference of leading and prominent BABis, Mirza Husayn Ali was in attendance on
Qurat-al-Ayn who conferred on him the title of Baha and not Bahaullah. P.5, the Tanbihun-Naimin.
Epistles were addressed by the BAB to leading BABis in the Badasht conference wherein titles were
conferred by him on prominent BABis.
No title was conferred by the BAB on Mirza Husayn-Ali whom he regarded as playing second fiddle.
In essence at the rebuff, Mirza Husayn-Ali was about to walk out when Qurat-al-Ayn, in a move
intended to guard against defection, placated him by awarding him the title of Baha and not Bahaullah.
Since the award was made without the fiat($) of the BAB, he was diffident to use it forthworth. The
title remained dormant until after the execution of the BAB and the passing of Qurat-al-Ayn and other
prominent BABis who were aware of the circumstances under which the award was made. It was only
when he bethought himself of advancing a claim to divinity that he appropriated to himself not only the
title of Baha but also that of Bahaullah. Pp. 20-21, Avareh’s Kashful-Hiyal, Vol. I, 6th impression.
In Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul-Kaf composed by him between Nov. 1850-October 1851,

JL-05-07
(04)
Mirza Husayn Ali is referred to as Janab-i Baha.
P. 375, appendix II to the Tarikh-i Jadid (the New History) by Mirza Husayn of Hamadan, Prof.
Browne’s translation.
The epistolary writings of Baha, if any are available relating to his period of residence in Iran to
indicate how he signed himself.
In Baghdad, Iraq
Imprisoned in Teheran for complicity in the attempt on the then Shah’s life and released and expelled
from Iran to Baghdad, he stayed in Iraq from 1853 to 1863 where he was known as Mirza Husayn-Ali
or Janab-i Baha.
Deed of conveyance from Mirza Musa son of Hajji Mirza Muhammad Hadi al-Jawahari to Mirza
Husayn-Ali; The colophon with which the Iqan composed by him in Baghdad ends: “Revealed from
the B & the H [i.e. Baha]”.
Epistles addressed by him to BABis signed 152, which according to his break-down in the Abjad
notation, stands not for eight but for nine representing the numerical equivalent of the word Baha so to
speak. Pp. 205-206, Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol III, 3rd impression: epistles addressed by him to
BABis signed or sealed Husayn-Ali.

JL-05-06
(05)
In Suleymaniyya Area.
During his two years voluntary exile in Suleymaniyya area in the northern Iraq, he assumed the title
and name of Dervish Muhammad respectively. P. 15 Ibn-al-Baha’s memoirse, p. 127, Awarah’s Kashfal-Hiyal, Vol. I, 6th impression; p. 85 Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. II, 2nd impression or p. 102
Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. II, 3rd impression; pp. 94-95 Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyyal, Vol. II, 2nd
impression or pp. 111-112 Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol II, 3rd impression (Abdul Baha’s account).
In Edirne, Eurpoean Turkey
Deported to Edirne from Baghdad where he sojourned from 1863 to 1868, he was known as Mirza
Husayn Ali or Janab-i Baha.
In the Imperial Ottoman warrant of deportation, reproduced in Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. II, 2nd
impression, pp. 74-75, or in vol II, 3rd impression, pp. 91-92, he is described as Shaykh Mirza HusaynAli.
In Acre
Banished to Acre where he stayed until his death in 1892, and where he lived among Sunni Moslems,
to whom naming of human

JL-05-05
(06)

being’s Bahaullah was objectionable, he was content with making himself or Baha or Baha-al-Din. P.
21, Awarah’s Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. I, 6th impression.
Now, from the date Baha embraced the BABi faith after the BAB’s declaration in 1844 until the latter’s
execution in 1850, he was a follower of the latter. Long before his execution, the BAB gave notice in
writing to leading BABis of the appointment by him of Subh-i-Azal as his ancestor, pp. 28-32, the
Tanbih-al-Naimin; Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul-Kaf, appendix II to the Tarikh-i-Jadid, pp. 370375, Professor Browne’s translation; documents in the Collection of the Epistles of the BAB and his
amanuensis Sayyid Husayn; the nomination was explicit and notorious, and on the execution of the
BAB, Subh-i-Azal, the vicegerent, at once received the unanimous recognition of the BABi
community.
Until his defection from the BABi Cause in Edirne, Baha was a loyal follower of Subh-i-Azal as he had
previously been of the BAB, as his writings prove. Prof. Browne’s Persian Introduction to the
Nuqtatul-Kaf, pp. 31-42.
Bahai authorities are at variance as to the date of Baha’s declaration of his mission:

JL-05-04
(07)
On Abdul Baha’s authority in his ‘A Traveller’s Narrative’, he declared his mission on arrival in
Baghdad upon expulsion from Iran. On Muhammad Ali’s authority, in his Will & Testament, Baha’s
“private” declaration was on arrival in Baghdad upon expulsion from Iran and his “public” declaration
was in A.H. 1280 = A.D. 1863-1864, apparently in Edirne.
On Mirza Jawad’s authority in his Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of the BABi Religion by
Prof. Browne, Baha’s private “declaration of his mission reckoned a second declaration, as is fully set
forth in more lengthy treaties on the matter was in those days”, apparently on Baha’s eve of banishment
from Baghdad in 1863 from which one concludes that there was also a first declaration of which no
mention is made, and the third “open” declaration was in Edirne in 1863.
On Muhammad Nabil of Zarand’s authority, in his Chronological Poem of the Events in the Life of
Baha. Baha’s “declaration” was in Edirne in 1866.
On Mirza Abdul Fazl of Gulpaygan’s authority in his Istidlaliyya or Risala-i-Ayyubiyya Baha’s
declaration was in 1868.

JL-05-03
(08)
On Ibrahim Khayrullah’s authority, in his book entitled Bahaullah. Baha’s first declaration to his circle
of believers “was in Baghdad at the beginning of 1853, his ‘general’ declaration to ‘his people’ in
Baghdad in 1863, and his ‘third public declaration in Edirne in 1867.
On Shoghi Efendi’s authority in his Epilogue to the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, P. 483, Baha’s
“public declaration,” of his claim was “European Turkey”, i.e. in Edirne.
Again on Shoghi Efendi’s authority in footnote 1, page 13, the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative,
Baha “received the first intimations of his divine mission in 1851-1852,” while imprisoned in Teheran
for complicity in the attempt on the then Shah’s life.
On Baha’s authority, his “manifestation”, took place in the latter period of his exile in Edirne:
JL-05-02
(09)
although his ‘manifestation’, like the sun under the clouds, was sometimes covert in Baghdad and in
the early days in Edirne. Report of Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman’s several interviews with Baha at
Acre.
Amidst the Bahai authorities’ conflicting statements as to the date of Baha’s “manifestation”, it was in
Edirne that Baha declared himself to be “He Whom God Shall Manifest”, of the Bayan, relegated the
BAB to the status of his precursor or harbringer, and demanded the allegiance of Subh-i-Azal which he
refused.
There is a lacuna between there BAB’s execution in 1850 and Baha’s declaration in Baghdad in
Muharam A.H. 1269 or October 15-Nov 13, A.D. 1852, or in Edirne in A.H. 1280 = A.D. 1863-1864.
How does Baha account for the lacuna and what documentary evidence does he produce to support his
claim?

“What he [the BAB] intended by the term [Gate] was this that he was the channel of grace from some
great person still being behind the veil of glory.” P.3, Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative”, Vol ii,
English translation.
“The BAB repeated, and meditated on the qualities and attributes of that absent-yet-present, regardedand-regarding person of his.” P.18. Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative”, Vol ii, English
Translation.
JL-05-01
(10)
“When He shall appear, my [i.e. the BAB] true nature, my mysteries and intimations, will become
evident …. And this event disclose itself in the year sixty nine, which corresponds to the number of the
year of ‘after a while’.” P. 53, Abdul Baha’s ‘A Traveller’s Narrative’, Vol. ii, English translation.
The BAB’s statement that “you will apprehend all the good in the ninth year,’ and Shaykh Ahmad of
Ihsa’s, founder of the Shaikhi school from whose bosom the BABi movement arose, statement of “after
a while,” proved true and “in sixty-nine “He whom god shall manifest’, of the Bayan removed the veil
from his face,” in Baghdad. Muhammad Ali’s Will and Testament.
In answer to a question “when the Promised One was to be made manifest, Sheykh Ahmad [of Ihsa,
founder of Sheykhi school] replied” : “….I can appoint no time. His Cause will be made known after
Him [a while]. P. 13, the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative.
The passage “you will apprehend all the good in the ninth year,” appears in the BAB’s Arabic Bayan,
Unity vi, chapter 15.
Shaykh Ahmad of Ihsa’s expression of ‘after a while (Ba’d Hin)’ is quoted in a passage in the BAB’s
Dalail-i Sabá (The Seven Proofs) in support of
JL-04-08
(11)
of his own manifestation and the development of his Cause. Pages in my copy are not numbered. The
passage appears in pp. 13-14, 14 lines to the page, counting from the end of the copy.
The year ‘of a while’, (Sane-i-Hin) according to the Abjad notation, is 68, and the year of ‘after a
while’, therefore corresponds to 69, which is the number after 68.
Thus, the year of ‘after a while,’ and ‘the ninth year’, were interpreted to be Baha’s date of
manifestation in A.H. 1269, nine years after the declaration of the BAB in A.H. 1260 = A.D. 1844.
Subh-i-Azal’s appointment by the BAB was treated as nominal and temporary, an arrangement entered
into secretly between Baha and the BAB through Mulla Abdal Karim of Qazwin, otherwise known as
Mirza Ahmad-i Katib, the BAB’s amanuensis, (pp. 62-63, Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative, Vol
ii, English Translation) who was one of the victim’s put to death in August 1852 in Tehran and was not
therefore in a position to verify Abdul Baha’s allegation of arrangement for which Abdul Baha
produced no documentary evidence.
Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative,” was composed by him “anonymously” at Acre during the lifetime of Baha. Professor Browne’s article in J.R.A.S October, 1892 and Abdul Baha’s former Persian
scribe Fazlullah (or Fayzullah) Muhtadi’s nicknamed
JL-04-07
(12)
Subhi’s Payam-I Padar (the Father’s message), PP. 58-59.
Mulla Abdul Karim of Qazwin, otherwise known as Mirza Ahmad-i-Katib, was the addressee of the
BAB’s epistle penned in his own handwriting wherein Subh-i-Azal is highly commended and described
as the Eternal Mirror, the Mirror of God or His Face, and the Glorious Fruit of the Bayan. Document in
page 10 at the top. The Epistles of the BAB and his amanuensis Sayyid Husayn.
Having accounted for the according to him) temporary and nominal supremacy of Subh-i-Azal by
describing it (Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative, Vol ii, E.T. PP. 62-63) as a precautional measure
designed to divert the attention and daner from Baha during his continuance in Persian Teritory, Abdul
Baha (T.N. Vol. II. P. 63) is compelled, in order that his version of Subh-i-Azal’s nomination and
Baha’s manifestation and Baha’s manifestation may appear consistent with facts, to support this
supremacy as ceasing on the arrival of Baha at Baghdad in the month of Muharam A.H. 1269 (Oct 15,
Nov. 13, A.D. 1852), and to assert that Baha’s manifestation did take place there and further that it took
place on that date, (Abdul Baha’s “A traveller’s Narrative”, Vol. ii, English translation, P.55 and P.
63), which statement appears impossible inasmuch as Baha was arrested in August, 1852, following the
attempt on the then Shah’s life on 28th Shawwal A.H. 1268 or 15th August 1852, (P. 440, the DawnBreakers,

JL-04-06
(13)
Nabil’s Narrative) and imprisoned four month in Tehran (P. 6 Mirza Jawad’s Historical Epitome,
Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion by Prof. Browne) ere he was suffered to depart to
Baghdad. According to the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, P. 474, Baha set out from Teheran for
Baghdad “on the first day of Rabi-al-Thani A.H. 1269 = 12th January, A.D 1853.”
As Abdul Baha does not specify whether or not Baha’s manifestation on arrival in Baghdad was
private, a general or public, it is assumed to embrace all the three.
On the other hand Muhammad Ali in his Will and Testament supports Abdul Baha but marks Baha’s
manifestation as “private”.
In footnote 1, P. 13, the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative Shoghi Efendi says: “It was in the year A.H
1269 (A.D. 1851-2) that Bahaullah, while confined in the Siyah-Chal of Teheran, received the first
intentions of His Divine mission. Of this He hinted in the odes which he revealed in that year.”
The BAB declared his mission in 1844 and was executed in 1850, completely unaware in his lifetime
of Baha’s “divine mission”, of which the first intentions, Baha himself “revealed”, at least one year
after the death of the BAB, according to Shoghi Efendi.

JL-04-05
(14)
In the beginning of his mission, the BAB composed a book entitled the First Book (Kitab-i Awal),
otherwise known as Ahsanul Qisas (the Best of Stories) or Qayyum-al-Asma or Commentary on Suratal-Yousuf. In it, he calls himself, among other names, the BAB, Reminder (Az Zikr) and Qurratul-Ayn.
In it a distinct claim to a divine mission is put forward. The claim put forward by him is that he enjoys
a special spiritual communion with the Twelfth or Absent Imam, called the Remnant of God
(Baqiyyatullah), He shall arise of the family of Muhammad (Qaim-i-al-i-Muhammad) and Hujjatullah
(the proof of god) whose return, as the Imam Mahdi, the Shias are expecting. In a passage in it he
addresses himself to him in the following terms: “O Remnant of God! I am wholly sacrificed to thee; I
am content to be reviled in thy way; I crave naught but to be slain in thy love, and god the most High
sufficeth($) as an eternal refuge ..”
In it, outwardly, at least, the dictates of Islam seem to be in the main accepted and the Quran is not
declared to be abrogated.
In his Persian Dalail-i Sabá (the Seven Proofs) composed by him after the declaration of his mission
and subsequent to the Bayan, PP. 29-30, 14 lines to the page, from the beginning of the manuscript, my
copy of the BAB refers to his First Book (Kitab-i-Awal) and states:

JL-04-04
(15)
« Vois comment l’Altesse attendue a manifesté sa vérité aux yeux des Musulmans pour leur ouvrir la
voie du salut. Elle, le premier rayonnement de la Création et le Miroir de Dieu, Elle a condescendu à se
présenter sous l’aspect de la Porte qui conduit à la connaissance du descendant caché de Mohammed ».
Dans son premier livre 1 il a parlé au nom des lois du Qoran afin que les hommes ne fussent pas
troublés par le Nouveau Texte et la loi Nouveau ; afin qu’ils pussent se convaincre que ce texte et cette
loi sont en relation avec leur propre livre, afin qu’ils ne restassent pas dans l’obscurite »
A.L.M. Nichola’s translation of the Dalail-i-Saba (the Treate des Sept $), see Nichola’s introduction to
the Persian Bayan, PP. IV-V. Vol I.
In PP. 1-2 (14 lines to the page, my manuscript copy) of the First Book Sayyid Ali Muhammad, the
BAB says: “God hath decreed that this book, in explanation of the Best of Stories, should come forth
from Muhammad [i.e. the absent or twelfth Imam], son of Hasan [i.e. the eleventh Imam], son of Ali
[i.e. the tenth Imam], son of Muhammad [i.e. the ninth Imam], son of Ali [i.e. the eighth Imam], son of
Musa [i.e. the seventh Imam], son of Jafar [i.e. the sixth Imam], son of Muhammad [i.e. the fourth

JL-04-03
(16)

Imam], son of Ali [i.e. the fourth Imam], son of Husayn [i.e. the third Imam], son of Ali [i.e. the first
Imam], son of Abi Talib, unto his servant [i.e. Sayyid Ali Muhammad the BAB], that the proof (or
demonstration) of god may reach the two worlds on the part of the Reminder.”
He is the twelfth Imam who speaks through the BAB by whom the passage “O Remnant of god!” is
addressed to the former.
The passage is question is quoted by Baha in his Kitab-i-Iqan (the Book of Assurance) composed by
him in Baghdad in support of the BAB.
Therefore Abdul Baha’s statement in his “A Traveller’s Narrative,” P.3, Vol. ii, English translation,
and Nabil’s statement in the Dawn-Breakers. Nabil’s Narrative, P. 10, which seek to identify Baha with
the Remnant of God referred to in the passage has no historical foundation.
The Bahai hierarchy’s allegation that the passage “O Rmnant of God, I am wholly sacrificed by thee ..”
the BAB “intended Baha is contrary to truth”.
Awarah’s Kashful-Hiyal, Vol II, 2nd impression, P. 32 or 3rd impression, P. 52
JL-04-02
(17)
The BAB composed “voluminous works”, to quote the Bahai authorities themselves, and it is strange
indeed that Baha, “who was the absent-yet-present, the regarded-and-regarding person, whose qualities
and attributes the BAB repeated and meditated on,” could invoke only one single cryptic reference of
“the ninth year,” from his alleged herald the BAB, to support his claim to be Him Whom God Shall
Make Manifest of the Bayan.
Apparently the expression ‘after a while’ and ‘the ninth year’ read out of their context were deemed to
be insufficient quotable text on which Baha based his claim and he had to invoke further ‘authority’ to
maintain his claim to be He Whom God Shall Make Manifest of the Bayan. This time he resorted to the
interpretation of the word ‘Mustaghath’.
In announcing his mission, the BAB brought a new book called the Bayan. He stated that his revelation
was in the stages of seed and it was to reach its ultimate perfection in the fullness of time.
Following the precedent set in previous dispensations when news was given of the following one, the
BAB named the bearer of the next revelation as Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest or Him Who
Shall Appear. The BAB expected that a period of either 1511 or 2001 years (represented respectively
by the sum of the letters in the words Ghiyath and

JL-04-01
(18)
Mustaghath according to the Abjad notation) would elapse between his time and the advent of Him
Whom God Shall Make Manifest. This period is expressed in words and figures in the Persian Bayan.
The Persian Bayan is fully quoted in Professor Browne’s Persian Introduction to Mirza Jani of
Kashan’s Nuqtatul-Kaf, pp. 14-27.
Now, the BAB is alleged to have sent an epistle called ‘The Tablet of the Letters (Lawh-i-Hurrufat) to
Mirza Asadullah Dayan; which Baha claims to have deciphered at Acre, according to which “the
appearance of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest must needs occur no less than nineteen years after
the declaration of the BAB.” PP. 220-221, the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative.
By this decipherment, Baha is alleged “to have marvelled the mystery of the Mustaghth which had long
baffled the most searching minds among the people of the Bayan and had proved an unsurmountable
obstacle to their recognition of the Promised One.” PP.220-221, ibid.

JL-03-09
(19)
Baha claimed that the period of 2001 years represented by the sum of the letters in the word
Mustaghath prescribed in the Bayan for the manifestation of Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest had
expired in nine or nineteen years by his appearance.
Abdul Baha also claimed that the period of 2001 years represented by the word Mustaghath had run out
in nine years by the manifestation of Baha.
Avareh’s Kashful-Hiyal, vol. II, 2nd impression, PP. 112-113, or Vol. II, 3rd impression, PP. 128-129.
This interpretation of the word Mustaghath accounts for Baha’s second manifestation in the garden of
Ridvan in Baghdad A.H. 1280 (1863-1864) on the eve of his exile from Baghdad, or for Baha’s third,
or the one and only, manifestation during the latter part of his exile in Edirne, nineteen years after the
declaration of the BAB in 1844.

Available documentary evidence rules out Baha’s having had a first and second manifestation in
Baghdad: composed by him in Baghdad in A.H. 1278 (1861-1862). See footnote 7, P. 33, Prof.
Browne’s Persian Introduction to Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul-Kaf wherein no declaration of such
claim is made, and the Bayan is throughout spoken of as the last Revelation. In it, he admits “never to
have sought any precedence over any one in any matter” and to have returned from his voluntary exile
in Sulaymaniyya to Baghdad “at the command of his chief [i.e. Subh-i-Azal];

JL-03-08
(20)
B) Baha’s Will & Testament written by him in Baghdad, “repeated at the end of the Tanbihun-Naimin
(The Sleepers Awakened) wherein he reiterates his allegiance fealty and servitude to the BAB and to
his appointed successor Subh-i-Azal;
C) Baha’s letter written by him on expulsion from Tehran and addressed to a prominent BABi wherein
he categorically denies allegations of apostasy from the BAB’s cause; in it he denies having said that
the Bayan was an abrogated Revelation’. In it he denies having laid claim to any authority or having
advanced any superhuman claim; in it he reiterates his allegiance and servitude to the BAB and Subh-iAzal; “My tongue, my heart, my soul, my spirit, my body, my flesh, my bones and my skin testify that
Sayyid Ali Muhammad the Point [i.e. the BAB] is the manifestation of God, the manifestation of His
verses, the Revealer of His words, and that we all prostrate ourselves in worship before the Point’s face
[i.e Subh-i-Azal] ..”
“Baha’s body is the ground on which Subh-i-Azal wals.”
Baha’s letter No. 1 collection of the Baghdad period.
d) “Subh-i-Azal is the pride of theophanies. I am at a loss as to how carry out the terms and servitude
towards him. Every moment I prostrate myself on every ground in worship of Subh-i-Azal. I seek and
crave for his mercy. I am nothing but a contemptible slave in his holy court. Baha’s body grovels in the
earth and abjection in expectation of Subh-i-Azal’s grace.” Baha’s letter No. 46, Collection of Baha’s
letters of the Baghdad period.

JL-03-07
(21)
E) Baha’s own admission that his “manifestation” had taken place in the later period of his exile in
Edirne. Report of Mirza Aqa Khan of Kashan’s several interviews with Baha at Acre.
Preparatory to his deportation from Baghdad, Baha was detained in custody for a period of twelve days
by the Ottoman authorities in the garden of Pasha, called the garden of Ridvan, at Baghdad. This
detention involved no danger to Baha. Rejoicing for Baha’s release from detention scat-free alleges to
have had a general manifestation followed by the production of inspired words. In fact, nothing of the
sort took place there. This frame-up was Baha’s fabrication years later at Acre, foisted upon Bahais as
the festival of Ridvan. Avareh’s Kashf-al-Hiyal : Vol II, 2nd impression
JL-03-06
(22)
Baha embraced upon the destruction of the foundations of the religion founded by the BAB and
declared himself to be Him Whom God Shall Manifest independently of the Bayan. The Kashful-Hiyal,
P. 49, 3rd impression, Vol. iii.
With his “manifestation” in Edirne, Baha complained that Subh-I-Azal should not have denounced him
at least ‘out of respect for the name of Him Whom God Shall Manifest,” as is provided in P. 105 Unity
vi, ch. 8, vol iii, the Persian Bayan, Nichola’s translation.
This passage from the Bayan appears to be the one and only thing which Baha seeks to connect his
“independent” claim with that of the BAB.

JL-03-05
Duplicate
(23)
JL-03-04
(23)

Baha’s “manifestation” in Edirne was prelude to a blood bath, a campaign of terror & assassination in
which prominent BABis who adhered faithfully to Subh-i-Azal were disposed by foul play.
Subh-i-Azal’s brother-in-law Mirza Nasrullah, who was honoured with a letter of commendation from
Baha (Baha’s amanuensis Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan’s letter to Mirza Nasrullah) was poisoned in
Edirne on the eve of Baha’s departure to Acre.
Subh-i-Azal’s second brother-in-law Mirza Quli (who was also commended by Baha as above) was
murdered in Acre.
Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan was assassinated in Acre.
Aqa Sayyid Ali the Arab was murdered in Tabriz.
The BAB’s brother-in-law Mulla Rajab Ali Qahir was murdered in Karbala.
The BAB’s brother-in-law Aqa Ali Muhammad (brother of Ghahir) was killed in Baghdad.
Hajji Mirza Ahmad of Kashan, brother of Mirza Jani of Kashan, author of Nuqtatul Kaf was
assassinated in Bghdad.
PP. 40-41, Prof. Browne’s Persian Introduction to Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul Kaf; P. 306, & P.
308, the Hasht Bihisht;
P. 35, Materials for the study of the BABi religion by Prof. Browne; pp. 119-126, the Kashful-Hiyal,
3rd impression vol. III; the Kitab-i-Aubhi, P. 120.
Mirza Rida Quli’s murder “was justified on the grounds that he “drank wine & ate pork.”. Abdul
Baha’s letter reproduced in facsimile in the Kitab-i Subhi, pp. 184-186, and the Kashful Hiyal pp. 122123, 3rd impression, vol. III.

JL-03-03
(24)
The murder of Haji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan is alluded in a passage of Baha’s Kitab-i Aqdas (the
Most Holy Book) addressed to Subh-i-Azal wherein he says: “God hath taken him who led thee
astray.” Letter of May 29, 1962.
Baha describes “Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan as a man possessed of utmost degree of atheism
or ditheism (Jandaqa), placing him in the same category as Munira Khanum, wife of Abdul Baha.” P.
14, Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s Memoirs; P. 54 notes of Nov. 1962.
With the blood of the victims $ at his door, Baha alleged against Subh-i-Azal an attempted fratricide of
which, according to Subh-i-Azal, he was in reality himself the author. Baha produced as evidence
“those servants who fled into exile with god [i.e. Baha], and beyond then those brought nigh and one of
my attendants.” Baha’s Sura-i Haykal, pp. 205-207 attached to letter of Nov. 5, 1962.
“One of my attendants” is identified “as Ustad Muhammad Ali, the barber of Isfahan, whose ears had
been cut off for theft and other crimes by the Governor of Isfahan, who, having fled thence to Baghdad,
had become one of Baha’s chosen associates, and the source of manifold evils and mischiefs” P. 305,
the Hasht Bihisht, “who was one of the assassins of the Azalis in Acre.” P. 55, Mirza Jawad’s
Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of the BABi Religion by

JL-03-02
(25)
Professor Browne, who “received Baha’s blessing on the eve of the commission of his crime”, pp. 125126, the Kashf-al-Hiyal, 3rd impression, Vol II, and who was apparently recipient of the title “the
BARBER of the Truth,” in Baha’s Hnour list., p. 309, the Hasht Bihisht, & p. 27 notes.
Baha suffered from dystaxia. P. 65 the Tanbihun Naimin (The Sleept Awakened). This infinity affected
Baha’s hands which had become shaky. Traces of this disease were noticeable in Baha’s writings
written with a shaky hand.
To cover up Baha’s infinity with some sort of excuse in the eyes of his followers Abdul Baha invented
this canard: “Subh-i-Azal administered poison to Baha, who not wishing to break the former’s heart,
took the poison. But for the poison to work Baha’s blessed will was not forthcoming. So Baha escaped
death; but his hand remains shaky.”, pp. 78-79, Kashf-al-Hiyal, sixth impression, Vol. I.
Avarah dismisses Baha’s allegation of attempted fratricide as a fabrication. P. 321, Kashful Hiyal, 3rd
impression, vol III.
For full report on the charge of attempted fratricide and the charge of bringing a false accusation of the
same see pp. 205-218 notes.

JL-03-01
(26)
Following his “manifestation”, Baha claimed that he was the First Point (i.e. the BAB) returned. Lawhi Nasir, J.R.A.S October 1889; P. 89, Notes.
The BAB was however reduced by Baha to the status of Baha’s herald. Baha reproves his followers for
having “god, Baha, who is unconditioned and unmatched” on the same footing with “the BAB, whom I
created by a word for me.” P. 35 Risala-i Janab-i Jud & pp. 91-92, notes.
Following his “manifestation”, Baha reproves “the people of of the Bayan,” namely Subh-i-Azal’s
followers “for having been veiled from my [i.e. Baha’s Beauty in my second manifestation [i.e. as the
BAB returned] by a word, and on whom I bestowed life with a breath ..” Baha’s Lawh-i Nasir, pp. 9697, “A Traveller’s Narrative,” Vol. ii, English translation, notes.
JL-02-08
(27)
Following his “manifestation”, Baha came to be introduced as follows:
a) Within the four walls of his house, as “the Ancient stock, the Branch, the Lote-Tree, the LoteTree of the Limit, the Temple, the Supreme Manifestation of god, the Pivot of divine
manifestations, round which all past and future dispensations evolve, pleased to grace the
world once in every five hundred thousand years;”, Bahaullah’s son Muhammad Ali’s Will &
Testament, and Ibn-al-Baha-Badiullah’s Will & Testament;
b) To Europeans as “the Educator or Instructor of Mankind.” P. 156, Subhi’s Payam-i Padar & P.
43 Kashf-al-Hiyal, vol I, 6th impression;
c) To the Covenant-Keepers, namely Abdul Bahaists the Ancient Beauty,” footnote 1 & 2,
Kashf-al-Hiyal, 3rd impression, vol III;
d) To the Unitarians, namely, partisans of Muhammad Ali as “the Blessed Beauty.” Footnotes 1
& 2 Kashf-al-Hiyal, p. 67, 3rd impression, vol III,
e) To the Bahai splinter group in America, i.e., followers of Abdul Baha’s former secretary
Mirza Sohran & Mrs Julie Chamler as “the Manifestation of god for the world.”, The
Carawan, Vol xxvi, No. 4, October 1960;
f) To BABis as “Him Whom God Shall Manifest.”
g) To the Shias “the Imam Husayn returned.”, P. 12 Subhi’s Payam-i Padar & P.45, KashfulHiyal, 3rd impression, vol III;
JL-02-07
Duplicate of Page 28.

JL-02-06
(28)
h) to Jews as the Messiah & deliverer of Israel.” Mirza Abul Fadhl of Gulpaygan’s Istidlaliyya or
Risala-i Ayyubiyya;
I0 To Sunni Moslems as “the head of a sect of Islam called Bahaiyya (Bahaism), like “the sect of
Shaziliyya.” P. 153 Subhi’s Payam-i- Padar;
j) to the Pope, to quote from Baha’s epistle, as “the Lord of Lords, who hath come in the shades of
clouds, the Father whereof Isaiah gave glad tidings, and the $ whom the Spirit [i.e. Christ] promised.”
Prof. Browne’s translation, pp. 963-967. J.R.A.S, October 1889.
The excerpt in (j) is a specimen of the epistles alleged to have addressed by Baha to all the Rulers of
the chief countries in Europe and Western Asia announcing his mission. There is however no
documentary evidence to indicate whether epistles were in fact sent to, or received by, their addressees.
These epistles were “kept under the carpet” and were produced out of the Bahai armoury of
propaganda in the fullness of time, wherewith to lure the gullible. Pp. 58-65, p. 84 & pp. 117-118,
Kashf-al-Hiyal, vol I, 6th impression; & p. 71, 2nd impression, vol II, or pp. 88, 3rd impression, vol II.

JL-02-05
(20)

At the outset just as the BAB claimed to be nothing more and nothing less than a mere channel of grace
between the Absent or Twelfth Imam and his church. So did Baha in the beginning attach himself to his
brother Subh-i-Azal to whom he attributed all his statements. Every now and then, and in the utmost
caution, Baha was apt to drop hints that the Eternal Beauty [Jamal-i-Azali] was to due to appear shortly
from behind the veil. By these hints he placated Subh-i-Azal and kept the followers preoccupied.
When Baha did intend “to devour the dais of god-hood” by himself to the exclusion of others, he
asserted that “by these hints he meant no one else but himself, who was the very self of the hidden
Beauty, to whom he had hinted, and who had now come out into the open.” Kashf-al-Hiyal, p. 32, 2nd
impression, vol. II or p.52, 3rd impression, vol II.
Introduction to volume III, pages V, VI of the Le Beyan Persan.
« Le Bâb est un charé’, il est inutile de le discuter. Il le dit lui-même et, d’autre part, l’ouvrage que
nous traduisons est une partie de son chéri’at. Donc, le représenter comme un simple annonciateur de
Beha Oullah est un mensonge historique. C’en est un autre que de prétendre à l’universalisation de la
religion du Bib par Béha Oullah (Epître an fils du Loup et autres es du même genre), Jesus, ou du
moins ses continuateurs, ont prétendu établir une religion catholique, c’est à dire, universelle. Les
Musulmans sont du même avis en ce qui concerne MOHAMMED et il est à peine besoin de dire que le
Bâb à son tour, réalisation de toutes les prophéties antérieures et divines, est catholique.
Nous ne lui avons jamais reproché d’avoir annoncé son retour en la personne de Celui que Dieu doit
manifester. Nous l’en avons, au contraire, hautement félicité. Mais peut être l’a-t-il annoncé en laissant
à en imposteur trop de facilités pour usurper la place qu’il indique lui-même comme devant être
occupée par un plus grand que lui. Se n’en veux pour témoin que la Porte VIII, de l’Unité VI, que l’on
trouvera dans ce volume. »
JL-02-04
(30)
“… If they be true [i.e. charges of assassinations of the Azalis by Bahais; they were confirmed by Prof.
Browne in his Introduction to the Tarikh-i-Jadid (The New History), pp. vviii-xxiv, and in his Persian
Introduction to Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqtatul Kaf, pp. 40-41] on whole view of the tendencies and
probable influences of Baha’s teachings must necessarily be greatly modified, for of what we are the
noblest and most humane utterances if they be associated with deeds such as here alleged [since
confirmed see supra].” Professor Brown’s comment in Note W. p. 364, Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s
Narrative,” vol ii, English translation.
“Baha is not [the Imam] Husayn but Hasan [Sabah, History of the Assassins of Alamut and the old man
of the mountain] returned.” Pp. 28-38, the Kashf-al Hiyal. 6th impression, vol I.

JL-02-03
(31)
“In the beginning, Baha was Subh-i-Azal’s general factotum, who bore his orders, carried out his
instructions, called himself openly a follower and guard of Subh-i-Azal and humbled himself before
him.” P. 12 Subhhi’s Payam-i Padar (The Father’s Message).
In his epistle addressed to his followers from Acre, Baha spoke of himself as “the wronged-one
(Mazlum).”
Disgusted with the crimes laid at the door of the Bahai hierarchy, some BABis renounced their BABi
faith and composed the following distich:
“If HusaynAli [i.e. Baha, his real name Husayn Ali is written as one word in Persian and not as two
separate words] is the manifestation of Husayn Ali [i.e. the third Imam, and son of Ali Ibn Ali Talib;
Baha claims to be the Imam Husayn returned; the Imam’s name Husayn Ali is written in Persian as two
separate words] then may god grant heavenly bless thousand times to the pure soul of Yazid [i.e. the
second Caliph of dynasty of Ommiades, son of Mu’awiya, having instigated the murder of the Imam
Ali’s two sons, Hasan & Husayn, his name is cursed by Moslems; his name is synonymous with a
wicked and execrable person].
Husayn [i.e. the Imam] was the wronged-one (Mazlum) and not the wrongdoer [Yazid].” P. 16, The
Tanbih Naimin.

JL-02-02
(32)

After his pretensions of the greatest magnitude on the strength of his own interpretation of the word
Mustaghath as meaning “nine or nineteen years” on which he had based his claim to be Him Whom
God Shall Manifest or Him Who Shall Appear, foretold by the BAB, Baha in what may be termed his
swan-song harked back to the words Ghiyath & Mustaghath and construed them in their true meaning.
This new construction superseded his earlier interpretation of the word Mustaghath on which the author
of the Dawn-Breakers, Nabil’s Narrative, waxed so eloquent. For obvious reasons not far top seek,
Shoghi Efendi translated into English of the Dawn-Breakers, failed to insert a footnote to the effect that
earlier interpretation had now become null and void in the light of Baha’s new construction.
In his swan-song Baha refers to the Promised One with whom he asserts identity and goes on to say:
“He [i.e. the Promised One] was called in the Bayan He Who Shall Appear and verily He shall appear
in Mustaghath [i.e. 2001 years hence reckoning from the time of the BAB] … whosoever expects a
manifestation after me, verily he is of the lost, and verily He who shall appear after one thousand years
[i.e. Ghiyath] shall speak in my name. And in Mustaghath [i.e. 2001 years hence reckoning from the
time of the BAB]
JL-02-01
(33)
there shall appear him who will bear witness to me that verily I am the Lord of the heavens and earth
…”
In the document, “after the Branches, [i.e., Baha’s sons, followers are commanded to show honour to
the presence [i.e. Baha’s amanuensis Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, pp. 15-20, notes] who stands before the
throne [i.e. of Baha] in a laudable station ..”
In the document Baha at long last committed and accepted the true meaning of the words Ghyiath and
Mustaghath in terms of their numerical value as conceived by the BAB and as is laid down in the
Bayan, with this difference that he appropriated them for his own claim.
In the document stress is laid on the word Mustaghath and “the document itself,” in the authoritative
opinion of prominent BABis who have had access to the document, “analysed from the angle of Baha’s
manifestation, exposes and condemns Baha as a pretender and interloper who has intruded into the
interval which must elapse between the time of the BAB and the advent of Him Whom God Shall
Manifest, the Promised One of the Bayan.”
“How does Baha come into the picture as Him Whom God Shall Manifest of the Bayan, on the strength
of this belated admission?” is the question posed by other prominent BABis.

JL-01-07
(34)
For the words Ghiyath & Mustaghath, see P. 83 & pp. 157-170 notes.
Bahais, Abdul Bahaists & Unitarians, have suppressed this document of such historical importance
which throws light on the background of the Bahai faith.
It is quoted in part in Risala-i-Jud only to disprove Abdul Baha’s pretensions who claimed “to have
covered the period of one thousand years by one single footstep.” Pp. 3- 4. Ibn-al Baha Badiullah’s
memoirs.
It is also quoted in Ibn-al-Baha Badiullah’s Will & Testament, p. 13, as well as in Baha’s son
Muhammas Ali’s Will & Testament.
On the whole, Bahais are unaware of the true significance of this document which will be donated to
the library in the near future for historical record to provide against any future allegation or distortion
of, or misrepresentation from, the document.
“Bahaism is a religious fraud.” By Samuel Graham Wilson, in his book entitled “Bahaism & its claims,
a study of the religion promulgated by Bahaullah and Abdul Baha (Fleming H. & company, New York,
1915).

JL-01-06
(35)
“approximately fourteen years had elapsed from the Bayani era [which commenced on the 5th Jamadial-Ula A.H. 1266 on 21st March A.D 1850, letter of January 19, 1962] when the Pretender of Acre [i.e.
Baha] advanced his claims.”

His first utterance was: “I have had a vision that there is no god but me.” Several other pretenders had
already preceded him in identical claims. “The notorious Mirza [i.e. Baha]” by reason of his connection
with Subh-i-Azal denied all divine manifestations.”
“At the outset the pretender’s [i.e. Baha’s] pretension was concealed although some were privy to it.”
“in Edirne” Baha “sent Abu Jahl [i.e. Baha’s amanuensis Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan] to me and
summoned this servant [i.e. Subh-i-Azal] to idolatory.” Baha “then set about murdering the friends [i.e.
the BABis who adhered faithfully to Subh-i-Azal] of whom he killed a great many.” In the end, Baha
“passed away survived by his evils.” The main dispute arose out of Baha’s “claim” & “his utmost lie”
that he was “god” and that the Point [i.e. the BAB] was his “Herald.”
Any doubts that might have been entertained in this respect were set at rest by three pamphlets issued
by Baha entitled “there is no god but me.”
“Despite this silliness” Baha wrote to say that “the Person due to appear in Ghiyath and Mustaghath is
to speak on behalf
JL-01-05
(36)
of me [i.e. Baha].” Baha’s pretensions notwithstanding’, Subh-i-Azal “would not suffer anything
prejudicial to Bah. “I simply wanted him not to talk too much or intrusively and thereby compel me to
denounce him.” But Baha “would not contain himself.” And “with the taking of an overdose of opium,
he trumpeted the vessel of his pretensions on the roof-top of his house gulled by the temptations of the
scald-headed [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan wherein his [i.e. Baha’s] brother [i.e. Mirza Musa
surnamed Kalim (interlocutor) because he talked with god (i.e. Baha) participated. Baha “repaired to
his abyss and the scald-headed to his $ …” Extracted from Subh-i-Azal’s letter dated March 21, 1911
addressed to Mouns (A. Bloche $] of La Biblioteque National, Paris, France.
Other portraits of Baha appear:
a) in P.45 Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol III, 3rd impression, fully described in pp. 27-28, Kashf-al Hiyal, vol. II,
2nd impression, or in pp. 47-48, vol. II, 3rd impression; &
in pp. 130-133, Kashf-al-Hiyal, vol III, 3rd impression, elaborated in pp. 76-78, vol I. 6th impression.

JL-01-04
(37)
Baha’s protocol of reception
Special ushers couched pilgrims for the strait observance of protocol proscribed for them for audience
with Baha: Once inside the outer door of Baha’s mansion, and away from inquisitive eyes the pilgrim
was to made to go on all fours: Crawling on the hands or feet or knees and kissing the ground he was
conducted into Baha’s audience-chamber where he was received by Baha. As the pilgrim went along
all fours the usher dinned into his ears that his faith was being put to severe test, that he was being tried
and that he was not to be found wanting: he was not to regard the Blessed Beauty [i.e. Baha] with
mortal eyes; the fact that he was to see God, Baha, in the form of man should not induce him to
imagine that God, Baha was in fact a mortal.
Kashf-al Hiyal PP. 27-28, vol II, 2nd impression or pp. 47-48, vol II, 3rd impression.
Baha’s audiences do not appear to last long as a rule. One of them was described to Prof. Browne
minutely by a Babi with whom he was intimately acquainted and who was admitted to audience with
Baha at Acre.
He was accompanied by a friend and by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, Baha’s amanuensis, called the
servant of god. On reaching the flight of steps leading to the room where Baha was, Prof. Browne’s
informant the Babi, saw his companions prostrate themselves

JL-01-03
(38)
and enter the room on their knees while he was hesitating as to whether he should do the same, Baha
called out to him to dispense with the ceremonial. Prof. Browne’s account in J.R.A.S. July 1800.
This is a short biography of Mirza Husayn Ali commonly called Bahaullah, architect of the Bahai faith,
who to quote from the Tanbihun Naimin, P.5, “afflicted with personality cult, had visions of world
conquest from his early days in Iran.”
After a chequers career, “the god of Acre”, to quote from the Hasht Bisihisht, P. 309, passed to the
mercy of God on May 28, 1892 at Acre.

Kindly Acknowledge
Yours Sincerely
Jalal S. Azal
JL-01-02
Abdul Baha’s “A Traveller’s Narrative”
References in the letter
Letter
Page
9
9
10
11
12

Vol ii
E.T. Page
3
18
55
62-63
63

Vol I
Persian Text Page
3- 4
24
70
78-80
81