Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: John Walbridge, Sacred Time: Babi and Baha'i History and Biography, bahai-library.com.
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Sacred Time:

Bábí and Bahá'í History and Biography

John Walbridge

1999

Contents

Chapter One:
Some Babi Martyrs

Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim-i-Qazvini, a secretary of the Bab

Two Babi Youth

Mirza `Abdu'l-Vahhab-i-Shirazi

Haydar Big-i-Zanjani

The Farhadis of Qazvin

The Seven Martyrs of Tehran

Chapter Two:
The Baha'i Faith in Turkey

The Rise and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

Ottoman attitudes towards the Babis

Istanbul, the Great City

The City's Name

History and description

History and description

Baha'i writings on Istanbul

Istanbul after Baha'u'llah

The Baha'i community of Istanbul

Edirne, the Land of Mystery

Name, History, and description

Baha'u'llah in Edirne

Sites associated with Baha'u'llah

Edirne after Baha'u'llah

The modern Baha'i community

Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz and his Ministers

Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz

`Âli Pasha

Fu'ad Pasha

The Last Years of the Ottoman Empire

Sultan `Abdu'l-Hamid II

Jamal Pasha and World War I

Ataturk and Modern Turkey

Shoghi Effendi on the fall of the Ottomans and the rise of modern Turkey

The Baha'i Community of Turkey

Early history

Persecutions of Baha'is in Turkey

Institutional Growth

Composition of the community

Growth of the Baha'i community

Other Turkish Baha'i Communities

Turks in Iran

Turks in the Central Asian Republics

Turks elsewhere

Baha'i literature in Turkish

`Abdu'llah Pasha

Chapter Three:
The Baha'i Faith in Iran

An Introduction to the History and Culture of Iran

Geography

History

Culture

Three Clerics and a Prince of Isfahan:

Background to Baha'u'llah's Epistle to the Son of the Wolf

Lawh-i-Burhan

Mir Muhammad-Husayn-i-Khatunabadi, "the She-Serpent"

Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir-i-Isfahani, "the Wolf"

Aqa Najafi, "the Son of the Wolf"

Sultan-Mas`ud Mirza Zillu's-Sultan

Khomeini

Miscellaneous historical and doctrinal topics

Seven Proofs

Suratu'l-Haykal

Lawh-i-Aqdas

Philosophy

Islamic philosophy as background to Baha'i thought

The Bab and philosophy

Baha'u'llah and philosophy

`Abdu'l-Baha and philosophy

Shoghi Effendi and philosophy

Philosophical writings by Baha'is

The Greek philosophers and the Jews

Dreams

Evolution: a note

R.M.S. Titanic

Appendices

Personal Names

Baha'i laws and customs relating to personal names

Persian and Islamic names

Arabic

Arabic in the Baha'i writings

Other Arabic Baha'i Literature

Author’s
Preface

The Babi and Baha'i religions
are historical religions, born in the full light of
history, situating themselves in history, and drawing
justification and inspiration from their own histories.
The following chapters collect a series of investigations,
mostly biographical, of Babi and Baha'i history. In
some cases, as in the chapters on Zanjan and Turkey,
they form a collected whole. In others, there is a
looser connection. The central theme here is a belief
that cultural context and detail illuminates Baha'i
history, a theme also explored in my earlier Sacred
Acts, Sacred Space, Sacred Time (Oxford: George
Ronald, 1996).

Chapter
One

Some
Babi Martyrs

The Babi religion may
be understood as a transitional phase between Shi`ism
and the Baha'i Faith, and a theme that unites them
is martyrdom. Whereas for Sunni Muslims the formative
events of their religion were the triumphant conquests
of early Islam, the formative event in Shi`ism was
the martyrdom of the Imam Husayn. Husayn perished
with a small band of followers in the plain of Karbala
in 680. His dignity in defeat and his dauntless faith
have provided the model for Shi`ite piety ever since.
The figure of Husayn also provides a link connecting
Shi`ism, the Babi religion, and the Baha'i Faith.
In a dream the Bab drank seven handfuls of blood from
the severed head of the Imam Husayn, and in the Baha'i
symbolic universe, it is Baha'u'llah who is the return
of the Imam Husayn. No Babi of Shi`ite background,
as they all were, could fail to foresee the possibility
of joining the returned Imam on some new plain of Karbala.

Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim-i-Qazvini,
a secretary of the Bab.

Also called Mirza Ahmad-i-Katib
("the Scribe") or Mirza Ahmad-i-Qazvini, he was a secretary
of the Bab, the teacher of Nabil-i-Zarandi, the historian,
and a friend of Baha'u'llah. Though of a merchant
family, he studied law and theology in his home city
of Qazvin with Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim-i-éravani. When
his teacher proclaimed him a mujtahid, he doubted his
worthiness. After a dream which the Shaykhi
merchant Haji Allah-vardiy-i-Farhadi explained as being
of Siyyid Kazim-i-Rashti, he went immediately
to Karbala with his brother `Abdu'l-Hamid and spent
the winter in Siyyid Kazim's classes. After Naw-Ruz
Siyyid Kazim sent him back to Qazvin where he worked
as a merchant for a number of years. He was apparently
married and had children.

Hearing of the Bab's proclamation,
he set out for Shiraz--immediately and on foot,
according to one report. Hearing in Tehran that the
Bab had instructed his followers to meet him in Karbila,
he went there, only to find that the Bab had in fact
gone to Bushihr and Shiraz. He joined
the party of Shaykhis seeking the Bab,
waited for a time in Isfahan, and finally met the Bab
with the first group of believers allowed to enter
Shiraz. There he became a confirmed believer.

When his followers caused
disturbances in the city, the Bab sent most of the
believers away but ordered Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim to stay
and make fair copies of his writings as they were revealed,
a task he shared with Shaykh Hasan-i-Zunuzi
and Siyyid Husayn-i-Yazdi. Just before the Bab was
sent to Isfahan, he sent these three ahead where they
continued to act as his secretaries, receiving letters
from believers and transcribing the replies. Later
when the Bab was living secretly in the house of Manuchihr
Khan, they continued this task and were the
only believers allowed to see him. After the governor's
death in 1847, he followed the Bab to Kashan,
Qum, and Kulayn, where he probably remained for the
two to three weeks until the Bab left. He did not
see the Bab again.

Mirza Lutf-`Ali (Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 2:232-33) reports that Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim
tried to go to the fort of Shaykh Tabarsi
with Aqa Muhammad-Ja`far-i-Tabrizi but that they were
detained in Shir-Gah. Hearing this, Mulla Husayn
sent out a party under Mirza Muhammad-Baqir-i-Hirati
that brought them to the fort. A few days later Mulla
Husayn sent him to Sari to attend Quddus who was detained
there. Quddus in turn sent him away with instruction
to personally serve the Bab. Another report states
that he took part in the disturbances in Khurasan
but did not reach the fort (ZH). Both versions
are open to doubt since they are not mentioned in Nabil,
who otherwise has full particulars on his activities.

Soon after, he settled in
Tehran where he lived under the protection of Baha'u'llah
and worked as a scribe, spending his evenings making
copies of the works of the Bab, which he gave as gifts.
In late 1848 a young Babi, Nabil-i-Zarandi, arrived
in Tehran and settled at the Madrasiy-i-Daru'sh-Shifay-i-Masjid-i-Shah
where Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim was then living. He befriended
Nabil and introduced him to the leading Babis of Tehran,
including Baha'u'llah and his family.

It was through Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim
that Baha'u'llah corresponded with the Bab after his
return from Mazandaran. With him Baha'u'llah originated
the plan to proclaim Mirza Yahya as the Bab's successor
while keeping him in hiding--this in order to deflect
attention from Baha'u'llah, who was well known to the
authorities and the people. (Traveller’s Narrative
37/67-68. MMA 174. RG 1:53-54, 2:247-48.)

During the persecutions of
February 1850, Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim took refuge in the
Masjid-i-Shah, the royal mosque adjacent to
the madrasih in which he was living. Warned by Baha'u'llah
that the Amir-Nizam had ordered the Imam-Jum`ih to
arrest him in the sanctuary, he escaped in disguise
to Qum. From about this time he was generally known
as Mirza Ahmad-i-Katib "the scribe"--a name given him
by Baha'u'llah, probably as an alias rather than as
an honorific. In Qum, shortly before the Bab's martyrdom,
he received a coffer from the Bab containing the last
of his writings and his pen-case, seals, rings, and
the famous pentacle tablet containing 350 derivatives
of the word Baha. He left the same day for
Tehran, explaining that the Bab's accompanying letter
ordered him to deliver it to Baha'u'llah.

After the Bab's martyrdom
he and Baha'u'llah brother, Mirza Musa Kalim, received
the remains of the Bab and his disciple. These they
hid first in the Imam-Zadih Hasan, then in the house
of Haji Sulayman Khan in Tehran, and finally
in the Imamzadih Ma`sum, where they remained hidden
until 1284/1867-68 (DB 521, RB 3:424-25). In spring
of 1851 Nabil found him living incognito in Kirmanshah.
During Ramadan in the summer of 1851 Baha'u'llah visited
them and sent them both back to Tehran. Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim
spent the winter of 1851-52 living in a caravansary
outside the New Gate of Tehran where he spent his time
copying the Bab's works.

When he and Nabil fell under
suspicion once more, he fled to Qum. By summer he
was back in Tehran and was arrested at the time of
the attempt on the life of the Shah. His brother
`Abdu'l-Hamid, who had come to urge him to return to
Qazvin, was arrested with him. The two brothers were
imprisoned in the Siyah-Chal with Baha'u'llah
until sometime between Aug. 22-26, when both were hacked
to pieces with sword by the artillerymen of the royal
bodyguard, probably in the present Maydan-i-Arg, adjacent
to the artillerymen's camp and the passage to the Siyah-Chal.

Mirza Ahmad was important
as an authority on the writings of the Bab. Several
manuscripts in his hand of the Arabic and Persian Bayans
survive. He handled the private correspondence of
the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and Mirza Yahya with discretion.
He was also one of Nabil's principal informants for
the inner history of the early Babi period. Modern
Baha'is know him best as the source through which Mulla
Husayn's famous account of the Bab's declaration reached
Nabil.

The sincerity of his spiritual
search is apparent from his own account preserved in
Nabil, from the trust placed in him by the Bab and
Baha'u'llah, and from his own actions: his contentment
with the modest stations of merchant and scribe when
his learning and piety would have given him an honored
place among the `ulama, his abrupt departures in search
of Siyyid Kazim and the Bab, and his refusal to rejoin
his family in Qazvin. He enjoyed the respect and affection
of Baha'u'llah and his family and the obvious devotion
of Nabil.

Sources: DB xxxvii,
lxiii, 52, 159-69, 176, 189, 192, 212, 214, 227-28,
331, 439, 504-6, 587-88, 592, 654. Tarikh-i Shuhada-yi
Amr 2:232-33, 3:295-309. BBR 142.

Two
Babi Youth

Mirza `Abdu'l-Vahhab-i-Shirazi

In the summer of 1844,
the Bab began dispatching his first believers, the
Letters of the Living, on various missions, assigning
Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami to announce the advent of the
Bab to the leading clerics in Najaf, the most prestigious
center of Shi`ite learning. The young merchant, Mirza
`Abdu'l-Vahhab, had had a dream in which the Imam `Ali
was distributing indulgences in the market. When he
went to his shop in the Vakil Bazar in Shiraz
the next morning, he saw Mulla `Ali reenacting the
scene he had dreamed. He followed Mulla `Ali, who
was leaving that day for `Iraq, and with some difficulty
persuaded him to allow him to come. They had only
gone a short distance when Haji `Abdu'l-Majid, Mirza
`Abdu'l-Vahhab's father, caught up with them. He severely
beat Mulla `Ali, left him lying at the roadside, and
took his son back to Shiraz. Nabil reports
this story in the words of Haji `Abdu'l-Majid who was
later a prominent Baha'i in `Iraq and told the story
often (DB 87-90).

Haji `Abdu'l-Majid some time
later moved his family to Baghdad and then to
Kazimayn where Mirza `Abdu'l-Vahhab established a business.
Apparently he had no further contact with Babis until
1267/1851 when Baha'u'llah visited Baghdad and persuaded
both him and his father to become Babis. When Baha'u'llah
returned to Tehran, he refused to allow Mirza `Abdu'l-Vahhab
to accompany him since he was the only child of his
parents and even gave him some money to expand his
business.

Nevertheless, `Abdu'l-Vahhab
soon received his parents' permission to go to Tehran.
He arrived at the time of the assassination attempt
on the Shah. When he asked the way to the house
of Baha'u'llah, he was arrested, placed in the Siyah-Chal,
and chained with four others to Baha'u'llah. Soon
afterwards he was executed--wearing Baha'u'llah's shoes
because he had none of his own. He was hacked to pieces
by the brother and sons of the Grand Vizier and their
servants. The executioner later returned to the dungeon
and praised the spirit with which he had faced death.
Baha'u'llah often told the story of his execution
and the dream that foretold it (DB 633-34). `Abdu'l-Baha
praised him in a Tablet and one of his American talks.

His death date is fixed between
August 22 and 26 by two dispatches of Sheil and the
report of the government newpaper (BBR 134-36, 141).

Sources: MAB 3:407-8.
DB 594. Tarikh-i Shuhada-yi Amr 3:284-94.
Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 68, 79, 94-98,
108. DJT 319-21 (cf. AB 221-22).

Haydar Big-i-Zanjani

He was the son of Din-Muhammad-i-Vazir,
Hujjat's military commander at the siege of Zanjan.
He was apparently in his late teens at the time of
the siege and seems to have acted as a sort of aide-de-camp
to his father. As the siege progressed, he took a
more active role in the fighting. For example, he
claims to have been the one who captured Farrukh
Khan, an army officer who infiltrated the Babi
lines in an ill-starred attempt to capture Hujjat.

When the Babis surrendered,
Haydar Big was spared execution but was tortured to
get him to reveal the location of a treasure the Babis
were thought to have hidden. He was then sent to Tehran
where he was spared execution at the last minute because
of his youth. He was imprisoned for nearly two years.
He spent some years in the service of an unnamed believer
who was later martyred. He was reported to have been
living in Tehran in the 1880s.

His lively first-person account
of the siege is preserved in the London manuscript
of the New History and was included in Browne's
translation of that book.

Sources: TJ 151-68
passim (in an interpolation added to the London MS
by Haji Mirza Isma`il-i-Kashani). `Abdu'l-Ahad,
"Pers. Narr." 769 in which Browne quotes Shaykh
`Ali-Bakhsh-i-Zanjani as confirming several
important particulars of Haydar Big's account of his
adventures. Husayn Zanjani, Vaqayi` 74.

The Farhadis of Qazvin

Several members of
this family are notable in Shaykhi and
Babi history.

Haji Allah-vardi-(or virdi)-yi-Farhadi.
ca. 1770-ca. 1830. Shaykhi merchant
of Qazvin. Survived by sons Aqa Muhammad-Hadi, Muhammad-Mihdi,
and Muhammad-Javad-i-Farhadi, and one other child.

Haji Asadu'llah-i-Farhadi,
ca. 1775-1263/1847-48. Babi martyr and younger brother
of Allah-vardi. His three daughters, Khatun
Jan, Hajiyyih Khanum, and Shirin Khanum,
were married to his nephews Hadi, Mihdi, and Javad
respectively. A respected merchant, his house was
a meeting place for Shaykhis, including
Shaykh Ahmad himself when he visited
Qazvin. When Letter of the Living Mulla Jalil-i-Urumiyyih
came to Qazvin, Haji Asadu'llah became a Babi, paid
Mulla Jalil's expenses, and gave him lodging in his
house and one of his wives to marry. The Farhadi house
became a Babi meeting place and was visited by Quddus,
Mulla Husayn, Tahirih, and others.

When Mulla Jalil's classes
attracted the jealousy of Tahirih's uncle Haji Mulla
Taqi-yi-Baraghani, he ordered the Farhadi house
attacked and Mulla Jalil kidnapped. After Mulla Taqi's
murder, the house was again attacked and looted. Haji
Asadu'llah was taken from his sickbed to prison and
sent chained and on foot in midwinter to Tihran with
four others to answer for the murder. Soon after his
arrival he died, either because of the hardships of
the journey or because he was secretly murdered by
Mulla Taqi's family. After he was denied burial at
the shrine of Shah `Abdu'l-`Azim, he was buried
at the nearby shrine of Bibi Zubaydih .

Aqa Hadi-yi-Farhadi was
the eldest son of Allah-vardi and the nephew and son-in-law
of Asadu'llah. With his younger brother Javad, he
led the Babi rescue of Mulla Jalil from the madrasih
where he was being held and tortured. He made swords
in the cellars of the Farhadi house intended for use
at Shaykh Tabarsi. Suspected in the
murder of Mulla Taqi, he fled to Tihran, and his wife
and sisters-in-law and their children had to live in
hiding in a ruined shrine in great hardship. Baha'u'llah
sent him back to Qazvin to rescue Tahirih, which he
did.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:82-88, DB:281-82.

Husayn-i-Milani,
who helped rescue the body of the Bab.

d. August 1852. Babi martyr.

One of the followers of the
heretic Usku, among whom he was known as Imam Humam
Aba-`Abdi'llahi'l-Husayn, he lived in Tabriz at the
time of the Bab's execution and played a role in the
rescue of the Bab's remains. Mu`inu's-Saltaniy-i-Tabrizi
states that he removed the Bab's remains from the moat
and conveyed them to the shop of Haji Muhammad-Taqiy-i-Milani,
while ZH states that it was to Husayn-i-Milani's shop
that the remains were brought. Baha’u’llah, King
of Glory, :88 states that he claimed to be Him
Whom God will make manifest and that he acquired a
following.

In August1852 he was living
in Tihran and was arrested after the attempted assassination
of the Shah. ZH states he was executed in Niyavaran
the same day as Haji Sulayman Khan, which would
have made him one of the earlier martyrs of that month
and thus presumably one of the better known Babi's
of Tihran. A platoon of soldiers stipped him and killed
him with bayonets.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr3:259. BBR:142.

The
Seven Martyrs of Tehran

In February 1850 a number
of prominent Babis were arrested in Tehran. Seven
of those who were condemned refused to recant and were
publicly exected. The incident was significant on
several grounds in the moral history of the conflict
between the Babis and the secular and religious authorities
of Iran. Browne later wrote:

They were men representing
all the more important classes in Persian divines, dervishes,
merchants, shop-keepers, and government officials;
they were men who had enjoyed the respect and consideration
of all; they died fearlessly, willingly, almost eagerly,
declining to purchase life by that mere lip-denial,
which, under the name of ketman or takiya,
is recognized by the Shi`ites as a perfectly justifiable
subterfuge in case of peril; they were not driven to
despair of mercy as were those who died at Sheykh Tabarsi
and Zanjan; and they seal their faith with their blood
in the public square of the Persian capital wherein
is the abode of the foreign ambassadors accredited
to the court of the Shah. (Traveller’s Narrative,
p. 216, quoted in BBR 100)

The following are biographies
of these seven martyrs.

Sources: The event is
described in every major history of the Babi religion.
Notable accounts include DB ???, BHD, ???, BBR 100Ð5,
God Passes By, 46Ð47, RR??. [Sorry, Wendy. A student
is using a number of my books at the moment.]

2. Mirza Qurban-`Aliy-i-Barfurushi
was a well-known mystical leader and the second of
the Seven Martyrs of Tehran. Originally from Barfurush
in Mazandaran or Astarabad in Gurgan, he was a widely
travelled Sufi master, a shaykh of the
Ni`matu'llahi order. He also had associations with
the other mystical orders of the time. His followers
and admirers were to be found in many parts of Iran--in
Tehran, Khurasan, Hamadan, Kirmanshah,
Mandalij, Mazandaran, and Astrarabad--and included
members of the royal family, notably the Shah's
mother. He was respected for his personal, moral,
and spiritual qualities. He lived simply and always
wore the simple garb and woolen cloak of the dervish.

Mirza Qurban-`Ali became a
Babi in 1845 after a chance meeting with Mulla Husayn-i-Bushru'i
while travelling from Karbila to Iran. In Tehran he
studied with Vahid and was closely associated with
the Babi community there. When the Bab was at Kulayn
near Tehran, Mirza Qurban-`Ali and some other believers
were able to visit him there.

According to Nabil and Fadil-i-Mazandarani,
he was prevented by severe illness from going to join
the Babis at Shaykh Tabarsi. However,
Mirza Lutf-`Ali, a survivor of the siege, reports that
he reached the government camp and, not being known
as a Babi, was asked to serve as Mihdi-Quli Mirza's
emissary to the Babis. At the fort he told Quddus
of the situation in the government camp and then returned
to Mihdi-Quli Mirza with samples of the writings of
the Bab. Later, when Vahid went to Yazd and Nayriz,
Mirza Qurban-`Ali intended to join him but was arrested
before he left.

Having taught his faith openly,
he was one of the prominent Babis arrested in February
1850. Since he firmly maintained his faith even under
the interrogation of the prime minister himself, intervention
on his behalf by many friends, including even the Shah's
mother, was unable to save him. To the prime minister
he said that his name, which means "sacrifice to `Ali,"
proved that he was destined to be a martyr for `Ali-Muhammad,
the Bab. He spent his last night chanting poems of
mystical love in the prison.

He was brought to the Sabzih-Maydan
after the execution of the Bab's uncle. After the
executioner's first blow merely knocked off his turban,
he recited the famous verse:

Happy he whom love's intoxication

So hath overcome that scarce
he knows

Whether at the feet of the
Beloved

It be head or turban he throws!

The second blow struck off
his head.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:98-104.

4. Aqa Siyyid Husayn-i-Turshizi
was Babi mujtahid, the fourth of the Seven Martyrs
of Tehran. A native of Turshiz (Kashmar)
in Khurasan, he did his initial studies in Khurasan
then went to Najaf for advanced study. After he was
accepted as a mujtahid there, it was decided that he
would return to his native Khurasan to teach.
On this journey he met a Babi acquaintance, the merchant
Haji Muhammad-Taqiy-i-Kirmani, who was returning from
Karbila to Tehran to wait permission to visit the Bab.
On the journey the merchant was able to convince his
friend of the truth of the new religion. In Tehran
he met the Bab's uncle and other Babis and became a
confirmed member of the Babi community of the capital.

He and Haji Muhammad-Taqi
were arrested in February 1850. Under interrogation
he defended the validity of the proofs given by the
Bab. Asserting that his knowledge and competence to
judge such matters had been certified by the mujtahids
of Najaf and Karbila, he demanded to be allowed to
debate the `ulama of Tehran. He had, however, already
been sentenced to death as an unbeliever by seven eminent
mujtahids of the city in judgments solicited by the
prime minister.

He was the fourth of the seven
martyrs brought to the Sabzih-Maydan for execution.
Haji `Ali Khan, the Hajibu'd-Dawlih, who was
there at the orders of the Shah, later reported
that at the last moment, he was very struck by the
youth, beauty, and demeanor of Siyyid Husayn and on
impulse offered him a high post in the government and
his daughter's hand if he would renounce his faith.
Aqa Siyyid Husayn refused, saying he preferred to
leve the world and its wealth to those who cared for
it. Angered, Haji `Ali Khan struck him in the
mouth and ordered his immediate execution. He died
after Mulla Isma`il-i-Qumi and before his friend Haji
Muhammad-Taqiy-i-Kirmani.

Sources: Tarikh-i Shuhada-yi
Amr 3: 108-12.

Haji Mulla Isma`il-i-Qumi
(or Farahani) was a Babi cleric, the third of the Seven
Martyrs of Tehran. He was born and raised in Farahan
in `Iraq-i-`Ajam but studied and lived in Qum for many
years. Later he studied in Najaf and Karbila, where
he became a distinguished and learned Shaykhi,
greatly respected for his character. He became a Babi
when Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami came to Karbila. After
participating in the disputes there with the `ulama,
he went to Shiraz to meet the Bab. He then
went to Khurasan and was involved in the disturbances
there. He was present at Badasht where he received
the title "Sirru'l-Vujud" (Mystery of Being). He accompanied
Baha'u'llah, Tahirih, and Quddus as far as Niyala,
where the party was dispersed, and then went to Tehran.
He bitterly regretted the illness that prevented him
from going to Shaykh Tabarsi. At this
time he lived in the in the Madrasiy-i-Daru'sh-Shifa
where several other Babis also lived, notably Nabil
and Mulla `Abdu'l-Karim-i-Qazvini. Nabil praises his
eloquence in expounding the Qur'an and traditions.
He actively taught the Babi Faith, always carrying
an indexed Qur'an in his pocket in case he met a receptive
person.

When in February 1850 orders
were issued to arrest the known Babis in the capital,
he happened to be at the house of Mirza Shafi`,
the vazir of Tehran, who warned him that his name was
on the list and that those arrested would be tortured
and killed. He went into hiding but was arrested when
he was recognized in a public bath and was chained
and imprisoned with the others. When brought to the
Sabzih-Maydan, he was stoned and cursed by the spectators
but replied with cheerful words. When he reached the
execution site, he gave some money to the executioner
to buy candy which he then shared with him. He then
offered prayers and was executed.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:104-7.

5. Haji Muhammad-Taqiy-i-Kirmani,
the fifth of the Seven Martyrs of Tehran, was a well-known
Babi merchant.

In 1264/1847-48 he had set
out from Kirman to make a pilgrimage to Karbila. In
Shiraz he became a Babi through Haji Mirza Siyyid
`Ali, the maternal uncle of the Bab. As the latter
was about to visit the Bab in Chihriq, Haji
Muhammad-Taqi asked permission to accompany him. Haji
Mirza Siyyid `Ali told him to fulfill his original
intention of making pilgrimage to Karbila and to wait
there for the Bab's instructions. As it happened,
the Bab considered conditions too dangerous, so Haji
Mirza Siyyid `Ali wrote him to come to Tehran where
they would wait together until conditions allowed them
to go to Chihriq.

Haji Muhammad-Taqi set out
for Tehran in the autumn of 1849. In Baghdad
he fell in with a friend, Aqa Siyyid Husayn-i-Turshizi,
who had become a mujtahid in `Iraq. During the journey
to Iran Siyyid Husayn also became a Babi. All three
were among those arrested and executed in Tehran in
February 1850. Haji Muhammad-Taqi was the fifth to
die, immediately after his friend, Siyyid Husayn-i-Turshizi.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:108-12.

Aqa Siyyid Murtaday-i-Zanjani
was the sixth of the Seven Martyrs of Tehran. He was
a merchant of Zanjan and brother of the Siyyid Kazim-i-Zanjani
who died at Shaykh Tabarsi. When brought
to the execution place, he threw himself on the body
of Haji Muhammad-Taqiy-i-Kirmani and insisted that
being a Siyyid, his death would be more meritorious
than that of his friend.

The New History and Nuqtatu'l-Kaf
do not mention him.

Sources: DB 457-58.
Tarikh-i Shuhada-yi Amr 3:112. cf. TJ 252,
216.

6. Aqa Muhammad-Husayn-i-Maraghi'i
(or Tabrizi) was a servant. A native of Aharbayjan,
he became a Babi in Tehran through Haji Mulla Isma`il-i-Qumi,
for who he had a deep affection. He was a servant
of `Azim, a prominent Tehran Babi, and was severely
tortured to induce him to implicate others. He would
neither speak nor cry out, and the guards thought he
was dumb until Mulla Isma`il-i-Qumi told them otherwise.
When he would not recant, he was condemned to death
with the others.

When he was brought to the
Sabzih-Maydan and saw the body of his teacher, he hugged
it and announced his unwillingness to be separated
from his friend. He and the other two remaining prisoners
each claimed the right to be executed first. Finally,
all three were killed at the same moment.

Sources:Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:113-14.

Shaykh Salih-i-Karimi the
Arab

The first Babi martyr in Iran
was a learned Arab cleric living in Karbila who had
been converted by Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami. A close disciple
of Tahirih, he was one of those who accompanied her
to Baghdad and Iran after her expulsion from
Karbila. An older man, he was one of those who supported
her in her disputations with her husband Mulla Muhammad-i-Baraghani
in Qazvin.

When Tahirih's maternal uncle
and father-in-law, Haji Mulla Taqiy-i-Baraghani,
was murdered, his heirs--particularly Tahirih's husband
Mulla Muhammad--accused her of instigating the crime.
Seventy Babis were arrested in Qazvin, and Shaykh
Salih was among those accused of the actual murder.
While imprisoned in the governorate in Qazvin, he
was severely bastinadoed. Since the governor did not
have the authority to order executions, the government
was persuaded to have the five prisoners still suspected
of the crime sent in chains to Tehran. One prisoner
died in route and another, who had confessed to the
crime, escaped soon after arriving. The remaining
three were imprisoned in Tehran. They were interrogated
individually by Mulla Muhammad, a mujtahid with Babi
sympathies, who exonerated them. Nonetheless, Mulla
Muhammad-i-Baraqani was able to persuade the Shah
to order the execution of Shaykh Salih.
He faced his death steadfastly, reciting prayers and
composing a couplet at the place of execution. He
was blown from the mouth of a cannon in the Sabzih-Maydan
in Tehran. The pieces of his body were collected and
buried in the courtyard of the Imamzadih Zayd.

Shaykh Salih-i-Karimi
was the first Babi to be executed for his faith in
Iran, though the elderly Haji Asadu'llah-i-Farhadi,
another of the Babis suspected in the murder, died
of ill-treatment and exposure on the road to Tehran.

Sources: Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:77-81.

\Shaykh Abu-Mansur Ahmad
b. `Ali b. Abi-Talib Tabarsi was the twelfth century
Shi`i scholar whose tomb near Barfurush
was the scene of the most important battle between
the Babis and government troops in 1848-49. Shaykh
Tabarsi--not to be confused with his contemporary al-Fadl
b. Hasan Tabarsi, the author of a famous commentary
on the Qur'an--was one of the teachers of the Shi`i
biographer, Ibn Shahrashub. He was best
known for the Kitabu'l-Ihtijaj, a collection
of the traditions in which the Prophet and the Imams
used arguments.

Sources: Biharu'l-Anvar
0:140. Adh-Dhari`ah 1:281-82. A`yanu'sh-Shi`ah
3:29-30. The identification of the tomb with this
man is made by the tablet of visitation in the tomb.
See Brown, Year, p. 617.

Mulla `Abdu'l-Fattah
(c. 1774-1852) was a native of Baha'u'llah's home village
of Takur. He was arrested during the attack on that
village in revenge for the attempted assassination
of the Shah. His beard and part of his chin
were cut off, and he was brought to the Siyah-Chal
in Tihran, where he immediately died. He was praised
by Baha'u'llah in a visiting tablet and by `Abdu'l-Baha
in prayers.

Tarikh-i
Shuhada-yi Amr 3:26_??, Baha’u’llah, King of
Glory, 89-92, Iqlim-i-Nur??.

Chapter
Two

The
Baha'i Faith in Turkey

Turkey is a secular
state with a largely ethnically Muslim population occupying
the Anatolian peninsula and a small area of the southeastern
part of the Balkan Peninsula. Modern Turkey is the
successor state of the Ottoman Empire, which until
the end of World War I also controlled parts of the
Arab Near East and the Balkans. The Ottoman Empire
played a major role in Baha'i history, for it was to
Ottoman Iraq that Baha'u'llah went as an exile in 1853.
Later he was exiled under Ottoman authority to Istanbul,
Edirne, and `Akka. `Abdu'l-Baha also lived in the
Ottoman Empire for most of his life, the greater part
of the time as a prisoner.

Baha'is have lived in the
territory of modern Turkey since the time of Baha'u'llah's
exile to Istanbul. The contemporary Baha'i community
consists of several thousand believers with about a
hundred local spiritual assemblies. The National Spiritual
Assembly of Turkey was formed in 1959.

In addition to those living
in modern Turkey itself, there are large numbers of
Turks elsewhere, particularly in northwestern Iran
and Soviet Central Asia. There are a considerable
number of Turkish-speaking Baha'is in Iran and an increasing
number of Turkic-speaking Baha'is in the new republics
of Central Asia.

The
Rise and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

The Turks are among the many
peoples who have overflowed from the steppes of Central
Asia into the settled areas of the Middle East, Europe,
and China. By the tenth century A.D. they had drifted
into the eastern Islamic lands, at first as mercenaries
but soon as rulers. The Ottoman Empire began in the
thirteenth century as one of the petty Turkish principalities
in the former Byzantine lands of western Anatolia.
In a series of brilliant conquests over the next two
centuries, the Ottomans built an empire covering most
of Anatolia and the southern Balkans, capped in 1453
with the capture of Constantinople itself. The Ottomans
triumphantly moved the government from their old capital
of Edirne (Adrianople) to Constantinople. At its height
in the sixteenth century the Ottoman Empire stretched
from Iraq to Algeria and from the Crimea to Aden and
was one of the most powerful and advanced states in
the world.

By the beginning of the nineteenth
century, however, it was clear that the Ottomans had
failed to keep pace with the technological, economic,
and military advances of the European states. Moreover,
the administrative structure of the empire had become
corrupt and the Sultan's power diluted. A number of
provinces had already been lost to European neighbors
or insubordinant governors. Many expected the empire
to collapse. Napoleon, for example, invaded Egypt
and Syria as a way of striking at Britain's Eastern
interests.

However, the Ottomans proved
more resilient than expected. A series of reforming
Sultans attempted to reorder the state, army, and economy
after European models. Salim (Selim) III (1789-1807)
attempted to establish a "New Order" in which the old
Janissary Corps would be replaced by a modern army,
modern schools established, and the people given a
say in local administration. In the end, however,
the old army and government establishment united against
him, and he was overthrown in a mutiny of the Janissaries.

He was succeeded soon after
by his cousin, Mahmud II (1808-39), who, after consolidating
his own power, carried on the reforms. In 1826 he
tricked the Janissaries into mutinying and massacred
them. He also tried to reform education, mostly without
success, though he did establish a modern medical school
and language academies for training diplomats. The
result was a professional diplomatic corps that furnished
most of the reforming statesman of the next decades.

`Abdu'l-Majid I (`AbdŸlmecid,
1839-61), though young and susceptible to influence,
was sympathetic to the reforms and issued a series
of decrees known as the Tanzimat which, at least on
paper, went far towards making Turkey a modern state.
However, by about 1850 the impetus towards reform
had largely petered out. It was during `Abdu'l-Majid's
reign that the Crimean War (1853-56) took place, in
which the European powers united against Russia in
defense of Turkey. Baha'u'llah alludes to the destruction
of a Turkish fleet by the Russians in his Tablet to
Napoleon III, an incident that Napoleon had used to
justify his entrance into the war.

The Tanzimat reforms had failed
to transform the state fundamentally, although many
improvements had resulted. Their flaw was that for
the sake of reform, power had been concentrated in
the hands of the Sultan in order to allow him to make
necessary changes. However, once power passed into
the hands of an incapable Sultan, there were no institutions
capable of restraining him.

Sources: For the history
of the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey, see Stanford
J. Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey
2 vol. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1976-
); Lord Kinross, The Ottoman Centuries; EB (1985) "Turkey
and Ancient Anatolia." For the religious situation
in contemporary Turkey, see World Christian Encyclopedia
"Turkey."

Ottoman attitudes towards
the Babis

In the nineteenth century
Ottoman Iraq was the temporary or permanent home to
a large number of Iranians--pilgrims, clerics, students,
refugees, merchants--most drawn by the Shi`i
shrines there. The Babi religion first came to the
attention of the Turkish authorities at the end of
1844 when one of the Letters of the Living, Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami,
was arrested in Iraq on the charges of circulating
a blasphemous imitation of the Qur'an and disturbing
the peace. Najib Pasha, the governor of Iraq
under whose authority Bastami was tried, seems to have
sincerely considered Bastami's Babi views objectionable.
Nonetheless, the main concern of the Turkish authorities
was apparently to avoid provoking disturbances between
the Shi`i and Sunni communities in Iraq and
complicating already strained relations with Iran.

Two years later when similar
disturbances arose around the person of Tahirih, Najib
Pasha, having learned from the commotions associated
with the Bastami affair, simply took her quietly into
custody and held her in the house of a leading Sunni
cleric while he waited for instructions from Istanbul.
A few months later she was deported to Iran.

By the 1850s there were many
Babis among the Iranians in Iraq, most notably Baha'u'llah.
The Turks had traditionally granted asylum to refugees
of all sorts, and at that time were freely giving Ottoman
nationality to Iranian refugees, to the irritation
of the Iranian government. They protected the Babis
as well, giving them citizenship when the Persian authorities
tried to have them extradited. Baha'u'llah kept the
Babis under careful control, so the Turks had few reasons
to be apprehensive about them.

The Iranian government, seeing
the recovery of the Babi community under Baha'u'llah's
guidance, was very anxious that he should be removed
from Baghdad. The Iranian ambassador in Istanbul steadily
agitated for this end. Eventually, the Turks gave
in and ordered Baha'u'llah to Istanbul as a guest of
the government.

Sources: For the trial
of Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami, see Amanat 220-38, Momen,
"Trial," BBR 83-90.

Istanbul,
the Great City

From 16 August through 1 December
1863 Baha'u'llah was an exile in Istanbul or Constantinople,
the former capital of the Byzantine empire and at that
time the capital of Ottoman Turkey. In the nineteenth
century it was the chief city of the Islamic world.

The City's Name

Istanbul was originally
named Byzantium, perhaps after the legendary Byzas,
supposed to be the leader of the first Greek colonists
to settle the site. The emperor Constantine the Great
renamed the city "New Rome" and "Constantinpolis" in
330 A.D. In English this became "Constantinople"--"Qustantiyyih"
in the Islamic languages. This name remained in use
until the adoption of the Roman alphabet in Turkey
after World War I.

The modern name "Istanbul"--or
"Stamboul" or "Astanih"--is an Arabic corruption of
a Greek phrase meaning "in the City" and was in use
as early as the tenth century A.D. A pun attributed
to Sultan Muhammad II, the Ottoman conqueror of the
city, made this "Islambul"--"where Islam abounds."
This became the preferred spelling of educated Ottomans.

Islamic cities, like people,
had titles. Those of Istanbul reflect its importance
and prestige: "Seat of the Sultanate," "Home of the
Caliphate," "Home of Victories," "Dome of Islam," and
the like. Western diplomats referred to Istanbul and
the Ottoman government as "the Sublime Porte," a French
mistranslation of Bab-i-`Ali, "High Gate"--the name
of the part of the palace where several ministries
were located.

To Baha'u'llah Istanbul was
simply "the City" or "the Great City" (al-madinih al-kabirih),
reflecting its preeminence in the Islamic world.

History and description

Istanbul is strategically
situated on the European bank of the waterway separating
Europe from Asia, on a triangular peninsula formed
by the Bosphorus, the Sea of Marmara, and a deep inlet
called the Golden Horn. By its situation it controls
sea traffic between the Mediterranean lands and the
Black Sea and the land traffic between the Balkans
and Asia. Moreover, the Golden Horn is a splendid
natural harbor, and the peninsula lent itself to defense.
Thus, the history of Byzantium/Constantinople/Istanbul
may be read as a twenty-six-century-long struggle between
those who would use the city to dominate the lands
bordering the Black Sea and eastern Mediterranean and
those who found their ambitions limited by the rulers
of the city.

The ancient and medieval
city. According to legend, ancient Byzantium was
founded about 657 B.C. by colonists from Megara and
Argos during the great age of Greek colonization.
The early history of the town is a complicated series
of struggles, as various powers contended for the town
with its control of the Black Sea grain trade, punctuated
by sacks as irritated neighbors retaliated for the
tolls the city placed on shipping. Byzantium eventually
joined the Roman Empire as a free confederate city,
but soon lost its privileges. It was destroyed in
196 and 268 A.D. during civil wars, but was rebuilt
both times.

Ancient Byzantium occupied
a much smaller area than the modern city, and none
of its monuments survive.

In 330 A.D. Constantine I,
the Great, the first Christian Roman emperor, moved
the capital to Byzantium. Now known as Constantinople,
the city almost immediately became the leading city
of the Western world and the capital of what was really
a new eastern Greek Christian empire. Constantine
tripled the size of the city. He and his successors
filled the city with wonderful churches, palaces, and
monuments, and girdled it with great walls that were
to be breached only once in their history.

Within a century and a half,
the last remnants of the Western Roman Empire had vanished,
but the fortunes of the Eastern Roman or Byzantine
Empire continued to rise, and by the sixth century
it had attained a power and magnificence nearly equal
to that of Rome at its height.

Constantinople was also the
seat of the Patriarch of Constantinople, among Christian
prelates second only to the Pope in Rome. After the
split with Rome in the eleventh century, he became
the titular head of the whole Orthodox Church, as he
remains to this day. Thus, Constantinople became a
sort of holy city to the Eastern Christians.

After the sixth century the
empire slowly dwindled, but Constantinople remained
one of the world's great cities. At its height it
had a population of half a million. An Arab traveler
of the twelfth century could still remark, "This city
is even greater than its repute." By the fifteenth
century, however, the Byzantine Empire had been reduced
to some small, distant, and impoverished provinces
and a few kilometers of land outside the city wall.
The city was full of ruins and largely empty of people.
The end came in 1453.

The Turkish city.
Muslims besieged Constantinople for the first time
in 669 A.D. During this campaign the elderly Abu-Ayyub
al-Ansari, the standard-bearer of the Prophet Muhammad
himself, died and was buried before the walls of Constantinople.
The siege failed. Naval raids a few years later also
failed. In 716-17 the caliph Sulayman b. `Abdu'l-Malik,
encouraged by a tradition that Constantinople was to
be conquered by a caliph bearing the name of a prophet,
besieged the city, again without success. Seven centuries
would pass before a Muslim army again stood before
the Great City.

In 1355 the Ottoman Turks,
having taken the last Byzantine territory in Asia Minor,
crossed the Dardanelles and established themselves
in Europe. For nine more decades the city maintained
a fragile independence, protected mostly by larger
dangers and opportunities that preoccupied the Turks.
A Turkish siege in 1422 failed to take the city, but
in April 1453 a larger army equipped with the finest
siege artillery in the world appeared before the walls.
The desperate pleas of the last Byzantine emperor
for aid from the West brought only two thousand Genoese
soldiers. Cheered by the miraculous rediscovery of
the tomb of Abu-Ayyub, the Turks stormed the city on
29 May. The last Roman emperor died fighting on the
walls.

Sultan Muhammad II--now called
"Fatih", the "Conqueror"--made Constantinople his capital.
Finding the city in ruins and depopulated, he filled
it with people deported from other conquered areas.
He ordered his nobles to build the mosques and other
public buildings for the various quarters of the city.
By the end of his reign the population was perhaps
70,000. Over the next century Istanbul rose steadily
in wealth, population, and magnificence as the sultans
strove to make their capital the greatest city in the
world. The Byzantines had left the ancient domed church
of Hagia Sophia ("Holy Wisdom"). Taking this as their
model, the Ottomans filled the city with great domed
mosques. In the sixteenth century the great architect
Sinan and his staff built more than three hundred public
buildings, most in Istanbul. Though the highpoint
of Ottoman architecture was the sixteenth century,
the Sultans continued building right up to the end
of the nineteenth century.

In various ways the Sultans
attempted to make Istanbul a sacred city of Islam.

The Ottoman Empire was cosmopolitan,
embracing dozens of nationalities--a diversity reflected
in the capital. From the first the Sultans had brought
Christians and Jews to live in Istanbul. Once the
city was reestablished, people flocked in of their
own accord: Arab, Turkish, and Persian Muslims; Greek
and Armenian Christians; representatives of all the
conquered Balkan provinces; Spanish Jews, refugees
from the Inquisition seeking the relative freedom of
Turkish rule; Western European traders, diplomats,
and mercenaries. Typically, people of a particular
ethnic group would settle in a quarter around a mosque,
church, or synagogue. There they would be allowed
to govern their own affairs and would be held collectively
responsible for the taxes, good order, and public health
of their neighborhood.

After the sixteenth century
Istanbul began a slow decline, reflecting the decline
of Ottoman power. The city had always been troubled
by earthquakes, fires, plagues, and civil disorder.
With the decline of the central authority, these grew
worse. With the central authorities no longer able
to strictly enforce building regulations, areas once
burned over filled up with ramshackle wooden houses.
Houses had long since encroached on the broad avenues
of Byzantine Constantinople. The city had become a
warren of narrow alleys. The rise of modern Europe
slowly ruined Istanbul's traditional industries and
trade. The government was no longer as rich or as
efficient as it had been. Whereas the charitable endowments
of wealthy noblemen had once built hospitals, hospices,
public kitchens, and other such institutions requiring
large annual expenses, they now built libraries and
fountains.

Thus, when Baha'u'llah came
to Istanbul in 1863, he found the Great City at perhaps
its lowest point since the mid-fifteenth century, though
still the greatest city of the Islamic world. It abounded
with magnificent mosques and swarmed with people from
many countries. It was the most European of Islamic
cities, its harbors choked with shipping from all over
the world and offering regular steamship service to
Europe, Africa, and Asia. But Istanbul was run-down
and ramshackle, like the empire it ruled, and none
of the improvements in public services and facilities
had yet been made that were later to transform Istanbul
into a modern city.

Baha'u'llah in Istanbul

Baha'u'llah and his
party reached Istanbul on Sunday, 16 August 1863/1
Rabi` I 1280 after a two-and-a-half day journey by
steamship from Samsun on the northern coast of Asia
Minor. Shamsi Big, an official responsible
for guests of the government, met them and had them
driven in carriages to a government guest house near
the Mosque of Khirqiy-i-Sharif. This
was in the center of the city, not far from the huge
Fatih Mosque built by Muhammad II. Shamsi Big
assiduously attended to the needs of the exiles, though
the large party--more than fifty people--overcrowded
the house. He hired two servants to do errands and
cooking. Various of Baha'u'llah's companions helped
as well.

The next day a representative
of the Persian embassy called on Baha'u'llah bearing
the compliments of Haji Mirza Husayn Khan Mushiru'd-Dawlih
and an apology for not being able to call in person.
It was a courteous and carefully calibrated acknowledgement
of Baha'u'llah's high social rank and his status as
a political exile. Many other visitors came as well,
including high Turkish officials such as Yusuf Kamal
Pasha, a former prime minister with whom Baha'u'llah
discussed the possibility of an international language.

Baha'u'llah Himself refused
to return these visits or to make the customary calls
on the Shaykhu'l-Islam, the foreign minister,
and the prime minister to arrange an audience with
the Sultan. Baha'u'llah turned aside the advice of
friends with the words, "I have no wish to ask favors
from them. I have come here at the Sultan's command.
Whatsoever additional commands he may issue, I am
ready to obey." Years later, the Persian ambassador,
who had been shamed by the Persian princelings and
schemers who swarmed in Istanbul looking for favors
and pensions from the Sultan, confessed that he had
felt pride in Baha'u'llah's "dignified aloofness."
So it was left to Baha'u'llah's brother Mirza Musa
to do such visiting as was necessary, accompanied by
Aqa `Abdu'l-Ghaffar-i-Isfahani, the only one
of Baha'u'llah's companions who spoke Turkish well.
Baha'u'llah himself never went anywhere except to
his brother's house and to the mosque and public baths.

Nonetheless, Baha'u'llah did
not live in seclusion. Visitors crowded into the house,
and he regularly received his companions. Other Babis
began to appear in Istanbul--though Baha'u'llah, foreseeing
that they would occasion trouble, sent them away as
fast as he could.

Several major tablets were
revealed during this period, notably Baha'u'llah's
Mathnavi, a mystical poem in Persian; the Lawh-i-Naqus,
known as Subhanaka ya Hu, revealed for the holy day
of the Declaration of the Bab, which fell during Baha'u'llah's
stay in Istanbul; and the tablet to Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz
and his ministers.

It was also at Istanbul that
Baha'u'llah's eighteen-month-old daughter Sahijiyyih
died. The child was buried outside the Edirne Gate.
She was the daughter of Mahd-i-`Ulya, Baha'u'llah's
second wife.

The original house having
proved too small, the party moved after about a month
to the house of Visi Pasha, a much larger and
more comfortable house a short distance away near the
Fatih Mosque.

The Persian ambassador soon
realized he had made a major mistake in having Baha'u'llah
brought to Istanbul. Though he was now much farther
from Iran, Istanbul was not an isolated provincial
town like Baghdad but the chief capital of the Islamic
world. The ambassador now urged the Turkish government
to transfer Baha'u'llah to somewhere less conspicuous,
either Bursa in Anatolia or Edirne in European Turkey.
The Sultan and his ministers, though not personally
hostile to Baha'u'llah, saw that Babi doctrines had
the potential to undermine the basis of Ottoman government,
as well as to complicate relations with Iran.

The news was first brought
to Baha'u'llah by Shamsi Big. Baha'u'llah was
furious. He had been brought to Istanbul as a guest
and now was being made a prisoner. His first wish
was to refuse to go, send the women and children to
foreign embassies for safety, and let the Turkish government
do what it could. At worst, the public martyrdom of
the Babis in Istanbul would bring great glory to the
Babi cause, but Baha'u'llah was confident the government
would back down. However, Mirza Yahya, who had been
living under an assumed name among the exiles, refused
to take this risk. Faced with the possibility of a
public rift among the Babi exiles, Baha'u'llah had
to comply with the government's order. The official
order was brought by a brother-in-law of the prime
minister. Baha'u'llah replied with the stinging Lawh-i-`Abdu'l-`Aziz
va-Vukala'--the "Tablet to `Abdu'l-`Aziz and His Ministers."

After less than four months
in Istanbul, the exiles were ordered to proceed immediately
to Edirne. On 1 December 1863 they set out for their
new place of exile.

Sites associated with Baha'u'llah.

House of Shamsi
Big, the first residence of Baha'u'llah and the
Babi exiles in Istanbul. This was evidently a government
guest house, not the personal residence of Shamsi
Big. It was a two-story house of some size, though
too small for the fifty-five exiles. Baha'u'llah and
his family lived in the apartments upstairs, while
the other Babis lived in rooms in the lower story.
A pleasant reception room on the first floor provided
a meeting-place for the Babis. This house was near
the Mosque of Khirqiy-i-Sharif in the
Sultan Muhammad Quarter in the center of Istanbul.
The old house no longer exists.

House of Visi Pasha,
the second residence, to which Baha'u'llah moved about
a month after his arrival in Istanbul. This was a
fine three-story house with its own bath and cistern,
separate private apartments for the family (the famous
Turkish Harem), and a large walled garden in the visitors'
section of the house. The house was located in the
same quarter as the house of Shamsi Beg near
the Mosque of Sultan Muhammad II Fatih that gave the
quarter its name. This house no longer exists. In
1952 Baha'is purchased part of the site of one of this
house and in 1955 built a national haziratu'l-quds
on the site. Conditions did not allow the building
to be used for official Baha'i purposes so it was used
as a residence.

The Fatih Mosque (Fatih
Camii), built by Sultan Muhammad II Fatih "the Conqueror"
as his contribution to the reconstruction of his new
capital, is the largest mosque complex in Istanbul.
Completed in 1471, in its original form it occupied
a huge square, over 300 m. on a side. About half the
area was an open court, in the midst of which sits
the large domed structure of the mosque itself. Legend
says that the Sultan cut off the architect's hand because
the dome was smaller than that of the Church of Hagia
Sofia. The cemetery behind the mosque contains the
tombs of the Sultan and his queen. Around the courtyard
were arranged an elementary school, library, hospital,
public bath, dervish monastery, eight seminaries, and
a public kitchen that once fed the thousands who lived
or worked in the mosque complex, as well as the poor
of the neighborhood. It was a particularly magnificent
example of the mosques with their complexes of charitable
institutions that once were the centers of life in
Islamic cities. The mosque and most of the other buildings
were destroyed in an earthquake in 1766. They were
immediately rebuilt according to a new plan in a style
influenced by European baroque architecture.

While he was in Istanbul,
Baha'u'llah went to public noon prayers almost every
day, usually in this mosque.

The Mosque of Khirqiy-i-Sharif
(Hirka-i S÷erif Camii), the mosque of the Holy
Mantle. Among the relics proving the legitimacy of
the Ottoman Sultans' claim to the caliphate was the
possession of the mantle of the Prophet. As it happened,
they had two mantles, so in 1851 Sultan `Abdu'l-Majid
built this charming mosque for the second, the first
being kept in the treasury in the Topkapi Palace.
It is built in the Neoclassical Empire style of the
age of Napoleon I. It was very near the house of Shamsi
Big, and Baha'u'llah came here for noon prayers. Both
these mosques exist unchanged from Baha'u'llah's time.

Edirne Gate (Edirnekap'),
in Baha'u'llah's time one of the two main gates to
the city. The road to Adrianople started from this
gate, so it is probably through it that Baha'u'llah
left the city. Muhammad the Conqueror entered the
city in triumph through the Edirne Gate. In ancient
times there was a cemetery outside the gate. Perhaps
it was still there in the nineteenth century, for it
was outside this gate that Baha'u'llah buried his little
daughter Sahijiyyih.

Baha'i writings on Istanbul

There are many references
to Istanbul in Baha'i literature, usually either allusions
to the Turkish government or to Baha'u'llah's exile
there. The most important is the apostrophe to the
city in the Kitab-i-Aqdas (SCKA 21 and quoted often
elsewhere.) Baha'u'llah addresses the city as the
"Spot that art situate on the shores of the two seas"
and says that "the throne of tyranny hath, verily,
been established upon thee." There, Baha'u'llah says,
he beheld "the foolish ruling over the wise, and darkness
vaunting itself against the light." He prophesies
that the "outward splendor" of the city would "soon
perish, and thy daughters and thy widows and all the
kindreds that dwell within thee shall lament." The
Great City thus symbolizes the pride and corruption
of the Ottoman Empire, and the literal abasement of
the city becomes an example of the retribution of God.

The Suriy-i-Muluk addresses
the Persian and French ambassadors in Istanbul and
its clergy and wise men, criticizing the latter for
their failure to investigate Baha'u'llah's claim.

Shoghi Effendi in The Promised
Day is Come makes the decline of Istanbul a symbol
and sign, not just of divine retribution upon the Ottoman
Empire, but of the decline in influence of Islam.
He cites the fall of the caliphate and the flight of
the last Ottoman Sultan, the decision to make Ankara
the capital of the new Republic of Turkey, and the
secularization of the city and of some of the great
mosques.

Istanbul after Baha'u'llah

Though the great domed
mosques still dominate the skyline of central Istanbul,
the city has changed much in the century since Baha'u'llah.
In 1865 the Khwajih Pasha fire--said
by Baha'u'llah in the Lawh-i-Ra'is to have been a divine
warning--burned a large part of the city. This allowed
the building of the first modern wide streets in the
old city. Over the next half century modern city services
were gradually constructed. In recent decades modern
apartment blocks have largely replaced the wooden houses
of old Istanbul, though the old city also holds the
shanties of poor immigrants from the countryside.
Istanbul is now a modern city covering several hundred
square kilometers on both sides of the Bosphorus with
a population of more than two million. A suspension
bridge now connects Asia and Europe. The population
has expanded enormously, particularly since the 1970s.

Politically, the last century
has been less kind to the Great City. The Young Turks
Revolution of 1908 humbled the Sultan. Five wars filled
the city with Muslim refugees from the former Ottoman
territories in Europe. After World War I the city
was occupied for five years by the Allies. The Turkish
Republic, idealizing the Turkish villages of Anatolia,
spurned Istanbul and made its capital in Ankara, deep
in Asia Minor. The Sultanate and Caliphate were abolished.
The last Sultan fled to Europe, and the city lost
its position as leading city of the Islamic world.

With the fall of the cosmopolitan
Ottoman Empire and the rise of nationalistic Turkey
and Greece, the Greek Christians who had lived in Istanbul
for five centuries under Turkish rule began to leave.
Istanbul has become steadily more Muslim and Turkish.

The Baha'i community of
Istanbul

The first Babi to reach
Istanbul was Mulla `Aliy-i-Bastami, the Letter of the
Living who had gone to the Shi`i holy cities
of Iraq to announce the coming of the Bab. He had
been arrested, condemned, and sent as a prisoner to
Istanbul. He was set to hard labor in the naval dockyards
where apparently he died, for he was never heard from
again.

When Baha'u'llah left for
Edirne, he left behind Aqa Muhammad-`Ali Jilawdar (also
known as Sabbagh-i-Yazdi) as a sort of Babi
agent to assist pilgrims passing through the city.
About two years later he joined Baha'u'llah in Edirne.
Others--both Baha'i and Azali--came to the city.
Nine were arrested in 1868 at the time of Baha'u'llah's
exile to `Akka, interrogated, and either deported or
sent along with the other exiles.

While Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha
were at `Akka, most Baha'i pilgrims passed through
Istanbul, preferring the convenience of Russian railroads
and steamships to the arduous overland journey through
Iraq and Syria. Some stayed on in Istanbul. The Baha'i
Qajar prince Abu'l-Hasan Mirza Shaykhu'r-Ra'is
spent several years there in the 1880s and 1890s, for
example. In the early 1880s the Afnan family established
a branch of their trading firm in Istanbul under the
management of Nabil ibn Nabil, the brother of Samandar.
Istanbul at this time was also a center of Azali activity,
mainly directed against the Qajar regime but also against
Baha'u'llah. The Azalis made a number of accusations
against the honesty of the Afnans. The affair lasted
ten years, drove Nabil ibn Nabil to suicide, and forced
the Afnans to close their office in Istanbul.

The modern Baha'i community
of Istanbul was established around the turn of the
century. After the establishment of the Republic of
Turkey, the new government attempted to suppress all
the old religious institutions. When Baha'is were
arrested in Smyrna on suspicion of being a secret religious
society, the Istanbul Spiritual Assembly intervened
on their behalf and were themselves arrested. However,
they were soon cleared, having had the opportunity
to publicly explain their beliefs. Shoghi Effendi
reported the event as a triumphant vindication of the
Faith that resulted in publicity all over the Middle
East. Baha'is were arrested again on similar charges
in 1933 and were held for about two months.

In 1951 a Baha'i delegation
attended a United Nations conference for Middle Eastern
non-governmental organizations in Istanbul. Shoghi
Effendi told the Baha'i world of his pleasure at the
degree of official recognition received by the Faith
on this occasion.

In 1952 Baha'is were able
to purchase part of the site of the house of Visi Pasha.

Since 1959 Istanbul has been
the seat of the National Spiritual Assembly of Turkey.
There is now a Baha'i center in Istanbul.

Sources: There is
a vast literature on Istanbul, its history, and its
monuments--even excluding works in Turkish. Popular
works include Bernard Lewis, Istanbul and the Civilization
of the Ottoman Empire(Norman, Oklahoma: 1972); Constantinople:
City on the Golden Horn (New York: Horizon Caravel
Books, 1969); and Istanbul (Time-Life Books). See
also EB "Istanbul." Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire contains a classic account of Byzantine
Constantinople. EI2 "Istanbul" contains detailed information
with full bibliography on the development and workings
of Turkish Istanbul. EI2 "Qustantiniyya" discusses
the period before the conquest from the Islamic point
of view. Guidebooks such as Hilary Sumner-Boyd and
John Freely, Strolling through Istanbul (London: KPI,
1987) are a good source of information and monuments
and the flavor of the city. Since modern tourism started
about the time of Baha'u'llah, guidebooks exist from
his time, such as Handbook for Travellers in Constantinople
(London: John Murray, 1845, 1871).

For Baha'u'llah's stay in
Istanbul, see God Passes By, 145, 157-61; Baha’u’llah,
King of Glory, , 154-55, ch. 26; RB 2: 1-6, 55-61,
317-18, 325-32; Salmani 37-40, Phelps 42-47; Traveller’s
Narrative 54-55, 65; BBR 34n, 199-200; SAQ 31;
CH 59-60; ESW 68-69; MAs 8:27-28; MAB 2:177.

References to Istanbul and
its affairs in Baha'i writings include PB 50, 102-4;
ESW 106; AQA Muluk (Lawh-i-Ra'is) 234; MAB 1:381, 2:121-22,
299; WOB 173-74, PDC 38-39, 65-66, 100-1; Tawqi`at
3:61; EBB 3.

For the complicated affair
of Nabil ibn Nabil and the Azalis in Istanbul referred
to in ESW 33, 108-9, 123-24, see Baha’u’llah, King
of Glory, ch.40, RB 3:172, 4:391-406; Muhadirat
275-77, 417.

On the Baha'i community of
Istanbul, see Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 31n;
RB 1:286-89; God Passes By, 303; BW 3:222-23,
4:317 (a photo of the community, c. 1930), 8:692, 9:659,
12: 66, 602, 605-7, 14:602; BN 28 (Nov. 1928) 2, 72
(Ap. 1933) 4, 245 (July 1951) 7; BA 152, 167-69; Garis,
Martha Root 295, 322-23, 326-27; EBB 147-48, 181-85,
259; AB 117, 399; BBR 89-90; Tawqi`at 3:33; PP 316-18.

Edirne,
the Land of Mystery

Baha'u'llah's new place of
exile was Edirne, the old capital of the Ottoman Empire.

Name, History, and description

Roman Edirne was called
Hadrianopolis or Adrianople--the "city of Hadrian."
In Turkish this became Adirnih--"Edirne" in modern
Turkish spelling. Europeans--who learned classical
Greek but not Turkish in their schools--continued to
call the city "Adrianople" until Turkey adopted the
Roman alphabet in the 1920s. Baha'i writings use "Edirne"
in Persian and Arabic and generally use "Adrianople"
in English. There are occasional references to "Rumelia,"
the nineteenth-century name for the area around Edirne.
Baha'u'llah, however, usually referred to Edirne as
Ard-i-Sirr, "the Land of Mystery"--Sirr, "mystery,"
and Adirnih both having the numerical value of 260
in Abjad reckoning. Baha'u'llah sometimes associates
the epithet "remote" (ba`id) with Edirne, as in the
reference to "this remote prison" in the Arabic Tablet
of Ahmad. He also calls it "the city We have made
Our throne."

Edirne is located about 200
km. northwest of Istanbul on the main road from Istanbul
to Central Europe. It is strategically situated at
the junction of several rivers in the gap between the
Rhodope and Istranja mountain ranges and thus controls
access from Europe to the Thracian plain and Istanbul
itself. It is beautifully situated on a hill within
a bend of the river Tunja.

The city was evidently founded
by the Thracians who called it Uskadama. After its
capture by the Macedonians in the fourth century B.C.,
it was renamed Oresteia. The Emperor Hadrian rebuilt
the city in the second century A.D. Adrianople was
an important Byzantine fortress town for more than
a thousand years, guarding Constantinople against threats
from the northwest. Major battles were fought there
against Goths, Avars, Bulgars, Peaenegs, Crusaders,
Serbs, and Turks. In July 1362 the troops of the Ottoman
Sultan Murad I defeated the last Byzantine governor
of Adrianople. The Ottomans made it their capital
for the next ninety years and the springboard for their
conquests in the Balkans. After the fall of Constantinople
to the Turks in 1453, Edirne was no longer the capital
but remained a favored retreat for the Sultans of the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The town prospered
under the favor of Sultans who built fabulous palaces,
mosques, and other buildings in the town.

In the eighteenth century
Edirne began to decline with the general loss of Ottoman
power in the Balkans. Several mutinies of the garrison,
a catastrophic fire, and an earthquake all damaged
the city. After an occupation by Russian troops in
1828-29, Muslims began moving from the city to be replaced
by Christians coming from nearby villages. By the
middle of the nineteenth century, the population of
Edirne was very mixed, with Muslim Turks being a minority.
The bulk of the population consisted of Christian
Greeks and Bulgarians with a large Jewish minority,
Gypsies, and the usual scattering of nationalities
from all over the Balkans and Near East. The population
was about 100,000.

Though many of the Ottoman
monuments had already disappeared or were in ruins,
a number of great buildings still stood, especially
several great mosques. Madrasihs, bazars, and caravansaries
served the needs of learning, commerce, and travellers.
The city once contained many palaces and mansions,
but these had suffered cruelly in the decline of the
city.

Baha'u'llah in Edirne

Baha'u'llah's exile
to Edirne marks his transformation from a guest of
the Ottoman government to a political prisoner. Edirne,
wrote Baha'u'llah, was "the place which none entereth
except such as have rebelled against the authority
of the sovereign." (God Passes By, 161) The
journey there was made in the middle of winter without
adequate preparations, and Baha'u'llah's party suffered
severely. On their arrival they were placed in a series
of temporary accomodations, vacant summer houses too
small and too poorly built to hold a large number of
people in winter. Among the tablets giving some details
of life and events in Edirne is a very early letter
of `Abdu'l-Baha written in 1864 complaining of their
living conditions during this first winter. Eventually
adequate housing was found, but Baha'u'llah nonetheless
moved several more times during his stay in Edirne.
The other Baha'is generally rented houses near Baha'u'llah's.
Most of the Baha'is not serving in Baha'u'llah's household
found work, usually keeping shops in the bazaar. This
helped to ease the financial hardships that had afflicted
them during the first months in Edirne.

Baha'u'llah's stay in Edirne
marked a crucial stage in the development of the Baha'i
Faith. Most important, it was from Edirne that Baha'u'llah
first made public announcement of his claim to prophethood.
Most of the Tablets to the Kings were written in Edirne.
Many tablets also announced and defended his claim
to the Babi community. Messengers such as Nabil, the
historian, carried the news of this claim to the Babis
and won the allegiance of most of the Babi community
of Iran and Iraq. A steady flow of pilgrims came to
Edirne and carried away the news of Baha'u'llah's claim.

The second major development
of the Edirne period was the open break with Mirza
Yahya, the appointed successor of the Bab. Mirza Yahya
had grown increasingly jealous of Baha'u'llah's prestige.
However, this had been concealed from the ordinary
Babis and Mirza Yahya had remained part of Baha'u'llah's
household. In Edirne, however, the dispute finally
came into the open. After Baha'u'llah formally confronted
Mirza Yahya with his claim to be him Whom God shall
make manifest, the Promised One of the Bab, Mirza Yahya
responded with a counterclaim to prophethood. Affairs
reached such a state that Mirza Yahya made two attempts
to kill Baha'u'llah, once by poison and once by suborning
Baha'u'llah's bath attendant. On 22 Shavval
1282/10 March 1866 Baha'u'llah withdrew from the community
to allow his followers to decide their allegiances
for themselves. Most chose to follow Baha'u'llah.
Baha'u'llah referred to this period as the Ayyam-i-Shidad
(the "days of stress") and the "most great separation."

Finally, it was in Edirne
that Baha'u'llah began to establish the laws of his
own religion, composing, for example, the tablets containing
the rituals to be followed during pilgrimage to the
two Holy Houses of Shiraz and Baghdad, the prayers
of fasting, and a summary of Baha'i law, as well as
the Tablet of the Branch, which prefigured `Abdu'l-Baha's
later appointment as his successor.

During these years the Baha'is
maintained excellent relations with the authorities
and townspeople. Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha were
on visiting terms with several of the governors, as
well as with consuls, missionaries, and the clergy,
all of whom thought well of the character and piety
of the Baha'is. Later some of these people came to
visit in `Akka. It was also in Edirne that Baha'u'llah
had his most extensive contact with Europeans.

In 1863-68 there were four
governors of Edirne, at least three of whom are known
to have been on good terms with the Baha'is:

Muhammad-Amin Pasha
Qibrisi, 1861-Apr. 1864, a former prime minister.

Sulayman Pasha, Apr.
1864-Dec. 1864.

`Arif Pasha, Dec. 1864-Mar.
1866.

Muhammad-Khurshid
Pasha, Mar. 1866- , whose deputy was `Aziz Pasha,
later the governor of Beirut in 1889-92.

When accusations were first
made against Baha'u'llah, Khurshid Pasha
defended his innocence. Later, when the orders came
to exile Baha'u'llah, the Pasha left the city
in protest, leaving his deputy `Aziz Pasha to
carry out the explusion.

`Aziz Pasha was a friend
of `Abdu'l-Baha and later visited Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha
in `Akka.

Two of Baha'u'llah's children
were born in Edirne, Diya'u'llah in 1864 and Badi`u'llah
in 1867.

Eventually, the dispute between
the Baha'is and the Azalis came to the attention of
the authorities. The decision was made to exile both
parties to less sensitive areas. One morning in early
August 1868, troops surrounded the house of Baha'u'llah.
Despite the protests of the foreign consuls and the
governor on their behalf, the Baha'is and Azalis were
ordered to leave the city immediately. Baha'u'llah
refused to leave until his steward could settle his
debts. The property of the Baha'is was sold at auction
at very low prices. Baha'u'llah and his companions
left the city on 12 August 1868/22 Rabi` II 1285.

Sites associated with Baha'u'llah

During their stay in
Edirne, the Baha'i exiles rented a considerable number
of houses and gardens. In addition, several other
sites are also associated with Baha'u'llah's stay.

The Khan-i-`Arab
was the two-story caravansary where Baha'u'llah was
lodged during his first three nights in Edirne. It
seems to have been located near the house of `Izzat
Pasha, evidently in the southeastern part of
the city near the Istanbul road. The accomodations
there were poor. Others in the party stayed there
somewhat longer. The Khan-i-`Arab no longer
exists.

The first house near the
Takyiy-i-Mawlavi in the Muradiyyih Quarter. Baha'u'llah
and his family moved here from the caravansary. It
was too small for his family so they moved again after
a week. Others of the party moved in from the caravansary
after his departure.

The second house in that
quarter. This was a larger house in the same area.
Baha'u'llah's brothers, Yahya and Musa, lived with
their families in a second house next door. These
early residences in Edirne were all poorly built, draughty,
and verminous. Since the winter was extremely cold
and Baha'u'llah's family had spent the previous winter
in sweltering Baghdad, they were unprepared for the
cold and suffered severely, especially the children,
who were frequently sick. The sites of these first
two houses were identified by Martha Root during her
visit in 1933.

The house of Amru'llah.
After six months or so, Baha'u'llah was able to rent
the house of Amru'llah, a very large house across the
street from the north entrance to the Salimiyyih Mosque
in the center of the city. This was a splendid three-story
house covering a city block. The andaruni (inner
family quarters) had thirty rooms. Baha'u'llah and
his family occupied the top floor, Mirza Muhammad-Quli
and his family the middle, and servants the bottom.
The biruni (outer house) had four or five fine
reception rooms on the top floor, as well as a kitchen.
Other Baha'is occupied the middle floor. The house
had a bath, cistern, and running water in the kitchen.
Mirza Musa and Mirza Yahya occupied two other houses
in the same quarter. Food for all three houses was
prepared in the house of Amru'llah and was distributed
to the poor as well. Meetings for prayer and to hear
Baha'u'llah were regularly held in the reception rooms.
Baha'u'llah lived in this house from 1864 until March
1866 and again later for a few months, probably during
the first half of 1867. When the house was sold he
moved to his final residence, the house of `Izzat Pasha.
The house was apparently named for its owner, one
Amru'll'ah Big, but coincidentally its name means "Cause"
or "command of God."

The house of Rida Big.
A the time of the open split with Mirza Yahya, Baha'u'llah
moved to the house of Rida Big, where he lived with
his family for a little less than a year, the first
few months in total seclusion. It is now in Baha'i
hands and has been rebuilt. Mirza Musa also had a
house in the neighborhood, as did a number of Baha'u'llah's
companions. Down the street is an orchard rented by
Baha'u'llah, now also in Baha'i hands. The house of
Rida Big had an andaruni and a small biruni,
but the latter had a very large walled garden.

The house of `Izzat Aqa.
After the sale of the house of Amru'llah, Baha'u'llah
rented a house in the southeastern part of the city,
not far from the Khan-i-`Arab. This was another
large house with a fine view of the river and countryside.
There were two large courtyards with flowers and trees.
Baha'u'llah lived here for about eleven months. his
companions had another house in the same area. Mishkin-Qalam,
the calligrapher, and Mirza Musa also had houses in
the area which Baha'u'llah visited on occasion.

The Muradiyyih mosque and
Takyiy-i-Mawlavi. A fine fifteenth century mosque
complex. Originally it was built for the Mawlavi dervishes,
the mystical order founded by the poet Rumi and much
patronized by the Ottoman Sultans. When the building
became a mosque, a takyih--dervish monastery--was
built next door. Subsidiary charitable foundations
were added to the complex: baths, a hospital, a seminary,
a bakery, and an almshouse. Several of the Baha'i
houses were close to this mosque, and Baha'u'llah is
known to have visited it. It still stands.

Salimiyyih Mosque.
The great domed royal mosque of Edirne. Built for
the cultured and dissolute Sultan Salim II, "the Sot,"
this wonderful building was the masterwork of Sinan,
the greatest architect of the Ottomans. Its dome and
minarets dominate the city, as they have since 1575.
It was in this mosque that Mirza Yahya challenged
Baha'u'llah to meet him to publicly dispute their claims.
Baha'u'llah came to the mosque at the appointed time,
but Mirza Yahya failed to appear.

Edirne after Baha'u'llah

Edirne is mentioned
often in the later writings of Baha'u'llah, usually
as the "Land of Mystery." It is often associated with
the open proclamation of his prophetic mission. The
most important direct references to Edirne in Baha'u'llah's
writings are the prophecies found in the Suriy-i-Ra'is
and some other tablets of great destruction and political
turmoil in the Edirne area and of Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz's
impending loss of these territories. The fulfilment
of these prophecies ten years later greatly raised
Baha'u'llah's prestige and was a proof often cited
by Baha'i teachers over then next several decades.

Another passage in the Suriy-i-Ra'is
states that "this Youth hath departed out of this country
and deposited beneath every tree and every stone a
trust, which God will erelong bring forth through the
power of truth." (God Passes By, 181)

Baha'u'llah's prophecies concerning
Edirne were soon realized. War broke out with Russia
and several Balkan Christian states soon after the
fall of `Abdu'l-`Aziz in 1876. The war of 1877-78
with Russia began with an initial success as the Turks
heroically defended Plevna in Bulgaria against a Russian
siege. However, when the Turks attempted to break
out, they were defeated. The Russians poured south
and the Muslim population of Bulgaria and Rumelia fled
before them, dying in thousands from cold, hunger,
disease, and Russian shells in that horrible winter.
All the chief towns of European Turkey fell, Edirne
included. The city and its population, particularly
the Muslims, suffered greatly from that occupation.
Most of the Turkish territory north of Edirne was
lost to the new Christian state of Bulgaria.

After the Russians withdrew,
the town recovered for a time, and in 1890 its population
was still about 87,000. However, it was once more
devastated in the Balkan Wars of 1912-13. The Turkish
defeats in October 1912 left Edirne besieged by the
Bulgarians. The Turks held out there until March 1913.
When the Bulgarians began fighting with their former
allies over the spoils of the war, the Turks were able
to reoccupy Edirne. After the establishment of modern
Turkey in 1923, the Greek population abandoned the
town as part of the population exchanges between the
two countries. The population--65,000 in 1911--had
dropped to 34,500 in 1927.

Today Edirne is a border town
with a population of 72,000 (1980), the first stop
for travellers entering Turkey by train from Western
Europe. It is the capital of the province of the same
name. The area grows various grains and fruits.

The modern Baha'i community

After Baha'u'llah's
departure in 1868, no Baha'is lived in or visited Edirne
for many decades. The first recorded Baha'i visit
to the city was that of Martha Root and Marion Jack,
17 October-6 November 1933. Shoghi Effendi had supplied
them with a list of the houses and sites associated
with Baha'u'llah. In the course of their visit they
were able to identify four houses--all then in ruins
after five wars--in which Baha'u'llah had lived, as
well as several other sites. Though sixty-five years
had passed since Baha'u'llah's departure, they were
able to find two old men who remembered "Baha'i Big"
and "`Abbas Big" and who were able to supply them with
information about the Baha'i households.

By 1963 with the aid of pioneers
from Iran, a local spiritual assembly had been established
in Edirne, and two sites associated with Baha'u'llah--the
house of Rida Big and a nearby orchard--were in Baha'i
hands. This house has been rebuilt though not fully
restored and furnished. Pilgrims occasionally visit.
Two major anniversaries of events in Baha'u'llah's
life were observed in Edirne. On 11-12 December 1963
some seventy Turkish Baha'is visited the city to observe
the centenary of Baha'u'llah's arrival there. In 1967
five Hands of the Cause came to commemorate the centenary
of the revelation of the Suriy-i-Muluk.

Sources: For the history
and description of Edrine, see EI2 and EB "Edirne."

For accounts of Baha'u'llah's
time in Edirne, see God Passes By, 161-180,
Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 217-59, 460-62,
RB 2, BBR 185-200, 205-7, 234-35, 487, AB 19-26, Traveller’s
Narrative 55-59, Phelps 47-69, CH 60-64, BA 189.

Persian sources on the Edirne
period, mainly important for Baha'u'llah's prophecies
concerning Edrine, are MAs 8:27-28, Amr va-Khalq 2:284-92,
4:453-58, Rahiq-i-Makhtum 1:55-56, 67-72, Qamus-i-Tawqi`
1:100-104, DM/IK 2:282, 283, 7:915. Other references
to these prophecies and related subjects include PUP
398, WOB 178, PDC 62, 65, Iqt. 74, TAB 213, MAs 4:277,
7:194-95, ESW 132, AQA 4:336, MAB 2:213, Badayi` 1:357,
2:194.

For Martha Root's account
of her visit to Edirne, see BW 5:581-93, reprinted
in Martha Root, Herald of the Kingdom 179-96. This
article contains photographs of most of the important
Baha'i sites. See also Garis, Martha Root 393-97.

On the modern Baha'i community
of Edirne and the house of Rida Big, see BW 14:3, BN
328 (6/1958) 14, 397 (4/1964) 3-4, 434 (5/1967) 2.

Sultan
`Abdu'l-`Aziz and his Ministers

The period from Baha'u'llah's
arrival in Istanbul in 1863 to his de facto release
from confinement in `Akka in 1877 coincided with the
important political developments that took place in
the Ottoman Empire during the reign of Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz.
He and his ministers `Ali Pasha and Fu'ad Pasha
were the Ottoman officials responsible for Baha'u'llah's
successive exiles, and each was the recipient of important
tablets from Baha'u'llah. Ottoman officials were apparently
impressed with Baha'u'llah personally, and `Ali Pasha
praised his character and beliefs to foreign diplomats.
However, the Ottomans were mainly interested in the
Babis as a pawn in Turkish-Iranian relations. By favoring
or suppressing the Babis, they could exercise some
influence on the Persian government. Baha'u'llah,
however, held himself aloof from such machinations,
refusing even to return the visits of Turkish officials.
This evidently irritated the Sultan, and the Ottoman
government yielded to the Iranian entreaties to send
Baha'u'llah away from Istanbul. They were also apparently
becoming concerned about Babi views on theocratic government
spreading and undermining Ottoman authority.

The reasons for Baha'u'llah's
final exile, to `Akka, are not absolutely clear. Evidently,
the agitation of the Azalis in Istanbul aroused the
implausible fear that Baha'u'llah was conspiring with
the Bulgarians (Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 254).
Foreign diplomats were told that the Baha'is threatened
to cause unrest by their efforts to convert Muslims.
Although there do not seem to have been converts in
Edirne, a number of Baha'is had drifted into the city.
There also had been trouble in Baghdad occasioned
by the conversion of an Ottoman officer of Sunni clerical
background. Baha'u'llah Himself believed that the
Persian government was at least partly responsible.
In any case, the Baha'is were treated with noticeable
harshness in their expulsion from Edirne and in their
initial conditions of imprisonment in `Akka.

In the late 1860s a further
concern began to trouble the Ottoman government. A
group of young aristocratic intellectuals, the Young
Ottomans, had started agitating for constitutional
reform. Baha'u'llah's letters to the kings, written
mostly during the Edirne period, also advocated constitutional
monarchy. A number of the Young Ottomans were in touch
with Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha, both because Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha were perceived as belonging to corresponding
social and intellectual circles in Iran and because
some of the Young Ottomans were imprisoned in `Akka
at the same time as Baha'u'llah. Thus during the last
decades of Baha'u'llah's life, he was imprisoned not
just because of old fears of Babi revolution but also
because of the threat of liberal reform.

Baha'u'llah addressed the
Ottoman government in a number of his works, especially
during the period 1863-73. A number of tablets, notably
the Suriy-i-Muluk and the lost Lawh-i-`Abdu'l-`Aziz
va-Vukala, addressed the Sultan directly, sternly criticizing
the quality of his government. Baha'u'llah also complained
of the unjust treatment he had endured at the hands
of the Ottoman government, especially after his exile
to `Akka. The Persian Lawh-i-Ra'is, for example, catalogs
the sufferings endured by the Baha'i exiles during
the early months in the Barracks of `Akka. The Kitab-i-Aqdas,
completed in 1873, also denounces the tyranny of the
regime of `Abdu'l-`Aziz.

Several works of this period
contained specific prophecies of the fall of `Abdu'l-`Aziz
and his ministers and of disaster at Edirne. These
were strikingly fulfilled soon after with the overthrow
of Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz in 1876 and the disastrous
war of 1877-78, which culminated in the occupation
of Edirne. The predictions, which had been well known
before the events, greatly raised Baha'u'llah's prestige.

Sources: For Baha'u'llah's
relations with the Ottomans, see God Passes By,
146-47, 172-75, 179, 181, 225; BBR 182-200; as
well as the sources cited in elsewhere in this chapter.

Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz

Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz ("AbdŸlaziz."
b. 9 Feb. 1830. d. June 1876) was the thirty-second
Ottoman Sultan. Baha'u'llah's exiles to Istanbul,
Edirne, and `Akka all took place during his reign,
and it was only after his overthrow and death the Baha'u'llah
regained relative freedom

Life and reign. The
third son of the reforming Sulan Mahmud II, `Abdu'l-`Aziz
came to the throne after the early death of his brother
`Abdu'l-Majid I on 25 June 1861. In the early years
of his reign he was under the influence of his two
great ministers `Âli and Fu'ad Pasha. Under
their influence the Tanzimat reforms continued. For
example, European-style reforms were made in such areas
as provincial administration, education, civil law,
and the treatment of minorities and foreigners. He
himself toured Western Europe, the first Ottoman sultan
to do so. On the other hand, unrest continued in the
Balkans, much encouraged by Russia. There were revolts
in Montenegro, Serbia, Herzegovina, Bulgaria, and Crete,
eventually leading to the loss of much territory in
Europe.

After the deaths of Fu'ad
and `Âli Pasha in 1869 and 1871, `Abdu'l-`Aziz
became increasingly autocratic and reactionary. Though
he aligned the Ottoman Empire with Russia, a traditional
enemy, unrest continued in the Balkans, culminating
in a bloody uprising in Bulgaria in 1875-76. Beginning
in 1873 famine struck Anatolia. In one particularly
severe winter wolves killed animals and people in the
suburbs of Istanbul. The "Young Ottomans," a loose
network of constitutionalist reformers, agitated against
the regime. Finally, the government was forced in
1875 to default on the huge public debt accumulated
through years of deficits, triggering a major financial
crisis and panic.

Midhat Pasha, the president
of the Council of State and a sympathizer with the
Young Ottomans, obtained a fatva from the Mufti
of Istanbul accusing the Sultan of madness, incompetence,
and corruption, and with the support of other ministers,
moved to depose him. Before dawn on 30 May 1876 warships
and troops surrounded the palace. Another ship threatened
the Russian embassy to prevent intervention from that
quarter. At dawn a salute of 101 guns from the warships
announced the fall of `Abdu'l-`Aziz. A few days later
he was dead, though whether by suicide or murder is
unclear.

Relations with Baha'u'llah.
It was under the authority of `Abdu'l-`Aziz that Baha'u'llah
suffered three exiles, under increasingly harsh conditions,
first as a guest to Istanbul, then to Edirne as a political
exile, and finally to outright imprisonment in `Akka.
There is not much evidence of `Abdu'l-`Aziz's own
attitude towards Baha'u'llah. Most likely he shared
the fears of his chief ministers about possible Babi
political ambitions. He did personally endorse Baha'u'llah's
final exile to `Akka and most probably the two earlier
exiles.

On his part Baha'u'llah bitterly
resented his treatment at the hands of `Abdu'l-`Aziz.
He had done nothing against the Ottoman government:
there was no justification for the harsh manner in
which he and his followers had been treated. Thus,
he denounces `Abdu'l-`Aziz in a number of tablets.
The injustice of `Abdu'l-`Aziz, he more than once
told visiting pilgrims, was greater than that of Nasiri'd-Din
Shah, for the latter had actually been the object
of an attempted assassination by Babis, whereas `Abdu'l-`Aziz
had no just cause for complaint against Baha'u'llah
or the Babis.

Soon after the death of Fu'ad
Pasha in 1869, Baha'u'llah prophesied the deaths
of `Ali Pasha and of `Abdu'l-`Aziz in Suriy-i-Fu'ad
and Lawh-i-Ra'is. This prediction was well known.
Thus the dramatic fall of `Abdu'l-`Aziz greatly raised
Baha'u'llah's prestige and was a factor in the conversions
of at least two eminent Baha'is: `Azizu'llah Jadhdhab
and Mirza Abu'l-Fadl-i-Gulpaygani.

Since it was in 1877 that
Baha'u'llah was finally able to leave `Akka and move
the Mazra`ih, it seems probable that his relative freedom
was a byproduct of the brief period of constitutional
government under Midhat Pasha and the Young
Ottomans.

Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz in
the Baha'i writings. `Abdu'l-`Aziz is addressed
directly at least twice in the writings of Baha'u'llah.
In addition, he is mentioned in several other tablets,
as well as in the writings of Shoghi Effendi.

a. Lawh-i-`Abdu'l-`Aziz
va-Vukala'. "Tablet to `Abdu'l-`Aziz and his Ministers,"
the first of Baha'u'llah's letters to kings. This
was Baha'u'llah's reply to the Sultan's order exiling
him to Edirne. The order had been brought by the brother-in-law
of the prime minister. Baha'u'llah refused to see
this man, who was received instead by `Abdu'l-Baha
and Mirza Musa, Baha'u'llah's brother. Baha'u'llah
promised to send a reply within three days. The next
day Shamsi Big, Baha'u'llah's host, took this
tablet in a sealed envelope to the prime minister.
Shamsi Big told the Baha'is that the prime
minister turned pale on reading it and said, "It is
as if the King of Kings were issuing his behest to
his humblest vassal king and regulating his conduct."
On seeing this reaction, Shamsi Big discreetly
left.

The text of this tablet is
lost, but Nabil reports that it was relatively long
and that it began with an address to the Sultan and
also included passages addressed to the ministers condemning
their conduct and character. It would thus seem to
have been similar in content to the passages addressed
to the Sultan and his ministers in the slightly later
Suratu'l-Muluk.

There is doubt as to the identity
of the recipient. Shoghi Effendi identifies him as
`Ali Pasha, the prime minister. However, `Ali
Pasha was foreign minister at this time and
Fu'ad Pasha prime minister.

b. Suratu'l-Muluk.
The most important surviving passage addressed to
Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz is contained in this tablet, which
also addresses the kings of the earth as a group.
Baha'u'llah tells the Sultan that the selflessness
of his advice is shown by the fact that he did not
ask the Sultan for anything. He warns him against
corrupt ministers. He should surround himself with
just ministers with whom he consults about the good
of the people. He should not rely on those who do
not believe in God or who disobey divine law, for such
people are not trustworthy. He should not allow others
to act for him but should personally attend to matters
of state. He should act with justice, trust in God,
and observe moderation. He should pay special attention
to the needs of the poor and prevent his ministers
from enriching themselves at the expense of the people,
for in Istanbul Baha'u'llah saw that worthless people
ruled over honorable people. (This is repeated in
the apostrophe to Constantinople in the Kitab-i-Aqdas:
"We behold in thee the foolish ruling over the wise,
and darkness vaunting itself against the light.")
The king is the shadow of God on earth and should behave
accordingly. The passage ends with Baha'u'llah complaining
of the unjust suffering he has had to endure but reaffirming
his loyalty and praying for the well-being of the Sultan.

d. Shoghi Effendi's writings.
In his work on the letters to the kings, The Promised
Day Is Come, Shoghi Effendi quotes the passages
of the Suratu'l-Muluk addressed to Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz,
as well as the apostrophe to Constantinople from the
Kitab-i-Aqdas. A major theme of this work is the destruction
of the individuals, states, and religious institutions
hostile to Baha'u'llah and his Faith. Shoghi Effendi
pairs `Abdu'l-`Aziz with Nasiri'd-Din Shah but
identifies him as more powerful than the Shah
and more responsible for the sufferings of Baha'u'llah.
He quotes the prophecies of the Lawh-i-Ra'is of the
destruction and loss of the lands around Edirne and
of the Lawh-i-Fu'ad of the death of `Ali Pasha
and the Sultan himself.

Shoghi Effendi then traces
the swift decline of Ottoman Turkey: the loss of European
and African territory during the reign of `Abdu'l-Hamid
II, the loss of the remaining Near Eastern and Balkan
territories during and after World War I, along with
the death of a large fraction of the empire's population
due to war, disease, starvation, and massacre. Finally
came the extinction of the six-hundred year old dynasty
along with the title of caliph supposedly inherited
from Muhammad Himself. Turkey was made a secular state
and the capital was moved to Ankara. This, Shoghi
Effendi states, was the retributive justice of God
on `Abdu'l-`Aziz and his successors. Similar passages
occur elsewhere in Shoghi Effendi's writings, notably
in WOB 174-76.

Sources: EI2 "`Abd
al-`Aziz." God Passes By, 146, 158-60, 172-73,
179, 181, 195, 208, 225. Baha’u’llah, King of Glory,
154, 199, 206-7, 260-62, 307, 359-61, 379, 411-13,
476; portraits, 209, 263. BBR 199, 311n., 485. EBB
183. Habib 217, 234. MH 4:227-28, 7:461. PDC 19,
61-66, 71. WOB 174-79. The text of the relevant parts
of Suratu'l-Muluk is found in Alvah...bi-Muluk 35-49.
The English translation is in GWB cxiv, PDC 37-40,
PB 47-54. A facsimile of the Farman banishing Baha'u'llah
to `Akka is found in BW 15:50 and Baha’u’llah, King
of Glory, 284.

`Âli Pasha

Life and Career. Muhammad
Amin `Âli Pasha (Mehmed Emin Ali Pasha; d. Bebek near
Istanbul 7 Sept. 1871.) was the Ottoman statesman and
diplomat who was foreign minister at the time of Baha'u'llah's
exiles to Istanbul and Edirne and prime minister when
he was exiled to `Akka. He was the "chief" addressed
in the two tablets known as Lawh-i-Ra'is.

The son of an Istanbul shopkeeper,
he was born in Istanbul in February 1815 and entered
government service at the age of fourteen in the secretariat
of the court. His nickname `Âli ("lofty") referred
either to his abilities or to his short stature. Since
he knew some French, he was appointed to the Translation
Bureau in 1833. The Translation Bureau was one of
the reforms of Mahmud II and served as a school of
foreign languages and training institute for diplomats.
As one of the few modern educational institutions
in the country, it produced many of the reforming statemen
of the middle of the century.

He rose rapidly in the diplomatic
service and was sent to Vienna in 1836, St. Petersburg
in 1837, and London in 1838 where he was the counsellor.
In 1840 he was a deputy to the counsellor to the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and became ambassador to Great Britain
the following year. In 1845 he was counsellor to the
Foreign Ministry and became foreign minister for the
first time the following year when his mentor Rashid
Pasha was promoted to prime minister. He was
dismissed for a few months in 1848 but soon restored.
He continued in this post until 1852 when he became
prime minister (Grand Vazir, Sadr-i-A`zam) for two
months after the dismissal of Rashid Pasha.
In the next two years he briefly held two minor governorships
before returning to the Foreign Ministry. Thereafter
he remained in high office most of the rest of his
life, alternating as foreign minister and prime minister
with his friend and fellow-reformer Fu'ad Pasha.
He was foreign minister 1854-55, 1857-58, July 1861,
Nov. 1861-67, and 1869-71. He was prime minister (Grand
Vizier) five times: 1852, 1855-56, 1858-59, 1861, and
1867-71.

`Âli Pasha was greatly
repected by Europe statesmen for his integrity, personal
charm, diplomatic skill, and mastery of French. This
served to protect him, since Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz would
have been happy to be rid of him. As a diplomat he
worked tirelessly to placate the European powers who
threatened to dismember the empire. He was also able
to settle peacefully the rebellion in Crete.

At home he was less popular.
The sultan disliked him for his attempts to restrain
the arbitrary exercise of royal power, to protect the
prerogatives of ministers, and to strengthen the rule
of law. The younger reformers, the so-called "Young
Ottomans"--attacked him because he did not support
the movement for a constitution. Nonetheless, under
his ministry a number of important reforms of the government
structure were carried out, railroads begun, and improvements
made in education, the army, and the navy.

William Howard Russell, the
British war correspondent, said of him in 1869,

Aali Pasha is a very small,
slight, sallow-faced man, with two very penetrating
honest-looking eyes. He has a delicate air, and looks
timorous and nervous; and his standing attitude is
one of rather imbecile deference to everybody, but
in the presence of the Sultan this becomes almost prostration.
Yet, he is courageous, bold, enlightened, honest,
and just; full of zeal for the interests of his country,
and unceasing in his efforts for its improvement. (A
Diary in the East, p. 475, cited in BBR 491.)

Relations with Baha'u'llah.
When Baha'u'llah came to Istanbul, `Ali Pasha
was serving his fourth term as foreign minister and
his ally Fu'ad Pasha was prime minister. He
initially summoned Baha'u'llah to Istanbul at the urging
of the Persian ambassador, who was anxious to have
him removed from the vicinity of the Persian border
and the Shi`i shrines. He seems to have been
favorably impressed by Baha'u'llah. In 1866 the Austrian
ambassador, Prokesch von Osten, reported:

`Âli Pasha has spoken
to me with great veneration of the Bab, interned at
Adrianople, who he says is a man of great distinction,
exemplary conduct, great moderation, and a most dignified
figure. He has spoken to me of Babism as a doctrine
which is worthy of high esteem, and which destroys
certain anomalies that Islam has taken from Jewish
and Christian doctrines, for example this conflict
between a God who is omnipotent and yet powerless against
the principle of evil; eternal punishments, etc. etc.
But politically he considers Babism unacceptable as
much in Persia as in Turkey, because it only allows
legal sovereignty in the Imamate, while the Osmanlis
for example, he claims, separate temporal from spiritual
power. The Bab, at Adrianople, is defrayed all expenses
by the order of and to the charge of the Persian government.

Two years later, the dispute
between the Azalis and the Baha'is led him to believe
that Baha'u'llah and his followers had political ambitions
and were attempting to spread their religion in Turkish
territory, and that they were likely to cause disturbances.
Thus Baha'u'llah was to be exiled to a less sensitive
area. Baha'u'llah viewed this as a clear injustice,
motivated by nothing more than political expediency,
particularly in view of the harsh conditions of his
imprisonment in `Akka. He prophesied the downfall
of both Fu'ad and `Ali Pasha.

Lawh-i-Ra'is, "Tablet
of the Chief," is the title of two tablets addressed
to `Âli Pasha.

1. The Arabic Lawh-i-Ra'is,
also known as Lawh-i-Ra'is I or Suratu'r-Ra'is (or
"Suriy-i-Ra'is") was composed during the journey from
Edirne to Gallipoli. It was begun at Ke¦an (Kashanih),
where the exiles spent the night of 14-15 August 1868,
and was finished at Gyavur-Köy soon after. It is written
in an elevated Arabic style and is some twenty pages
in length. The opening pages are addressed to `Âli
Pasha. Most of the tablet, however, is addressed
to Haji Muhammad-Isma`il-i-Kashani, known as
Dhabih--"sacrifice"--or Anis--"companion"--by
which he is called in this tablet. Dhabih and
some others had arrived in Edirne, only to find Baha'u'llah's
house guarded by troops. Unable to meet Baha'u'llah,
he had gone to Gallipoli. The portions of the Suratu'r-Ra'is
addressed to him are intended to console him for his
failure to meet Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah also answers
a question about the nature of the soul that Dhabih
had asked in a letter. Dhabih was able to meet
Baha'u'llah in a public bath in Gallipoli a few days
after the completion of this tablet. Dhabih
died in Tabriz about 1880.

The opening pages of the Suratu'r-Ra'is
are a stern denunciation of `Âli Pasha for his
persecution of Baha'u'llah. Addressing him bluntly
as "O chief," Baha'u'llah tells him that he has no
power to hinder the Cause of God by his "grunting"
or the "barking" of those around him. His deeds have
caused Muhammad to mourn. He has allied himself with
the "chief of Iran"--meaning either the Shah
or the Persian ambassador in Turkey--to harm Baha'u'llah.
(`Ali and Fu'ad Pasha both denied to foreign
diplomats that the urgings of the Persian government
had anything to do with Baha'u'llah's exile.) Baha'u'llah
compares him to the rulers who had opposed Muhammad,
Moses, and Abraham. The Shah of Iran had killed
the Bab, but Baha'u'llah had nonetheless arisen to
revive his religion. He prophesies that there will
be great afflictions and turmoil in the region of Edirne
and that it will pass out from under the authority
of the Turkish Sultan. Finally, Baha'u'llah states
that his only purpose is "to quicken the world and
unite all its peoples."

Baha'u'llah then addresses
Dhabih. He tells of how he and his family and
followers awoke to find the house surrounded by soldiers
barring all from coming or going, even keeping them
from obtaining food the first night. The people of
the town, hearing that they were to be sent away, gathered
around the house weeping--but the grief of the Christians
was greater than that of the Muslims. One of the Baha'is,
Haji Ja`far-i-Tabrizi, thinking that he was to be separated
from Baha'u'llah, cut his own throat. Another of Baha'u'llah's
followers had done this in Baghdad. Though this was
contrary to divine law, it showed the depth of their
love. Such a thing had not been seen in past religions.

Baha'u'llah praises Dhabih
and seeks to console him. This is a day the prophets
of the past all longed to attain. His followers should
thus not let afflictions discourage them. He prophesies
that God will raise up a king to protect his followers.
He prays for Dhabih's success in spreading
his faith during his travels and compares Dhabih's
happy state with that of those people who have rejected
Baha'u'llah.

Baha'u'llah also replies to
Dhabih's question about the soul, regretting
that he could not have heard the answer from Baha'u'llah's
own lips. Saying that he does not wish to dwell on
what people have said in the past, he gives a brief
account of the soul, explaining that "soul," "spirit,"
"mind," "vision," and the like all represent the same
entity, differentiated by the circumstances under which
they are exercised. He refers Dhabih to another
tablet where the matter is explained fully.

Baha'u'llah also mentions
one "`Ali" who had been in Baghdad with Baha'u'llah
and who had come to Edirne, only to find him a prisoner.
The tablet closes with a prayer that Dhabih
will not be hindered from meeting Baha'u'llah in Gallipoli.

2. Persian Lawh-i-Ra'is,
also known as Lawh-i-Ra'is II and occasionally Suriy-i-Ra'is,
is a letter to `Âli Pasha written not long after
Baha'u'llah's arrival in `Akka, probably before the
end of 1868. It is a strong protest at the injustice
of the imprisonment of Baha'u'llah, his companions,
and their dependents. The title is by analogy to the
earlier tablet to `Âli Pasha, for the prime
minister is not addressed as "Ra'is" in this tablet.
It is in Persian and is about twenty pages long.

Baha'u'llah begins by criticizing
`Âli Pasha's presumption of lofty rank. The
heading of the tablet--"He is the Master by right"--reminds
him that God is the true ruler. Baha'u'llah then addresses
him as "thou who reckons thyself the highest of men"--a
pun on his name `Âli, "lofty." He reminds him that
all the Prophets of God, though they came to reform
the world, were, like Baha'u'llah, branded as trouble-makers
by the rulers of their time. However, even if this
accusation were true, the women and children who were
imprisoned with Baha'u'llah had done nothing wrong.

Baha'u'llah then describes
some episodes of his exile from Edirne to `Akka: how
some companions who were not included in the order
paid their own way to `Akka, the sufferings of the
children forced to change from ship to ship, how two
of his companions tried to kill themselves when faced
with separation, how they were denied food and water
during the first night in `Akka, the three loaves of
inedible bread that was the daily food ration, and
the death and disrespectful burial of two of the exiles.
Such treatment was manifest injustice, since the people
of Edirne could testify to the piety and detachment
of Baha'u'llah and his companions. Baha'u'llah prophesies
that as a result, the wrath of God would seize `Âli
Pasha and his government. Warnings had come
before--for example, when a large part of Istanbul
burned--but they had not heeded. Now it is too late:
the wrath of God is so great to allow him to repent.

Baha'u'llah reminds him that
neither pomp nor abasement lasts forever. To illustrate
this, Baha'u'llah tells of an incident from his youth.
his older brother was getting married, and Baha'u'llah's
father had arranged a puppet show as part of the festivities.
Baha'u'llah watched in fascination as the puppet-king
and the members of his court come on stage and take
their places. A thief is executed and blood spurts
from the severed neck. The king dispatches soldiers
to fight a rebel, and from behind the curtain the sounds
of cannon are heard. After the show, Baha'u'llah saw
a man come out with a box under his arm. Baha'u'llah
asked him where the king was and all the members of
his court. The man said they were all in the box.
From that day on, says Baha'u'llah, all the glory
of the world has been like that puppet show in his
eyes and of no value.

Any perceptive person, he
says, knows that worldly glory will soon be placed
in the box of the grave. Even if a man is not given
to know God, he ought at least to pass his life with
prudence and justice. Nevertheless, most people are
asleep and infatuated with worldly things. They are
like the drunken man who fell in love with a dog, only
realizing what his lover was when morning came. `Âli
Pasha himself is subject to the vilest ruler:
his own self and passion. If he examined his own soul,
he would realize his own abasement.

Baha'u'llah tells how, when
he reached Gallipoli on his way to `Akka, he had asked
a Turkish officer named `Umar escorting him to arrange
a ten-minute interview with the Sultan at which the
Sultan might ask him for whatever miracle or proof
he thought sufficient to prove the truth of Baha'u'llah's
revelation. If Baha'u'llah was able to produce it

, he and his companions should
be freed and left to their own devices. But no word
came from the Sultan or from the officer. Though it
was not fitting for the Manifestation of God to go
before another, Baha'u'llah made this offer out of
consideration for the children and women who shared
his imprisonment and exile.

The tablet closes with Baha'u'llah's
advice to `Âli Pasha to ask God to let him see
the good and evil of his own actions.

The importance of Lawh-i-Ra'is
I and II. These two tablets and the related Lawh-i-Fu'ad,
with their grim prophesies of affliction for the Ottoman
Empire and its leaders were soon widely circulated
among the Baha'is and were recognized as being of special
importance. Baha'u'llah Himself in a later tablet
said that "from the moment the Suriy-i-Ra'is was revealed
until the present day, neither hath the world been
tranquilized, nor have the hearts of its peoples been
at rest." (GWB `16.3) They were in circulation by
the mid-1870s and were included in early published
collections of the works of Baha'u'llah. Their importance
for early Baha'i teachings lies in the fact that their
prophecies were well known before the dramatic fall
of Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz in 1876.

Sources: For general
accounts of his life see EI2 "`Âli Pasha Muhammad
Amin," as well as EB "Ali Pasa, Mehmed Emin," BBR 491,
Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 469. For information
on his attitudes towards the Baha'is, see BBR 187,
191, 311n. Baha'u'llah's statements about him are
summarized in God Passes By, 174, 208, 231-32.

On the Arabic Suratu'r-Ra'is,
see RB 2:411-21; Muhadirat 602-6, 687, 964; Ganj 109-11;
God Passes By, 172, 174, 179-80; PDC 48; DM/IK
13:2058. The Arabic text is found in AQA: Muluk 203-25,
Majmu`ih (Eg.) 87-102, Suratu'l-Haykal 129-43. Translated
excerpts are found in God Passes By, 174, 179-80,
WOB 178, RB 2:414-16.

On the Persian Lawh-i-Ra'is,
see RB 3:33-37, Ganj 121-23, Baha’u’llah, King of
Glory, 173, DM/IK 13:2058. The text is found
in AQA: Muluk 227-47, Majmu`ih (Eg.) 102-16. Translations
of excerpts are found in God Passes By, 187,
PDC 46, 62.

Fu'ad Pasha

Keeci-Zadih Muhammad Fu'ad
Pasha was the Ottoman prime minister at the
time of Baha'u'llah's exile to `Akka.

Life. Fu'ad Pasha
was born in Istanbul in 1815. His father, `Izzat Mulla,
was a religious judge and poet of some importance who
lived an adventurous life in and out of royal favor.
In 1829 `Izzat Mulla was exiled to Sivas, and Fu'ad
left the theological seminary to study at the new modern
medical school in Istanbul. He spent three years as
an army doctor in Tripoli, Libya. Having learned French
in medical school, he was able in 1837 to obtain an
appointment to the Translation Bureau, which also served
as a training school for the modern diplomatic corps.
Over the next fifteen years he rose rapidly as a diplomat
and protege of the reformer Rashid Pasha,
serving in London (where he was translator and later
first secretary when `Âli Pasha was ambassador),
Spain, Rumania, and Russia, as well as holding various
high offices and commissions in Istanbul.

In 1852 he was appointed foreign
minister for the first time under his friend `Ali Pasha
and dealt with crises over Montenegro and the Christian
holy places in Jerusalem. He was again foreign minister
in 1855-56, 1858-60, 1861, and 1867. He was also prime
minister in 1861-63 and 1863-66, during which time
`Ali Pasha served as foreign minister. During
1863-67 he was also minister of war. He held several
other senior posts at various times and was sent on
a number of special missions, notably the suppression
of the Greek revolt in Thessaly and Epirus in 1854-55
and the Lebanese civil war in 1860-61.

Fu'ad Pasha was one
of the principal figures of the Tanzimat reforms of
the middle of the nineteenth century. He was determined
to reshape the Ottoman Empire in a more European mold.
Nonethless, his efforts were necessarily less devoted
to positive reforms than to fending off external threats
to the empire and internal threats to the reforms by
conservatives, notably from the Sultan himself. He
was criticized by the younger reformers because of
his lack of interest in representative government.
He was also interested in linguistic reform and in
1850 wrote the first modern Ottoman Turkish grammar
with Ahmad Jawdat, a liberal cleric who was another
of Rashid Pasha's reformist proteges.

He accompanied the Sultan
to Europe in 1867. Exhausted by overwork, he went
to France to rest in 1868-69. He died of a heart attack
in Nice 12 February 1869.

Relations with Baha'u'llah.
Fu'ad Pasha was prime minister at the time
of Baha'u'llah's arrival in Istanbul and foreign minister
at the time of his exile to `Akka. As such he answered
the inquiries of foreign diplomats made on Baha'u'llah's
behalf. His policy is succinctly stated in his reply
to the inquiries of the Austrian ambassador:

On representing to Fuad Pasha
the intolerant acts of the Ottoman Government towards
the Babee Sect, he was informed by His Highness that
the Porte had ordered Mirza Hussein Ali and his adherents
to be deported to Tripoli in Africa on account of their
having tried to propagate religious dissensions in
the Mahomedan Element in Roumelia; that the Porte was
entirely responsible for this measure, the Persian
Legation having taken to part in it; and that the subvention
of 5000 piasters per month which was allowed to the
Mirza by the Authorities at Adrianople would not be
discontinued at Tripoli. (BBR 192)

The idea of exiling Baha'u'llah
to Tripoli in Libya perhaps reflects Fu'ad Pasha's
memory of three years as a young army officer in that
desolate spot.

Baha'u'llah predicted the
fall of Fu'ad Pasha in the Suratu'r-Ra'is.

.

The Suriy-i- or Lawh-i-Fu'ad
is an Arabic tablet of Baha'u'llah commenting on Fu'ad
Pasha's death. Written to Shaykh
Kazim Samandar, probably soon after Fu'ad Pasha's
death from heart disease on 12 February 1869. The
latter had been prime minister at the time of Baha'u'llah's
exile to Edirne and foreign minister when he was exiled
to `Akka. Baha'u'llah had prophesied his fall in the
Suriy-i-Ra'is, written about six months earlier. The
Suriy-i-Fu'ad is written in the style of the passages
about Hell in the Qur'an. It also contains many allusions
to the Qur'anic narratives of the punishment of the
ancient nations that persecuted the prophet. It was
aptly described by Baron Rosen as "a sort of hymn of
triumph on the occasion of the death of the most implacable
enemies of the new religion." and was of some importance
because of its accurate prophecies of the fall of `Âli
Pasha and Sultan `Abdu'l-`Aziz. It was therefore
widely circulated during the time of Baha'u'llah and
was included in one of the collections of Baha'i scripture
published in India during his lifetime.

This tablet is also known
as "Lawh-i-Kaf-Za, "Tablet of K. Z." The tablet begins
with these letters, which are an abbreviation of Kazim,
the name of the recipient.

After counselling Samandar
to be steadfast, Baha'u'llah announces the death of
Fu'ad Pasha: "God has taken the greatest of
those who issued the decree against us." Using the
narrative style of the Qur'an, he describes how Fu'ad
Pasha fled to France, seeking the help of physicians
against the wrath of God. A dialogue then takes place
in which Fu'ad Pasha pleads with the avenging
angel for his life, citing his wealth and high position
as reason to be spared. But there is no escape for
him: the angels of hell summon him to the punishment
prepared for him, reminding him of the great injustice
he committed in making prisoners of the Holy Family.
Baha'u'llah then prophesies the downfall of `Âli Pasha,
the other minister involved in his exiles, and of Sultan
`Abdu'l-`Aziz himself--"their Chief who ruleth the
land."

Baha'u'llah once again exhorts
Samandar to remain steadfast against the lies of the
Azalis, for God has also taken Mirza Mihdi Gilani,
the Azali in Istanbul. This man had written a treatise
against Baha'u'llah, to which Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Badi`
was a reply. A second narrative depicts Mirza Mihdi's
pleadings with the angel of death. These stories,
Baha'u'llah says, are told to console Samandar.

Sources: For his life
and career, see EI2 "Fu'ad Pasha, Kece??k-zadeh
Mehmed," Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 471-72,
BBR 501. For his relations with Baha'is see BBR 187,
191, 311n; Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 154,
199, 206 (with photo); God Passes By, 146,
174, 208, 231-32.

The text of Lawh-i-Fu'ad is
published in Mubin 210-14 and Rosen, Collections scientifiques
6:231-33. A sentence is translated in PDC 63. For
further information on the tablet see RB 3:87, Ganj
192-93, DM/IK 13:1961, 2071, 2073-74.

The
Last Years of the Ottoman Empire

In 1876 the loose group of
reformist exiled intellectuals and politicians known
as the Young Ottomans had succeeded in deposing `Abdu'l-`Aziz
on grounds of misgovernment and madness. The result
was a brief period of constitutional government--and,
in distant `Akka, the release of Baha'u'llah from strict
confinement within the city. `Abdu'l-`Aziz was succeeded
by his nephew, the young Murad V, who was himself deposed
three months later when he proved to be a drunkard
and mentally incapable.

Sultan `Abdu'l-Hamid
II

When Murad proved unsuitable
as sultan, the reformers turned to his younger brother
`Abdu'l-Hamid (AbdŸlhamid), who thus became the thirty-sixth
Ottoman Sultan.

Life and reign. Born
21 Sept. 1842 in Istanbul, he was the fifth of thirty
children of Sultan `Abdu'l-Majid and seems to have
had an unhappy childhood after his mother died when
he was seven. Midhat Pasha, the reformer who
had led the plot that overthrew `Abdu'l-`Aziz, offered
him the throne on condition that he accept a constitution
and constituent assembly and that he rule through the
reformist ministers.

Before the reformers could
accomplish much, a disastrous war broke out--first,
Christian uprisings in several Balkan provinces, then
open war with Montenegro and Serbia (1875) and with
Russia (1877-78). Despite heroic (and unexpected)
Turkish resistance at Plevna in what is now Bulgaria,
the Turks were totally defeated. The Russians occupied
Edirne (Adrianople) and advanced to within a few miles
of Istanbul, thousands of refugees pouring into the
city ahead of them. In the end the Russians were stopped
when the British navy moved to support Istanbul. Nonetheless,
the Turks lost most of their remaining territory in
Europe. The border of the newly-independent Bulgaria
was only a few miles from Edirne. The finances of
the Empire were placed under European control.

The failure of the Western
European powers to support Turkey against Russia confirmed
`Abdu'l-Hamid's suspicions of the Europeans. Thereafter,
he pursued a passive policy of delay in foreign relations.
Though his extreme suspicion of the European powers
sometimes lost opportunities for Turkey--as when his
failure to cooperate with England lost him the chance
to reassert Turkish sovereignty in Egypt--it kept Turkey
at peace for a generation and prevented further major
losses of territory.

It quickly became clear that
`Abdu'l-Hamid was an autocrat of the most absolute
sort and did not share the liberal views of the reformers
who had brought him to power. Once the war with Russia
was over, he suspended the constitution and dissolved
the irritating new Constituent Assembly. The reformers
who had brought him to power were soon silenced, exiled,
or killed. An attempted countercoup further fueled
his fears. Unlike earlier sultans who had left much
of the ordinary business of government to their ministers,
`Abdu'l-Hamid created a centralized despotism of a
quite modern sort. He was himself shrewd and energetic,
and he created a palace bureaucracy that allowed him
to control directly all the details of government.
A horde of police, spies, and informers pervaded the
empire. The building of railroads and a telegraph
network allowed him to control the Empire far more
tightly than any of his predecessors could have dreamed
possible. Freedom of speech was suspended. Censorship
was all-pervading and thorough. The palace was a virtual
fortress, guarded by Albanian guards loyal only to
the Sultan.

Apart from absolutism the
distinguishing policy of his reign was Pan-Islamism.
The Ottoman sultans had always claimed the title Caliph,
supposedly bequeathed to them by the last `Abbasid
caliph when the Ottomans conquered Egypt. Now, with
many of the Christian provinces lost to the Empire,
`Abdu'l-Hamid stressed his role as supreme Islamic
leader: head of the leading Muslim state, protector
of the Holy Cities, and successor to the Prophet Himself.
This won him support from the Muslim masses in the
Empire and won prestige for him and the Ottoman Empire
in other Muslim countries, especially those controlled
by Europeans, where he was able to make trouble for
the European powers. The greatest achievement of this
policy was the building of the Hijaz Railway, which
was to carry pilgrims from Damascus to Mecca and Medina.
It was paid for by contributions from the entire Muslim
world and was completed as far as Medina, before being
destroyed in World War I. (It has never been rebuilt.)

The other side of this policy
was the persecution of the non-Muslim minorities, especially
the Christians. This culminated in the civil disorders
in Macedonia great massacres of Armenians in 1894-96
(repeated on a much larger scale during World War I),
carried out at the instigation and with the connivance
of the authorities. Moreover, his partiality to his
Muslim subjects did not in the end win their permanent
loyalty, for his administration was sufficiently corrupt
to alienate Muslims as well.

In some ways `Abdu'l-Hamid
is to be seen as the full expression of the darker
side of the Tanzimat reforms earlier in the nineteenth
century. Like many of his reforming predecessors,
he believed that reform could only be imposed from
above, and in fact he carried out important reforms
in several areas, notable education, communication,
and law. However, absolute power was in the hands
of a man gripped by exaggerated fears and for the most
part blind to the actual needs of the people. Moreover,
his insistence on dealing with everything himself greatly
limited the effectiveness of government.

The Europeans were appalled
by the oppressiveness and incompetence of his government,
by the all-pervasive censorship, and especially by
the brutal treatment of minorities. This won him the
nicknames "Red Sultan" and "Abdul the Damned."

In the end the new educational
institutions he had founded produced the reformers
who overthrew him. A loose network of reform-minded
exiles called the Young Turks formed the Committee
of Union and Progress. In 1908 the commanders of the
Turkish army in Macedonia mutinied in support of the
Committee, marched on Istanbul, forced `Abdu'l-Hamid
in July 1908 to reintroduce the constitution, and placed
the leaders of the Committee in charge of the government.
The following April a countercoup by the Istanbul
garrison, probably instigated by `Abdu'l-Hamid, briefly
overthrew the new government. The Macedonian troops
returned, this time to depose `Abdu'l-Hamid. His brother,
Muhammad V (r. 1909-18), became Sultan. `Abdu'l-Hamid
lived out his life under house arrest, first in Salonika
and then in Istanbul. He died in Istanbul on 10 Feb.
1918.

`Abdu'l-Hamid was in some
respects an attractive figure--approachable, simple
in dress, hard-working, and intelligent. Unlike some
of his predecessors, he was not ruined by the temptations
of the harem. But he was lonely, fearful, and unhappy,
and these qualities expressed themselves in the paranoia,
treachery, and absolutism of his government. Muslims,
Christians, and Jews celebrated together in the streets
when he was overthrown.

`Abdu'l-Hamid and the Baha'is.
Baha'u'llah was the prisoner of `Abdu'l-Hamid from
1876 until his death in 1892, but there is no evidence
that the Sultan was particularly concerned with the
Baha'is in those years. Baha'u'llah was able to move
out of the city of `Akka without interference the year
after `Abdu'l-Hamid's accession. When Baha'u'llah
died in 1892, `Abdu'l-Baha sent a cable to the Sultan,
who gave permission for Baha'u'llah to be buried at
Bahji--an interesting example of `Abdu'l-Hamid's concern
for the minutiae of administration. This tolerance
of the Baha'is lasted until the turn of the century.

After 1892 `Abdu'l-Baha remained
a prisoner as his Father had been, theoretically in
custody but in practice under few restrictions. It
was the opposition of Mirza Muhammad-`Ali, the second
surviving son of Baha'u'llah, to `Abdu'l-Baha that
finally attracted Sultan `Abdu'l-Hamid's personal attention
to the Baha'is. Mirza Muhammad-`Ali and his followers
had approached the governor of Damascus, accusing `Abdu'l-Baha
of plotting against the government. Several factors
seem to have led the Sultan to give credence to these
accusations. First was the increasing threat of nationalist
movements in the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire.
Second was the arrival of Western pilgrims. The Sultan
was well aware that various European powers had colonial
ambitions in Ottoman territory, and he seems to have
feared that the Americans visiting `Abdu'l-Baha were
part of a plot to foment revolt. Finally, `Abdu'l-Baha
had many friends--and possibly even followers--among
reform-minded Turks. In August 1901 `Abdu'l-Hamid
ordered that `Abdu'l-Baha, his brothers, and his cousin
Majdi'd-Din once again be strictly confined within
the wall of `Akka. Around 1905, Mirza Muhammad-`Ali
and his supporters, aware of `Abdu'l-Hamid's alarm
at the Constitutional Revolution in Iran, approached
the authorities with fresh accusations. This time
the Sultan responded with a Commission of Inquiry that
spent some weeks investigating `Abdu'l-Baha and the
Baha'is. However, when the Commission returned to
Istanbul, they found the Sultan preoccupied with finding
those responsible for his attempted assassination.
Apparently, `Abdu'l-Hamid did not take up the matter
for some time. A tablet from `Abdu'l-Baha of about
this time tactfully praises `Abdu'l-Hamid for ignoring
the slanderous accusations against him and instructs
the Baha'is to pray for the Sultan (TAB 3:494-96).
In about 1908 there was fear that the Commission's
recommendations would finally be acted on and `Abdu'l-Baha
would be exiled to Fezzan in the interior of Libya.
However, the Young Turks' revolution in the summer
of 1908 resulted in the release of all political prisoners,
`Abdu'l-Baha included.

Naturally enough, `Abdu'l-Hamid's
dramatic fall and imprisonment and the simultaneous
liberation of `Abdu'l-Baha impressed the Baha'is as
an example of the hand of God at work. `Abdu'l-Baha,
for example, sometimes remarked on it in his talks:
"God removed the chains from my neck and placed them
around the neck of `Abdu'l-Hamid. It was done suddenly--not
a long time, in a moment, as it were." (PUP 225) For
Shoghi Effendi, `Abdu'l-Hamid was (quoting an unnamed
historian) "the most mean, cunning, untrustworthy and
cruel intriguer of the long dynasty of `Uthman."
(PDC 272) His fall was "the beginning of a new era"
(PDC 65), one of "the awful evidences of that retributive
justice" (PDC 66), and was one part of the collapse
of Islamic institutions as a result of their failure
to accept the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Sources: EI2 "`Abd
al-Hamid II." Accounts of the reincareration of `Abdu'l-Baha,
the Commission of Inquiry, and the release of `Abdu'l-Baha
are found in God Passes By, 263-72, AB 94-95,
111-24, and BBR 320-23. These are largely based on
information from Khatirat-i-Nuh-Salih and Khatirat-i-Habib.
See also Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 420,
425-27; AB 47, 128-29, 374, 395; EBB 148, 259; PDC
13, 61, 64-65; WOB 174-75; PUP 36, 203, 225.

Jamal Pasha and
World War I

After the revolution of 1908,
the Committee of Union and Progress ruled in the name
of the Sultan. New administrative, social, and economic
reforms were imposed, including areas neglected by
earlier reformers such as women's rights and industrial
development. `Abdu'l-Baha took advantage of the new
freedom to travel to Egypt, Europe, and America. `Abdu'l-Baha
publicly stated his gratitude for the fall of the Sultan,
but by the time of his return to Haifa in 1913, the
Committee of Union and Progress had become a dictatorship,
ruling in an authoritarian style reminiscent of `Abdu'l-Hamid's.
Once again `Abdu'l-Baha feared for the Baha'i position
in the Holy Land. Internal reforms were, however,
overshadowed by military disasters. In 1911 Italy
seized Libya, the last Ottoman province in Africa.
The First and Second Balkan Wars of 1912-13 resulted
in the lost of almost all the remaining Ottoman territory
in Europe to an alliance of Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia,
and Montenegro.

The Ottoman Empire rashly
entered World War I as an ally of Germany and Austria.
Though Ottoman forces performed fairly well--inflicting
a humiliating defeat on the British in the Dardanelles
campaign of 1915, for example--the Ottoman economy
eventually collapsed under the strain of modern war.
Troops deserted in large numbers. The Arab provinces
of the Near East fell to Allied troops. On 30 October
1918 Turkey signed an armistice. Battle, famine, and
disease had devastated the population.

For Baha'i history, the most
important Ottoman official during World War I was Ahmad
Jamal Pasha (Cemal Pa¦a), the Turkish commander-in-chief
in Syria, who threatened to execute `Abdu'l-Baha.

Jamal Pasha's Life
and career. Born in Istanbul in 1872, he graduated
from the Ottoman military college in 1895 and was commissioned
a captain in the general staff. Stationed in Salonika,
he joined the subversive Committee of Union and Progress,
the "Young Turks." When the Committee seized power
in 1908, he became a member of its executive committee.
In the following years he was military governor of
†skŸdar and civil governor of Adana and Baghdad. He
commanded a division in the First Balkan War (1912).
After the Committee of Union and Progress seized total
power in January 1913, he became successively military
governor of Istanbul (promoted to lieutenant-general),
minister of public works, and minister of the navy.
During this period he was one of the three Young Turk
leaders who ruled as a dictatorial triumvirate.

Soon after war broke out,
he was made commander of the Fourth Army in Damascus
and military governor of the Syrian provinces--the
area covering modern Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan,
and northwestern Saudi Arabia. His efforts in 1915
and 1916 to invade British-occupied Egypt were repulsed.
Despite progressive tendencies--notably an interest
in public works and archaeology--Jamal Pasha
ruthlessly suppressed the Arab nationalists, hanging
thirty-two prominent Arab leaders in 1915 and 1916.
He also persecuted the Jewish settlers in Palestine.

In December 1915 Jamal Pasha
contacted the Allies, offering to revolt against the
Ottoman Government, stop the massacres of Armenians,
and cede European Turkey to the Russians. In return
he would become Sultan of the Ottoman provinces in
Asia. The British rebuffed him. Since the Turkish
government did not find out about these negotiations,
he remained in command of the Syrian army.

In June 1916 the Sharif
of Mecca--the hereditary ruler of the Hijaz--revolted
against the Turks and began harrying their lines of
communication. The British invaded Sinai in 1916 and
Palestine in 1917, driving back Jamal Pasha's
army. At the end of the year, he was relieved of his
command, having lost Palestine as far north as Jaffa
and Jerusalem.

When the Young Turk government
fell at the end of 1918, he fled to Europe. He was
tried in absentia and sentenced to death. Accepting
an appointment in the Afghan army, he traveled to Russia,
where he helped negotiate an agreement between the
Bolsheviks and AtatŸrk's nationalists in Turkey. In
Tiflis, Armenia, on 21 July 1922, while returning from
another diplomatic mission to Moscow, he was assassinated
by Armenians, the third victim of a campaign to avenge
the Armenian massacres of World War I.

Jamal Pasha and `Abdu'l-Baha.
After the outbreak of World War I, `Abdu'l-Baha came
under renewed suspicion, probably for his Western connections.
When Jamal Pasha first came to `Akka, probably
about the beginning of 1915, he summoned `Abdu'l-Baha
to his camp and told him bluntly that he had received
reports that `Abdu'l-Baha was a religious mischief-maker.
`Abdu'l-Baha saw that the Pasha was drunk and
knew his reputation for hanging enemies real and imagined,
so he turned the matter to a joke by comparing his
own reputation to that of Jamal Pasha, who had
been in the eyes of the Sultan a political mischief-maker.
The two men parted on good terms.

Mirza Muhammad-`Ali and his
followers began reporting to Jamal Pasha that
`Abdu'l-Baha's religious activities and relations with
people in other countries were of a political nature
and that he was opposed to the Committee of Union and
Progress. It was not long after that the German consul
in Haifa brought `Abdu'l-Baha the news that Jamal Pasha
had told a gathering of Muslim clergy in Jerusalem
that he intended to crucify him after he returned from
conquering Egypt and that he would destroy the Shrines
of Baha'u'llah and the Bab. `Abdu'l-Baha reassured
the distraught consul that none of these events were
likely to happen.

After the failure of the first
Turkish attack on the Suez Canal on 2-3 February 1915,
Jamal Pasha and his German advisers began elaborate
preparations for a larger attack. Jamal Pasha
himself roamed Syria and Palestine trying and hanging
Arab nationalists. "Gallows" occurs frequently in
`Abdu'l-Baha's description's of the Pasha's
character. `Abdu'l-Baha was sufficiently concerned
that one day early in 1916 he went to Nazareth to meet
Jamal Pasha. When a letter arrived asking about
`Abdu'l-Baha's whereabouts, he replied, "Tell him,
`In front of a cannon.'"

Jamal Pasha's attacks
on the canal in April and July also failed. Thereafter,
he was preoccupied with the British advance through
Sinai and southern Palestine that began in August and
lasted until December 1917. Before he could carry
out his threats to `Abdu'l-Baha, he was recalled.

Nonetheless, in December 1917
rumors of danger to `Abdu'l-Baha reached Major Tudor-Pole,
a friend of `Abdu'l-Baha who was at that time an intelligence
officer with the British army in Palestine. He alerted
influential friends and followers of `Abdu'l-Baha,
who persuaded the military authorities to pass word
through the lines that `Abdu'l-Baha was not to be harmed.
Haifa and `Akka fell to British and Indian cavalry
on 23 September 1918. The British authorities immediately
announced that `Abdu'l-Baha and his family were safe.

Jamal Pasha in Baha'i literature.
Jamal Pasha appears several times in `Abdu'l-Baha's
talks to local Baha'is. (Most of what we know about
his dealings with the Pasha come from these
talks.) Though he joked about the real danger that
Jamal Pasha posed, he described him as "a mountain
of arrogance" and said that he was bloodthirsty, rapacious,
and drunken.

For Shoghi Effendi, Jamal
Pasha was one of a series of threats to the
Baha'i World Center--Sultan `Abdu'l-Hamid, Hitler,
and the 1947-48 war--averted by the providence of God.
Shoghi Effendi described his character as "bloodthirsty"
and "suspicious and merciless" and referred to his
"ruthless military dictatorship" and to his being "an
inveterate enemy of the Faith."

Sources: For the life
of Jamal Pasha, see EI2 "Djemal Pasha" and his
own Memories of Turkish Statesman (London, n.d.),
also available in Ottoman, modern Turkish, and German.

The main source for his relations
with `Abdu'l-Baha is Khatirat-i-Habib, pp. 184-86,
290, 332-33, 443-47, from which are derived other accounts
such as AB 409-14, God Passes By, 317, PP 26,
AAK 3:42-45, Rahiq 1:370. See also CH 202-5. Note
that the order of events given in the body of the present
article is an educated guess.

On the capture of Haifa, see
AB 425-30, CH 219-27, BBR 332-38.

For Shoghi Effendi on Jamal
Pasha, see PP 189, PDC 13, 65, CF 54, 72, God
Passes By, 317.

AtatŸrk and Modern Turkey

Peace, however, was
not to come to Turkey for four more years after the
end of World War I. It became clear that the Allies
planned the dismemberment of Turkey. The British,
French, and Italians occupied Istanbul, the Straits,
Cilicia, and the old Arab provinces. The Armenians
had been promised a state including most of eastern
Anatolia, and the Italians had been allotted southwestern
Anatolia. The Greeks had invaded western Anatolia,
pushing eastwards from the ancient Greek territories
of the Aegean coast, burning and killing as they went.
The Sultan, a bitter enemy of the Young Turks, was
in the hands of the Allies and was abetting their plans.

In the face of this disastrous
situation, the Turks of Anatolia rallied to resist
the various invaders. Mustafa Kemal, later known as
AtatŸrk, the most successful of the wartime generals,
organized a popular government in Ankara. The new
regime defeated the Armenian Republic in 1921, regaining
some territory lost to Russia forty years earlier and
ending Armenian hopes for regaining their old lands
in eastern Anatolia. In 1922 the Turks drove the Greeks
back into the sea at Smyrna. The Treaty of Lausanne
of 1923 confirmed the existence of the new Turkey.
Huge population exchanges--Muslim Turks from Greece
and Greek Christians from Turkey--and the loss of the
non-Turkish Muslim provinces resulted in a new Turkish
republic that was overwhelmingly Muslim and ethnically
Turkish. The Sultanate was abolished and with it the
Ottoman Empire. The last Sultan lingered a few months
longer as caliph--now only a religious leader--but
even this title was abolished in 1924.

AtatŸrk made himself a virtual
dictator and set about reorganizing Turkey on the model
of modern European nation-states. In the Ottoman Empire,
the Turks had been the first of many nationalities
of the empire; the Republic of Turkey became a Turkish
national state. Islam was deinstitutionalized. Though
mosques remained open, all the theological seminaries
and monasteries of the mystical orders were closed.
Almost all religious institutions were disbanded.
A new civil law based on the Swiss code replaced Islamic
law. Traditional headgear was prohibited, and men
were required to wear Western hats. Under state sponsorship
there was rapid economic development. AtatŸrk turned
Turkey's back on the Islamic world and attempted to
make it Western and European.

AtatŸrk was not entirely successful
in eliminating Islam as a social and political force,
particularly in the countryside. His attempts to abolish
Arabic as a liturgical language were eventually abandoned.
Even AtatŸrk's harsh anti-clerical measures could
be seen by many pious Muslims as salutary reforms of
corrupt religious institutions. Typical, perhaps,
is the fact that Turks never ceased referring to AtatŸrk
himself as "Ghazi"--"victor in the holy war."

Politically, Turkey has become
generally democratic. After AtatŸrk's death in 1938
Turkey enjoyed considerable periods of democratic rule,
broken by military intervention in times of instability.
Generally, Turkey has remained true to AtatŸrk's vision
of a secular modern state--in recent years, for example,
attempting to join the European Community. However,
Islamic nationalism is also increasingly influential.

Shoghi Effendi on the fall
of the Ottomans and the rise of modern Turkey

Five years after the
end of World War I the Ottoman Empire was gone, replaced
by AtatŸrk's secular Republic of Turkey. In several
of his works, especially The Promised Day is Come,
Shoghi Effendi points to this extraordinary transformation
as evidence of the hand of God at work, sweeping away
the obsolete forms of Islam and preparing the way for
the eventual triumph of the Baha'i Faith, "a slow yet
steady and relentless retribution." (PDC 61) He links
it to the fall of the Qajar monarchy in Iran. For
Shoghi Effendi the decline of Istanbul--no longer the
capital even of the shrunken Turkish Republic--particularly
symbolized this.

The Ottoman Empire also represented
Sunni Islam's encounter with the revelation of Baha'u'llah,
just as Iran and the Qajar regime represented Shi`ism.

Shoghi Effendi considered
the Ottoman regime more culpable than the Iranian government
in its treatment of the Baha'is. While in Iran the
Babis had attempted to assassinate the Shah,
the Ottomans had no just cause for complaint against
the Baha'u'llah.

Sources: For Baha'i
writings on the Ottoman Empire and Turkey, see Amr
va-Khalq 4:453-58; PB 102-4; TB 213; PDC 19, 38-39,
61-66, 100-1; WOB 173-74; RB 2:312-23, as well as the
bibliography on tablets mentioned above.

The
Baha'i Community of Turkey

The modern Republic
of Turkey has the second largest Baha'i community in
the Middle East.

Early
history:

The modern Baha'i community
of Turkey was established by Iranian Baha'i traders,
pilgrims, and refugees seeking the opportunities and
relative freedom of cosmopolitan Istanbul. A local
spiritual assembly was established there, and Baha'i
communities eventually grew up in other towns in the
area. A second area of Baha'i settlement was in the
south, in partly Arab areas like Adana, Iskenderun
(Alexandretta, held by France until 1937), and neighboring
towns. The Baha'is here seem to have been Arabic-speaking
descendants of early Baha'is in Iraq and the Holy Land.
Baha'i communities also eventually grew up in other
important towns such as Smyrna and Ankara.

Martha Root visited Turkey
in 1927, 1929, and 1932.

Persecutions of Baha'is
in Turkey

Like the Tanzimat and
Young Turk reformers before him, AtatŸrk attempted
to modernize Turkish society by authoritarian rule
rather than by liberalization. He ruthlessly suppressed
competing influences: most Islamic institutions, particularly
the mystical orders, Freemasons, labor groups, Communists,
and the like. In 1928 a number of Baha'is in Smyrna
were arrested on the grounds that they were--as the
Times of London correspondent put it--"a group of Turks,
Americans, and Persians who had formed a secret society
with the object of continuing the religious practices
in vogue in the days of the Sultans." They were further
suspected of having political contacts with royalist
emigres. When the Istanbul spiritual assembly intervened,
its members were also arrested. The Istanbul Baha'is
used the trial as an opportunity to expound publicly
the history and teachings of the Baha'i Faith, gaining
considerable publicity in the Middle Eastern press.
In the end they were cleared of the charge of being
a subversive organization and convicted only of the
minor charge of having failed to register as an association.

In 1932-33 many Baha'is were
arrested in Istanbul and Adana on similar charges,
although in Adana the prejudices of Muslims seem to
have been a factor also. By March 1933 the Istanbul
Baha'is had been acquitted, but fifty-three Baha'is
remained in prison in Adana, prompting Shoghi Effendi
to ask the American and Iranian Baha'is to appeal to
the Turkish authorities in their behalf. All the Baha'is
were released by the beginning of April.

In later decades Baha'is continued
to face intermittent harassment from Turkish authorities
concerned that they represented a foreign political
or cultural influence, thus forcing the Turkish Baha'is
to remain somewhat cautious in their public activities.
As late as the 1960s a Baha'i election meeting was
raided by police and those present briefly jailed.

Institutional Growth

The constitution of
the modern Republic of Turkey guarantees freedom of
worship and conscience but prohibits religious interference
in politics. The criminal code prohibits proselytism.
The establishment of the republic resulted in the
deinstitutionalization of Islam but also the departure
of almost all non-Muslims from the country. Islamic
institutions now are entirely controlled by the state.
Other religious communities are free of direct state
control but must operate within narrow legal limits.

The development of the modern
Turkish Baha'i community has been shaped by these paradoxical
circumstances. Though in most ways freer than other
Middle Eastern Baha'i communities, it has always had
to exercise its freedom with caution for fear of triggering
old religious or newer political prejudices. The Turkish
Baha'i community, like Turkey itself, exists in a cultural
borderland between Europe and the Middle East.

Systematic development of
the Baha'i community began with the Ten Year Crusade
(1953-63). With the aid of pioneers from Iraq and
Iran, the community grew to twelve assemblies in 26
localities. A national spiritual assembly was formed
in 1959. The community built a national haziratu'l-quds
in Istanbul and bought a temple site and three holy
places. There were organized youth activities.

During the Nine Year Plan
(1964-73) the community grew to 22 assemblies in 57
localities, including groups on three islands near
the Dardanelles: Imroz, Bozca Ada, and Marmara. There
were also systematic efforts to establish communities
in the towns and villages visited by Baha'u'llah and
along the Black Sea coast. The number of assemblies
and localities grew to 33 and 102 in 1979 but dropped
to 29 and 98 by 1983. In 1986 there were 50 assemblies
and 157 localities. Statistics on assembly activities
such as feasts, assembly meetings, and children's classes
show that the Turkish assemblies are relatively strong
and active. Fairly large scale enrollments have occured
in southwestern Turkey.

The peculiar political conditions
of Turkey made goals involving official recognition
much more difficult to obtain. The first national
spiritual assembly had to be elected by mail. Though
the national spiritual assembly has not been able to
achieve incorporation, since 1980 it has had some exemption
from taxation. Since 1966 authorities have also permitted
believers to list their religion as "Baha'i" on their
identity cards.

The Turkish community is financially
self-sufficient.

The most significant accomplishment
of the Turkish Baha'i community is the degree to which
it has become assimilated into its country, an achievement
only equalled in the Middle East by the Baha'i communities
of Iran, Iraq, Egypt, and Morocco.

The Turkish Baha'is have undertaken
various efforts associated with Baha'u'llah's stay
in Turkey. These include establishing communities
in the areas visited by him, acquiring and restoring
holy places, and commemorating events of his life in
Turkey.

A Turkish Baha'i scholar,
Sami Doktoroglu, discovered a number of important official
Ottoman documents relating to Baha'i history.

Composition of the community

The earliest Baha'is
in Turkey were Iranians. Some of their families have
remained and have assimilated thoroughly into Turkish
life, a process encouraged by strong Turkish nationalist
pressures. Though Turkey still receives pioneers,
it sends almost as many pioneers out to other countries.
Over the years Baha'i teaching has brought many ethnic
Turks into the community, especially since the 1970s.
During the Nine Year Plan the Turkish community was
successful in teaching in the `Alavi, or `Ashiq,
community, a dissident Shi`i minority in Anatolia.
By the 1970s the Turkish Baha'i community was culturally
Turkish, rather than being an expatriate Iranian community
as is the case in many other Middle Eastern countries.

Since the Iranian Revolution
of 1979, many Baha'i refugees have crossed into Turkey,
some of whom have had to stay for long periods while
awaiting resettlement.

Growth of the Baha'i community
(including Alexandretta/Hatay)

Year Baha'is LSAs Groups Isol. Local. Inc.
LSAs

1900 100?

1921 1

1930 2 8 10

1937 6?

1944 6?

1953

1963 12 9 5 26

1973 22 35 57

1979 33 69 102

1986 44 58 55 157

Sources: For the history
of the modern Turkish Baha'i community, see AB 399;
BBR 474-75; DM/IK 7:972-74; Garis, Martha Root, pp.
294-95, 322-27, BW 1:101, 103; 2:183; 3:43, 45, 218,
222-23; 4:97, 274, 430-31; 5:432; 6:511; 7:560; 8:692;
9:658-59; 10:559; 11:524-25; 13:297-98, 356, 759, 951,
1035; 14:86, 161, 418; 15:173-74, 251; 16:267; 17:96,
185-86; BN 28 (Nov. 1928) 2; 72 (Ap. 1933) 4; 397 (Ap.
1964) 3-4; 434 (May 1967) 2; PP 316-18; God Passes
By, 303.

See also the statistical and
teaching plan summaries released by the Baha'i World
Center: 1963: 26, 31, 36, 44, 119; 1964: 12-14, 35;
1968: 2, 27, 50, 67, 79, 94, 101-2; 1975: 11, 44, 67,
71, 76, 95; 1983: 98; 1986: 39, 45, 50-51, 56, 66,
72-74, 79, 88, 90-91, 152-53.

Some photographs of Turkish
Baha'is are found in BW 3:321, 4:317, 319; 13:297,
525; 14:264; 15:251, 576; 16: 266.

Other
Turkish Baha'i Communities.

The Turks are first known
as the nomadic founders of a sixth-century empire stretching
across Central Asia to the Black Sea. In later centuries
they drifted into the Middle East as conquerors, nomadic
tribes, and mercenary or slave soldiers. Their descendants
today are scattered across Central and Southwest Asia.
They are linked by history, language, and a common
allegiance to Islam.

Though the largest modern
Turkish community is in Turkey, large numbers of Turks
live in Iran, the Soviet Union, and China, as well
as elsewhere in the Middle East, Europe, and now even
America and Australia. All speak Turkic dialects that
are somewhat mutually intelligible.

Turks in Iran

Turks and Turkic peoples
have lived in Iran for more than a thousand years,
largely sharing the culture of the Persian-speaking
majority. More often than not, Iran has been ruled
by Turkish dynasties such as the Safavids (1499-1722)
and the Qajars (1779-1924).

Most Turks in Iran are in
Aharbayjan, now divided between Iran and the
Soviet Union. These are the Azeri (Ahari) Turks,
closely related by language and culture to the Turks
of Turkey but thoroughly assimilated into Iranian life
and sharing a common Shi`i faith.

The Babi and Baha'i religions
spread among the Turks of Aharbayjan as it did
among the Persians elsewhere in Iran. Most of the
Babis at the battle of Zanjan, for example, must have
been Turks.

A number of the nomadic tribes
of Iran are also Turkic, but there have never been
many Baha'is among them, though systematic efforts
have been made to teach them.

Turks in the Central Asian
Republics

Six of the new republics
of the former Soviet Union are ethnically Turkish:
Azerbaijan, Kirghizistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan,
and Kazakhstan, although the latter is now only 40%
Turkic due to immigration from other parts of the former
Soviet Union. The area north of Iran and Afghanistan
and east of the Caspian was formerly known as Russian
Turkistan. There are also other Turkic groups elsewhere
in the Soviet Union. Baha'i refugees from Iran established
communities in Russian Turkistan and the Caucusus around
the turn of the century. Until the early 1930s there
were national spiritual assemblies in the Caucasus,
which included Soviet Azerbaijan, and Turkistan. Some
of these communities still exist after half a century
of isolation from the rest of the Baha'i world. Few
if any of the local Turkic peoples ever became Baha'is.

Since the collapse of the
Soviet Union, there has been rapid growth in the Baha'i
communities in the new republics, including the Turkish
areas. New converts seem to include a significant
number of Turks, but the sitatuation is changing rapidly
as of this writing. [Wendy: If you actually have any
numbers, please feel free to insert them.]

Turks elsewhere

Other Turkic communities
exist in western China, Bulgaria, Syria, and Iraq.
There are few if any Baha'is among these groups.

In the last three decades
poverty has driven many Turks to emigrate to Western
Europe, America, and Australia. The Five Year Plan
called for collaboration among the national spiritual
assemblies of Turkey, Germany, and Australia in teaching
these emigrants.

Baha'i
literature in Turkish

The Turkic languages
belong to the Altaic family and are thus related to
other Central Asian languages such as Mongolian. All
the Turkic languages are characterized by vowel harmony,
agglutinative morphology, and verb-final word order.
They are thus very different in sound and structure
from other Islamic languages such as Persian and Arabic.
Almost all modern Turkic languages once used the Arabic
alphabet, though it was not very suitable for their
sounds. Early Turkic languages also used the ancient
Uighur script, and modern Republican Turkish uses the
Roman alphabet. Since about 1939 Soviet Turkic languages
have used the Cyrilic script, but since the independence
of the Turkish republics of the former Soviet Union
there have been plans for adopting the Latin alphabet
of modern Republican Turkish.

The Turkic language used in
the nineteenth century Near East was Ottoman (Osmanli),
a southwestern Turkic dialect heavily infused with
Persian and Arabic words. It was the language of government
and the ruling elite throughout the Ottoman Empire,
though educated Ottomans usually knew Persian and Arabic
as well. It was closely related to Azeri, the Turkic
dialect of northwestern Iran.

In 1928 as part of his modernization
program, AtatŸrk decreed that Turkish should be written
in the Roman alphabet. In addition he tried to purify
the language from Persian and Arabic loan words. The
Arabic script was no longer to be taught. This had
the effect of cutting modern Turks off from their old
literary heritage; not only could they not read the
old alphabet, they no longer knew many of the Arabic
and Persian words that filled Ottoman Turkish. Modern
Turkish is thus quite different now from other Turkic
languages and from the Ottoman Turkish of a century
ago.

It should be noted that Republican
Turkish spelling of Arabic and Persian words and names
is based on Turkish pronunciation and thus differs
substantially from the common transliterations directly
from Persian and Arabic. "Muhammad," for example,
is "Mehmet" in modern Turkish.

`Abdu'l-Baha lived almost
his entire life in the Ottoman Empire and spoke Ottoman
Turkish well. He wrote a number of prayers in Turkish.
These are heavily infused with Persian words and phrases,
in accordance with the literary tastes of the time.
They have been published.

Though a few items evidently
were published in Ottoman Turkish, Baha'i publishing
in Turkey did not begin in earnest until after the
change to the Roman alphabet. In addition to expository
works originally written in Turkish, many of the best
known Baha'i books in Persian were translated, particularly
works by Baha'u'llah, `Abdu'l-Baha, and Mirza Abu'l-Fadl-i-Gulpaygani.
The early translators, such as Majdi énan, were educated
before the reform and thus knew Persian and Arabic.
These translations, though written in the Roman alphabet,
were thoroughly Ottoman in style and became increasingly
difficult for younger Turks educated in the new system.
There have thus been attempts to rewrite the older
translations in modern Republican Turkish to make them
more accessible. Translation remains a problem since
there are now few Turkish Baha'is who are fluent in
Arabic and Persian. The enrichment of Turkish Baha'i
literature has been a goal of teaching plans since
1964.

Though there are large Turkish-speaking
Baha'i communities in Iran, the Iranian government
prohibited the publication of literature in Turkish
throughout most of this century. As a result there
has been little Turkish Baha'i literature published
in Iran, the Turkish prayers of `Abdu'l-Baha being
a notable exception. A translation of the short obligatory
prayer into Azeri is found in BW 16:601 and 17:520.

Sixty percent of the speakers
of Turkic languages live outside Turkey, many of them
in the Soviet Union: about one out of eight Soviet
citizens speaks a Turkic language as his mother tongue.
Most of the earliest published Baha'i literature in
Turkish was printed by the large Baha'i communities
in Baku in Russian Azerbaijan and Ashkhabad in Russian
Turkistan. Beginning with the Nine Year Plan, the
translation of Baha'i literature into the various dialects
of Soviet Central Asia has been a goal, including Turkmen,
Kazakh, Kirghiz, and Uzbek. Translations were made
into at least the first two of these prior to the fall
of the Soviet Union. It seems likely that with the
independence of these states there will be a large
increase in Baha'i literature in the languages of the
Turkish republics.

Sources: For information
on Turkish, see EB (1985) "Turkic Languages;" Bernard
Comrie, The World's Major Languages (New York: Oxford,
1987) pp. 619-44. The most recent bibliographies of
Baha'i literature in Turkish are BW 13:1108; 18:889.
For other Turkic languages see BW 14:569; 15:714;
16:601, 612; 18:843, 857-58.

Excursus:

`Abdu'llah
Pasha

This Turkish official was
the governor of `Akka from 1819 to 1832 and was the
owner of a number of buildings important in Baha'i
history. He was the governor of `Akka after his father-in-law
Sulayman Pasha. He sided with the Turkish Sultan
against Muhammad-`Ali Pasha of Egypt when the
latter sent his son Ibrahim Pasha to invade
Turkish Syria in the summer of 1831. The Egyptian
army besieged `Akka for six months. Eventually, he
was forced to surrender the city after a bombardment
that damaged almost every building in the city. He
was exiled to Egypt but later returned to reclaim his
properties in the `Akka area. He then moved to Istanbul
and finally to Medina where he died and is buried.

Among the extensive properties
he amassed were the mansion of Mazra`ih on land formerly
owned by his father `Ali Pasha and in which
Baha'u'llah later lived; the Governorate of `Akka,
now known as the House of `Abdu'llah Pasha,
where `Abdu'l-Baha lived from 1896 to 1910; and mansions
adjacent to the Mansion of Bahji and on the promontory
of Mt. Carmel. He also completed the Citadel of `Akka
in which Baha'u'llah was imprisoned.

Sources: DH 205-6.

Chapter
Three

The
Baha'i Faith in Iran

An
Introduction to the History and Culture of Iran

This article is intended to
give background information useful for understanding
the cultural and historical context of the rise of
the Babi and Baha'i Faiths in Iran.

1. Geography. The
modern state of Iran is centered on the Iranian Plateau,
a high arid plain surrounded on most sides by mountains.
The center of the plateau contains several regions
of almost impassable desert. Most of the population
of the plateau lives in oases near the mountains where
water is available, often conveyed to the irrigation
works by long tunnels called qanats, an irrigation
system that has been in use for several millenia.
The bulk of the population of the plateau is Persian-speaking.
In the past large parts of the population have been
nomadic, with most of the rest of the population living
in agricultural villages. In the twentieth century
most of the nomadic population has become sedentary,
and the proportion of the population living in cities
has greatly increased.

Modern Iran also includes
several adjacent geographical areas. In the northwest,
Adharbayjan is a region of mountains and high plains.
With more rainfall than in most areas of the country,
it has traditionally been Iran's most important source
of grain and meat. Its population, though Shi`ite
in religion and Iranian in culture, is Turkish-speaking
and thus is closely tied by language and experience
to Turkey in the west and to the Republic of Azerbaijan
to the north, an area that belonged to Iran until the
early nineteenth century. North of the plateau are
Mazandaran and Gilan along the south and southwestern
shores of the Caspian. These areas, below sea-level,
contain rain forests. Though the predominant language
is Persian, these areas remain somewhat distinct from
the rest of Iran. South and west of Adharbajan is
Iranian Kurdistan, an area inhabited by the semi-nomadic
Kurds and closely related by culture to the Kurdish
areas of Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. Separatist movements
have flourished in this area. The corner formed by
the Iraqi border and the Persian Gulf is an ethnically-Arab
lowland, geographically contiguous with Iraq, of which
it has often been a part. Though Arabic remains the
predominant language, there are large Persian settlements
there and the region has become much more culturally
integrated with the rest of Iran since the discovery
of oil at the turn of the century. The extreme southeast
of Iran is inhabited by the Baluch, a people also living
in neighboring areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Finally, northeastern Iran is a continuation of the
plains of Central Asia.

It should be noted that just
as all Iranians are not Persian speakers, not all speakers
of Persian live in Iran. Persian is one of the two
main languages of Afghanistan, and Tajik, a closely
related dialect, is spoken in Tajikistan and parts
of Uzbekistan. Persian was also the lingua franca
of Islamic India and survived in India and Pakistan
as a literary language into the twentieth century.

A large country, the climate
of Iran varies from region to region. On the Iranian
Plateau, summers are hot and dry. In the northern
areas and in the mountains winters can be quite severe.
Even in Tehran, snow is common in the winter.

2. History

Pre-Islamic Iran

The Aryans and their religion.
The Iranians are part of the Indo-European people.
Sometime, probably in the early second millenium B.C.,
a people calling themselves Aryans migrated from north
of the Black Sea southwest towards Iran and Afghanistan.
These people worshipped a pantheon of gods preserved
both in Hindu and Zoroastrian mythology. Their economy
seems to have been based on cattle-raising. One group,
the Indo-Aryans, went southeast into northwestern India,
where they apparently conquered the native population.
Their religion formed the nucleous of modern Hinduism.
Another group, the Iranians, moved southwest into
Iran, eventually settling a region including much of
the area east of the Caspian, Afghanistan, and Iran.
There is no direct evidence of the movements of the
Aryans, but something can be deduced from comparing
the languages and mythology of the Aryans of India
and Iran. The Indo-Aryans, for example, used a word
for "god' that the Iranians use to mean "devil." Likewise,
the oldest myths of both peoples preserve something
of their early culture. By the early first millenium
B.C. various Iranian groups were dominant on the Iranian
plateau and neighboring areas to the east and north.

At some time before or during
the migrations of the Iranians, a prophet named Zarathushtra
(Zoroaster, the usual English form, reflects the Greek
form of his name) arose among them. He was a priest
of the traditional religion. On the basis of visions
of the supreme god Ahura Mazda (probably meaning "Lord
Wisdom"), he denounced abuses and taught a religion
in which believers were to carry out various rituals,
particularly concerning purity, in order to aid Ahura
Mazda in his battle against the devil, Ahriman. Zoroaster
formulated his teachings in the form of a series of
hymns known as the Gathas. These were commited to
memory by his followers and passed down by them until
they were finally written down, together with much
additional traditional material, sometime around the
fifth century A.D. This body of literature is the
Avesta, the holy book of Zoroaster's religion. For
his teachings Zoroaster was persecuted until he finally
found refuge with King Vishtaspa, who established Zoroastrianism
as the state religion of his kingdom and fought the
enemies of the new faith.

Though there is no direct
evidence about Zoroaster until much later, there cannot
be much doubt that he lived and preached. There is
great controversy about where and when he lived, the
traditional date and placeÑ258 years before Alexander
(570 B.C.) in AdharbayjanÑbeing clearly too late and
too far west. Various modern authorities place him
in Sistan (on the border between modern Iran and Afghanistan),
Choresmia (south of the Aral Sea), and Kazakhstan.
Dates range from the early second millenium to the
early first millenium.

The Medes and the Persians.
The Iranians come into written history with the rise
of the Median empire, an Iranian dynasty, in western
Iran in the ninth century B.C. In the seventh century
one of the Iranian vassals of the Medes, Cyrus II the
Great of Persis in southwestern Iran, overthrew his
master and went on to conquer a vast empire, which
eventually stretched from Libya to the gates of India
and from the Bosphorus to the Indian Ocean. The Persian
or Achaemenid Empire, as it is known, was the greatest
state the world had yet seen, and its efficient administration
set the pattern used throughout the Middle East for
centuries to come. The Persian Empire plays a conspicuous
role both in the BibleÑit is the Persian king who restores
the temple in JerusalemÑand in classical Greek historyÑXerxes'
famous and unsuccessful effort to conquer Greece.
Through the Persian Empire Iranian culture and religious
ideas were conveyed to the Mediterranean world.

The Persian Empire was unexpectedly
and suddenly destroyed by Alexander's invasion in 334.
Alexander himself died before he could establish his
dynasty, and the empire was divided by his generals,
Iran falling to the descendants of Seleucus, who also
ruled Iraq, Syria, and the Holy Land. Though Greek
culture heavily influenced the Iranians, there was
still only a thin Greek veneer on what was still an
Iranian nation. By the second century B.C. the Seleucids
had been supplanted by an Iranian dynasty originating
near the southeastern corner of the Caspian. This
dynasty, known to the West as the Parthians and to
themselves as the Arsacids, ruled a loose confedation
controlling a territory from Iraq and the borders of
Syria to Afghanistan and the Aral Sea. Their famous
mounted archers were the most formidable opponents
of the Roman legions. Though more Iranian than the
Seleucids, they were still much under the influence
of Greek culture.

In the third century A.D.
the Sasanians, a local dynasty of Fars (the same region
that was the homeland of the Achaemenids) overthrew
the Parthians and formed the Sasanian empire. Occupying
much the same territory as the Parthians, the Sasanians
were militantly Zoroastrian in religion and continued
the Parthian tradition of opposition to the Romans.
The Sasanian empire was well-organized and centralized.
At their high point in the early seventh century,
the Sasanians were able to occupy much of the Byzantine
Empire and besieged Constantinople itself. Whereas
the Persians nearly forgot the Achaemenids and Parthians,
the Sasanian kings have remained well-known figures
in many aspects of Iranian culture: literature, statecraft,
art, and folklore.

The Arab Invasion and Empires.
In the years when Muhammad was preaching his new religion
and establishing a Muslim state in Medina and eventually
all of Arabia, the Sasanians were undergoing military
defeat and civil unrest. Thus when the Arabs invaded
Sasanian Iraq, resistence was ineffective. The provincial
nobility failed to unite to support the central government
against the invader. Thus, the Arabs were soon able
to occupy both Iraq and Iran. Yazdegerd III, the fugitive
Sasanian emperor, was killed in Marv, in the far northeastern
corner of his empire. Thereafter, Iran was ruled first
from Medina and then until 750 from Damascus.

Persians quickly came to play
a key role in the Islamic state. The first Arab occupiers
were depenedent on Persians to administer the old Sasanian
provinces: Persian was the official language of administrative
records in the eastern part of the Islamic world through
the seventh century, and Persian officials carried
on the routine of tax collection and administration
under the eyes of their new Arab rulers. By the end
of the century considerable numbers of Persians had
become Muslims. In 750 a Shi`ite revolution in eastern
Iran led to the overthrow of the Umayyad caliphs of
Damascus. The Abbasids, the new caliphs, were descendants
of an uncle of the Prophet. They moved the capital
to Iraq, building the new city of Baghdad. Their chief
powerbase was the eastern empire--Iraq and Iran, the
Sasanian lands--and Persians played an ever-greater
role in administration and cultural life. The administrative
system and court rituals of the Sasanian empire were
to a considerable extent resurrected by the Abbasids.
During this period Iran gradually became overwhelmingly
Muslim, mainly Sunni in this period, although there
were always pockets of Shiite sympathy.

The Military Successor
States. By the end of the ninth century the Abbasid
caliphs in Baghdad could no longer exercise full control
over their dominions. Governors of distant provinces
became independent while still acknowledging the nominal
authority of the prestigious but increasingly powerless
caliphs in Baghdad. The example of independent provincial
governors was soon followed by military adventurers
who carved out ephemeral empires for themselves. Frequently
drawing their strength from nomadic Turkic or Mongol
tribes, such states characterize Iranian history into
modern times. Often these rulers were little more
than adventurous gangsters whose states prospered so
long as the founder lived and fell apart under less
ruthless heirs. Under such rulers life continued unchanged
in the Persian cities, for a change of ruler often
meant nothing more than a change of tax collector.
Such cultural achievements as these military rulers
could boast of tended to consist of subsidizing poets
or scholars or of monumental architectureÑboth activities
intended to legitimize the sovereign's rule. Only
in a few cases did these states have lasting influences
on Iranian life.

Iran as a political entity
can scarcely said to have existed in this period.
Political boundaries bore little relation to ethnic
boundaries. Religious identities were often stronger
than identies based on language or nation.

The Safavids. The
modern state of Iran came into existence in 1500 through
the conquests of Shah Isma`al Safavi, the hereditory
head of an order of militant Shiite Sufis. Isma`il
was a Turk from Ardabil in Azerbaijan, in the northwest
of modern Iran. His state occupied the territory of
modern Iran and some additional areas such as parts
of Iraq, the Caucasus, and Afghanistan. Until this
time Iran had been largely Sunni, though there was
a long tradition of sympathy for radical Shi`ite groups.
Isma`il forcibly converted his territories to Twelver
Shi`ism, to the great irritation of neighboring Sunni
states such as the Ottomans and the Uzbeks. Though
under continual military pressure, particularly from
the Ottomans, Isma`il and his successors were able
to consolidate a regime that lasted for over 200 years.
The cultural achievements of the Safavids were considerable.
The Safavid kings and their courtiers were often lavish
patrons of art, literature, and scholarship. Safavid
architecture represents the highest achievement of
Islamic architecture in Iran, notably Shah Abbas the
Great's magnificent capital, Isfahan. Islamic philosophy
reached its highest level of sophistication under the
Safavids.

After a series of weak rulers
the Safavid state collapsed in the early eighteenth
century before an invasion from Afghanistan. This
event triggered a half-century of instability in Iran.
Two rulers in this period managed to gain control
of the bulk of the old Safavid territories. The first,
Nadir Shah, was a Sunni soldier from Khorasan, who
in the classic pattern of military rulers in Iran,
rose through his bravery, charisma, and luck to become
a conquerer. His greatest achievement was his invasion
of India in 1739, in which he sacked Delhi and brought
a fabulous treasure, including the famous Peacock Throne,
back to Iran. He was eventually assasinated by his
own soldiers and his empire fell apart. The second
strong ruler was Karim Khan Zand (r. 1751-79), who
ruled much of Iran from Shiraz. Less ambitious than
Nadir, he ruled under the unpretentious title of "regent"
(vakil). Though typical of military adventurers
in Iran throughout history, he won the affection of
the Persians through his wise and moderate rule, his
concern for commercial prosperity, and the magnificent
buildings he erected in his beloved Shiraz.

The Qajars. Karim
Khan's successor was immediately challenged by Aqa-Muhammad
Khan (d. 1797), a eunuch of the Turkish Qajar tribe.
He had been variously a rival and advisor of Karim
Khan. After the latter's death he established himself
as ruler of most of the old Safavid territories, first
uniting the various branches of the Qajar tribe under
his rule, then defeating and killing Karim Khan's son
Lutf-`Ali, and finally recapturing the lost territories
of Georgia and Khorasan. After Aqa Mohammad's murder
in 1797, his nephew Fath-`Ali became the ruler. Fath-`Ali
Shah was distinguished less for his statecraft than
for his uxoriousness: his wives, concubines, and resulting
children numbered in the hundreds. During his reign
Iran faced its first serious challenge from Europeans.
Blundering into two disastrous wars with Russia, Iran
lost the northern half of the key province of Azerbaijan.
Fath-`Ali Shah's heir apparent was his son `Abbas
Mirza, who ruled Azerbaijan for more than thirty years
and conducted Iran's foreign policy. `Abbas Mirza
was an intelligent and forward-looking man, who sought
to adopt European-style reforms in such areas as the
military and fiscal administration, much as the Ottomans
were doing at the same time. His European advisors
hoped that under `Abbas's rule, Iran would develop
into a strong and stable modern state. Unfortunately,
he shared his family's tendency towards dissipation,
and he died shortly before his father. The throne
thus passed to `Abbas Mirza's son, Muhammad (r. 1834-48).
Muhammad Shah showed little interest in continuing
the reforms that his father had undertaken, and relied
on an incompetent prime minister, the ignorant and
superstitious Sufi Haji Mirza Aqasi.

Muhammad Shah's son and heir,
Nasiru'd-Din (b. 1831, r. 1848-96), came to the throne
as a teenager and ruled nearly half a century. Nasiru'd-Din
Shah had been governor of Azerbaijan (the traditional
post for the heir-apparent) under the supervision of
Mirza Taqi Khan Amir Kabir, who then became prime minister.
Amir Kabir was an ardent reformer, who sought to institute
European-style reforms under an absolutist monarchy.
He, for example, established the first modern institution
of higher learning in Iran, the Daru'l-Funun ("Polytechnic").
It was he who ordered the execution of the Bab, apparently
because he saw a charismatic and revolutionary religious
movement as a threat to the stability of the state.
However, Naseri'd-Din Shah soon tired of his brilliant
and overbearing prime minister, removed him from office,
and had him killed in 1852. For the remainder of Nasiru'd-Din
Shah's reign, Iran came under increasing pressure from
the European powersÑpolitical, military, and economic.
The Shah was himself interested in Western technology
and methods, travelled in Europe, and periodically
attempted to carry out reforms. However, he lacked
the intelligence and will to follow through on these
measures, not all of which were well-thought-out in
any case. By the time of his assasination in 1896
at the hands of a supporter of the Pan-Islamist Jamalul-Din
Afghani, Iran was entering a crisis.

The Constitutional Period.
Both Nasiru'd-Din Shah and his successor Muzaffari'd-Din
Shah were perennially short of foreign currency to
pay for imports of foreign goods and travel in Europe.
They developed the practice of selling concessionsÑmonopolies
on some part of the economyÑto raise funds. These
concessions caused great resentment in the Iranian
public, for not only did the resulting monopolies force
Persians to pay unnecessarily high prices, but they
often led to the ruin of sectors of the traditional
economy. In 1890, the Shah sold a monopoly on the
sale of tobacco to a British businessman. An outcry
resulted, the clergy banned the use of tobacco, and
the Shah was forced to withdraw the concession. A
few years later the discontent crystalized in the form
of a demand for a constitution. An alliance of modernist
intellectuals (some of whom were secretly Azali Babis),
bazaar merchants, and reformist clergy forced the dying
Muzaffaru'd-Din Shah to agree to a constitution and
a constituent assembly, the Majlis. When Muhammad-`Ali,
the new Shah, tried to dissolve the Majlis, a civil
war resulted in which the Constitutionalist forces
eventually triumphed. Though the next decade was marked
by unstable government and economic depression caused
by World War I, the ideal of constitutional government
became firmly rooted in Iran.

The Pahlavi Dynasty.
In 1921 Reza Khan, the head of a Russian-trained cavalry
regiment that was the most effective military force
in the country, seized power in Tehran and was proclaimed
prime minister. He was a resolutely secular and absolutist
reformer who sought to modernize Iran from above on
the model of AtatŸrk in Turkey and Mussolini in Italy.
Though measures such as the forced unveiling of women
and the curtailing of the authority of the clergy caused
resentment, under his rule Iran rapidly developed a
modern state apparatus and economy. He proclaimed
himself Shah in 1925, deposing the powerless Ahmad
Shah Qajar. The symbol of his achievements was a railroad
he built going from the Persian Gulf through Tehran
to the Russian border. It was this railroad, together
with his fascist sympathies, that proved to be his
undoing. When Germany invaded Russia, the Allies occupied
Iran in order to be able to send supplies to Russia.
Reza Shah was deposed and died in exile on the island
of Mauritius.

His son, Muhammad-Reza came
to the throne as a teen-ager and for some years was
virtually powerless. During the 1940s political life
flourished in Iran as the Majlis was freed from the
heavy hand of Reza Shah. By the early 1950s the Shah
was attempting to consolidate power. When Muhammad
Mosaddeq, a nationalist politician, became prime minister
and nationalized the Bristish-owned oil fields, the
American Central Intelligence Agency engineered a coup
that overthrew Mosaddeq and brought the Shah to power.
Like his father, Muhammad-Reza Shah attempted to modernize
Iran from above. Paid for by steadily increasing oil
revenues, vast changes occured in Iranian life. Education
became widely available, the country became firmly
integrated into the world economy, and a large middle-class
grew up. The clergy grew increasingly marginalized,
particularly after 1963 when they were unable to prevent
a land-reform program from stripping them of the lands
that supported the religious institutions.

The Islamic Republic.
Under the Pahlavis political reform failed to keep
pace with economic and social change. When uncontrolled
inflation began to wreak havoc in the economy in the
mid-1970s, the Shah began to lose his popularity.
In 1978 an alliance of Islamic, leftist, and bazaar
groups, united by the prestige of the Ayatollah Khomeini,
forced the Shah into exile. Khomeini's own Islamic
supporters, the best organized of the revolutionary
groups, seized power. Despite a bitter campaign of
terrorism by leftist groups and a long war with Iraq,
the Islamic regime was able to consolidate its power,
uniting the country in hostility towards the Western
powers, especially the United States. Despite a dismal
human rights record and near economic collapse caused
by war and mismanagement, the regime continued to enjoy
wide support due to the reforms it was able to carry
out and its genuine independence from foreign influence.
Moreover, the fact that a modicum of democracy was
maintained allowed the Islamic Republic to lay claim
to both the nationalist and the consistituionalist
political legacies.

3. Culture

The following is a
brief account of several important themes in Iranian
culture and society

Iran and Islam

A continuing theme
in Persian culture is whether Iran should be identified
as primarily Iranian or primarily Islamic. As early
as the eighth century Persian Muslims had begun to
reassert their identity as Iranians against the prevailing
Arabic chauvinism of the ruling Arabs. The greatest
expression of this attitude is Firdawsi's Shah-Naiha,
the "Book of Kings," an eleventh-century revised poetic
translation of a pre-Islamic national history written
in Sasanian times. Thus, Iranian rulers and officials
through the last thousand years have tended to identify
with the heritage of pre-Islamic Iran, an identity
reinforced by the Persian language. This Iranian identity
was closely linked with a cult of monarchy, in which
pre-Islamic ideas about the divine right of kings,
elaborate court ceremonials, and administrative traditions
were resurrected. It was the administrative classes,
the most permanent element of the government, who clung
most tenaciously to the pre-Islamic Persian heritage.
Thus, Baha'u'llah's family, which had a tradition
of government service, proudly asserted their pure
Persian descent from the last Sasanian king.

On the other hand, pre-modern
Iranian Muslims saw themselves as citizens of the Islamic
nation or as Shiites. Thus a Persian Shiite would
be quite willing for his daughter to marry an Arab
Shiite but would on no account allow her to marry a
Zoroastrian Persian. In most cases these two identities
co-existed. Sometimes they were fused, as when the
mother of the Imam Husayn was identified as the daughter
of Yazdegerd III, the last Sasanian emperor. The fact
that Iran was the only Muslim state with Shiism as
the state religion tended to smooth over potential
conflicts between Iranian and Islamic identities.

In modern times the conflict
between these two identities has sharpened. The Pahlavi
Shahs, seeing Islam and the Shi`ite clergy as barriers
to the modernization of Iran and to the consolidation
of state power, appealed to a specifically Iranian
nationalism. Outward symbols of Islamic allegiance
such as traditional headgear were outlawed, and symbols
of the glories of ancient Iran were brought forward
to replace them. Thus, the Zoroastrian calendar replaced
the Islamic calendar in official use. A campaign was
launched to rid Persian of loan-words from ArabicÑa
nearly hopeless task, since Arabic words are as prominent
in Persian as French, Greek, and Latin loan-words are
in English. Parents were encouraged to give their
children names from the Shah-Namih. This effort
reached a height in 1971 when Muhammad-Reza Shah held
a lavish celebration (thirty-five years late) at Persepolis,
the old Achaemenid capital, of the 2500th anniversary
of the foundation of the Persian monarchy. At the
same time he revised the calendar to date from that
event.

The clergy naturally resisted
such measures. Khomeini, for example, insisted on
signing his name "al-Khomeini," a small act of rebellion
that converted his name from Persian to Arabic. After
the Islamic Revolution the new Islamic rulers appealed
once again to symbols of pan-Islamic identity, replacing,
for example, the Persian national symbol of the Lion-and-Sun
with the Arabic name of God, Allah, on the Iranian
flag. The study of Arabic, the language of Islam,
was once again made manditory in Iranian schools.
However, soon the country was locked in a desparate
war with Iraq, and the Islamic leadership was forced
to once again invoke the symbols of Iranian national
unity to rally the nation to the fight.

Shiism and Islam.

Somewhat comparable to the
conflict between Iranian and Islamic identity is the
conflict between Shiite and Islamic identity. Shiites
see themselves as both part of and separate from the
larger Sunni Islamic world. Ancient resentments born
of the persecution of the imams separate Shiites from
other Muslims, but both parties see the Shiites as
part of the larger Islamic nation. On the whole, the
experience of Iran, often at war with neighboring Sunni
states, has predisposed its people to see themselves
primarily as a distinct community surrounded by nations
hostitle to its faith. Thus, Shiism can be invoked
to rally the Iranian nation against enemies, real or
imagined. The propaganda of the Iran-Iraq war drew
on ancient memories of the persecution of the Imams
in Iraa, especially of the Imam Husayn. On the other
hand, the official policy of the Islamic Republic has
been to stress the commonalities between Shiite and
Sunni Islam. In practice attitudes vary considerably
among individuals. In the Shaykhi school, for example,
and also in the writings of the Bab, Shiite particularism
is predominant. On the other hand, Baha'u'llah had
little interest in Shiite/Sunni differences.

Class structure of Iranian
society.@

The fundamental class structure
of Iranian society has its roots in pre-Islamic times.
Although class lines were not rigid, there were distinct
class patterns. The following are the major social
divisions of traditional Iranian society.

Peasants: The largest
portion of the Iranian population until very recent
times consisted of peasants living in small agricultural
villages. Their situations could vary considerably,
depending mainly on whether they owned their own land.
Typically villages and their agricultural land were
the property of absentee landlords, usually civil or
military officials. Villages also sometimes belonged
to charitable foundationsÑin effect to the clergyÑor
to wealthier merchants. The rent was paid in kind,
and the crop was divided according to traditional formulae
among the the landlord, the cultivator, and the individuals
who supplied irrigation water, animals for cultivation,
and seed. Due to a number of factors the economic
situation of the peasants became steadily worse in
the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, leading many
peasants to migrate to the towns and cities.

Nomads: At one time
nomadic tribes constituted nearly half the population
of Iran. The nomadic peoples, or at least the chiefs
of the major tribes, enjoyed considerable wealth and
political power. Nomad soldiers were the backbone
of the traditional Iranian army, and many of the Iranian
dynasties of Islamic times, notably the Qajars, were
of nomadic origin. Under the Pahlavis the power of
the tribes was broken and most were forced to accept
a sedentary life. Since the Islamic Revolution, some
of the tribes have been able to resume a nomadic life.

The Bazar: Traditional
economic life in Iran is based on the bazar, an amorphous
physical, social, and economic entity that is at the
heart of Iranian cities. The bazar as a social class
included shopkeepers, apprentices, craftsmen, wealthy
wholesale merchants, moneychangers, and other participants
in the market, great and small. The bazar tended to
be allied to the clergy against the government, whose
taxes, exactions, and interference was usually the
bazar's chief problem. In the twentieth century new
sorts of economic activity based on Western models
destroyed the bazar's monopoly on economic life, but
the bazar still remains important, both economically
and politically.

The Men of the Sword:
Ruling was normally the prerogative of soldiers, who
were often non-Persian invaders or tribesmen. The
highest posts in government were normally occupied
by members of this military ruling class.

The Men of the Pen:
The continuing administration of government was the
prerogative of an educated bureaucratic class, mainly
Persian in origins. The bureaucratic families maintained
specialized skills in such areas as accounting, tax
collection, official correspondence, and record-keeping.
Thus, while a provincial governor in Qajar times would
most likely be a Qajar prince whose place was owed
to his tribe's Turkish military traditions, his secretary
and his chief accountant would most likely be Persians
whose families had specialized in these skills for
generations. Baha'u'llah was from such a family and
would thus have been expected to assume his father's
administrative position. The cultural and administrative
traditions of these bureaucratic families went back
far into Sasanian times, and this class was the most
loyal supporter of pre-Islamic Persian traditions of
nationalism and culture. Paradoxically, as an educated
class they also tended in recent times to become Westernized.

The Clergy: The Shi`ite
clergy constituted a small but important social class.
To some extent, the profession of cleric was hereditary
like most other occupations and crafts in pre-modern
times. However, the class and professional boundaries
were not rigid, and there was a steady flow of talented
young men of other backgrounds entering the clergy,
while the sons of clerics often took up other professions,
usually as merchants. The clergy had very close links
with the bazaar, and clerical families were and are
often linked by marriage to bazaar families of comparable
social station. For example, the Bab came from a merchant
family, but he himself spent some time in the seminaries
of Iraq, a cousin of his father became a leading cleric,
and the family maintained close links with some of
the Shaykhi clerics.

Few religious positions were
directly controlled by the government, so the clergy
frequently played roles as intermediaries between the
government and other classes. The allegiances of the
clergy varied considerably depending on their positions.
SomeÑfor example, the Friday Prayer leaders, who were
appointed by the governmentÑwere closely linked to
the government.. Clerics supported by endowments and
contributions were more likely to be alligned with
the merchants, the main source of such revenues, whereas
village mullas would be likely to occupy a position
between the landlord and the peasants.

The New Class: The
rise of Western-style education in the early twentieth
century created a new middle class without strong links
to traditional Iranian culture. The possessors of
the new education rose rapidly in influence and wealth
as the Pahlavi reforms created a demand for officials,
technicians, and businessmen. The new class represented
a discontinuity in Iranian society since their experiences
and outlook were in many ways fundamentally different
from those of the traditional classes. Their rise
was bitterly resented by more traditional groups like
the clergy and the bazaar.

Persian Language and Literature

Persian is an Indo-European
language and is thus related by structure to most European
languages, but its alphabet and much of its vocabulary
are Arabic. The language underwent vast changes in
the millenium between the fall of the Achaemenid empire
to Alexander and the reemergence of New Persian in
the early Islamic period. Unlike other areas conquered
by the Arabs, the Iranian-speaking areas never adopted
Arabic except as a learned language. When independent
states with Persian-speaking courts emerged in Iran
around the 10th century, Persian reemerged as a literary
language. The preeminent literary form in New (Islamic)
Persian has always been poetry, and almost every educated
Persian has at least dabbled in writing poetry. A
knowledge of poetry is one of the basic attainments
of an educated Persian, both in medieval and modern
times. The first great classic of New Persian literature
was Firdawsi's Shah-namih, an adaptation of
the Sasanian national history. This work served as
a rallying point for the reviving Persian nationalism.
The educated bureaucratic classes continued to cultivate
such nationalistic literature, as well as Persian adaptations
of Islamic scholarly works and dynastic histories glorifying
their patrons.

The best known tradition in
Persian literature is mystical poetry. The rise of
New Persian coincided with the rise of organized mysticism
in Islam. A huge and impressive literature of mystical
poetry, both lyric and epic/didactic, soon arose in
Persian. Mystical themes came to permeate even secular
Persian poetry, so that it is usually almost impossible
to distinguish a mystical poem from a secular love
poem. Mystical poets like Rumi and `Attar developed
Persian into a subtle and expressive medium for discussing
spiritual matters.

There was also prose literature
in Persian. As a scholarly medium, Persian was until
recently subordinate to Arabic, so Persian works on
scholarly and scientific topics tended to be popular
adaptations of more serious Arabic works. Notable
genres in Persian include literary letter-writing,
history, and statecraft. In Baha'i literature these
genres are represented by such works as Baha'u'llah's
and `Abdu'l-Baha's tablets, Dawn-Breakers, and
Secret of Divine Civilization respectively.

The Arts

Apart from literature,
three arts in which Persians excelled may be mentioned:
calligraphy, decoration, and miniature painting. Because
Islam discouraged figurative art and stressed the importance
of the sacred text, calligraphy became an important
art in Islam. Calligraphy was highly cultivated in
Iran, so that any educated Persian was expected to
have a reasonable command of one or more calligraphic
styles. The Bab's calligraphy was seen as a miracle
by his followers, and the production of display calligraphs
and fine manuscripts was one of the ways in which early
Baha'is propagated and legitimized their religion.

Persian artists excelled at
decorative arts of all sorts. Even architecture was
often subordinated to the surface of the wall or ceiling
with its elaborate tile or carved plaster ornamentation.
Decoration with elaborate calligraphy and floral or
geometrical elements is heavily used in all kinds of
Persian arts and crafts.

MiniaturesÑpaintings illustrating
booksÑwere a particular Persian specialty. The place
filled in Western art by great oil paintings is in
Iran occupied by the magnificent decorated books produced
for discerning royal patrons.

Etiquette

A portrait of Iran
would be incomplete without some reference to the role
played by etiquette, in many ways the most distinctive
feature of Persian life. Iran is a very old society,
for much of its history ruled by outsiders and subject
to unexpected upheavals. Thus, it seems that Persian
society turned inward and lavished much of its creativity
on private life. Thus, Persian society has developed
an elaborate system of etiquette. Two features are
particularly noteworthy. First is a stong emphasis
on hospitality, sometimes referred to pejoratively
by Persians as ta`aruf, "polite hypocrisy."
The underlying assumption is that the guest honors
the host by his presence, so that the host is obliged
to reciprocate by unquestioning and unstinting hospitality
and generosity. Second is an elaborate set of rules
governing interactions among individuals with finally
graduated nuance to reflect personal, social, and class
rank distinctions. In language, oral or written, titles,
style of speech and diction, and even pronouns reflect
the relative status of the two parties. Though this
system of etiquette gives Iranian society its characteristic
graciousness, it is sometimes criticized by Iranians
themselves as providing a mask for hypocrisy.

Sources:

A good introduction to many
aspects of Iranian society, particularly in the twentieth
century, is R. Mottahedeh, The Mantle of the Prophet.
Two well-informed European views from the nineteenth
century are G. Curzon, Persia and the Persian Problem,
a detailed and profoundly well-informed study of Iran
from a political standpoint, and Morier, Hajji Baba
of Isfahan, a charming but unflattering novel about
Persian life. The most thorough survey of all aspects
of Iranian life and history is Cambridge History
of Iran, 8 vols. In many respects the finest general
account of Iranian culture is still E. G. Browne, The
Literary History of the Persians.

Three
Clerics and a Prince of Isfahan

Background
to Baha'u'llah's Epistle to the Son of the Wolf

Among the defining events
in the development of the Baha'i community of Iran
in the time of Baha'u'llah was the murder of two wealthy
and prominent Baha'i merchants in Isfahan early in
1879. Members of the respected Nahri family, the two
brothers were entitled by Baha'u'llah "the King and
Beloved of Martyrs." The incident itself is well known.
The following sections discuss the Tablet that Baha'u'llah
wrote in immediate reaction to the murders and four
prominent opponents of the Baha'i Faith in Isfahan:
three clerics and a prince-governor.

Lawh-i-Burhan

The Tablet of the Proof
was revealed in 1879 as a rebuke to the two clerics--the
"Wolf" and the "She-Serpent"--responsible for the martyrdoms
of the King and Beloved of Martyrs in Isfahan. The
Imam-Jum`ih of the city, Mir Muhammad-Husayn Khatunabadi,
had owed the brothers a large sum of money. It was
generally thought that their arrest as Baha'is was
a pretext to void this debt and allow the governor,
the Imam-Jum`ih, and Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir
Isfahani, another leading cleric, to seize and divide
the brothers' extensive properties. Though the governor
had received orders to send the two brothers to Tehran,
where they would most likely have been released, the
two clerics were able to force him to permit their
executions.

The killing of the two brothers--members
of a prominent merchant family in Isfahan and among
the leading Baha'is in Iran--shocked and angered the
Baha'is and their many friends, both Iranian and European.
Baha'u'llah immediately wrote the letter known as
the Lawh-i-Burhan sharply rebuking the two clergymen.
It reached Tehran only thirty-eight days after the
killings. Mirza Abu'l-Fadl-i-Gulpaygani, on Baha'u'llah's
instructions, sent a copy of the letter to each of
the clergymen. There is no record of their reactions.

The principal theme of the
Lawh-i-Burhan is contrast between the pretentions of
the two clergymen to be exponents of the Law and faith
of Islam and the injustice and cruelty of their killing
two descendants of the Prophet himself. Most of the
tablet is addressed to Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir,
the more influential of the two.

Baha'u'llah denounces the
injustice of sentencing the two brothers to death.
Baha'u'llah says that there is no hatred in his own
heart for the Shaykh, who has been deceived
by his own folly. Had he realized what he had done,
he would have cast himself into the fire.

Baha'u'llah compares the Shaykh
to the Jewish priests who condemned Christ to death
and to the leaders of the cult of idols in Mecca who
opposed Muhammad. They could offer no proof to justify
their actions, nor could the Shaykh for
his. (This is the source of the title of the tablet.)
In fact, the Shaykh followed his passions,
not his Lord, and abandoned the Law of God--the knowledge
of which is the source of the authority of the Muslim
clergy--and followed the law of his lower self. True
learning is to recognize the station of Baha'u'llah.
If the Shaykh were to subdue his passions,
he would understand the call of Baha'u'llah and his
sins would be forgiven. Baha'u'llah and his followers,
as their actions testified, had no fear of the Shaykh's
cruelty.

Baha'u'llah says that leadership
had made the Shaykh proud. But there
is no honor in being followed by the worthless and
ignorant: it was such people who supported the priests
who put Christ to death. Baha'u'llah refers here to
three of his own works: tablets to the Sultan and Napoleon
III and the Kitab-i-éqan.

Baha'u'llah digresses to address
the Muslim clergy in general, warning them that neither
their wealth nor the religious sciences in which they
prided themselves would profit them. The Shah,
Baha'u'llah implied, feared to interfere with wolves
such as the Shaykh. But the Shaykh
is like the last sunlight on the mountaintop, soon
to fade away like those who had opposed God in the
past. Truly, Muhammad and Fatimih the Chaste wept
at his deeds. The Muslim clergy had opposed everyone
who had tried to improve the condition of Islam. Baha'u'llah
points as a warning to the disastrous war of 1877 in
which Turkey had lost much of her territory in the
Balkans.

Now Baha'u'llah turns from
the "Wolf" to the "She-Serpent"--Mir Muhammad-Husayn,
the Imam-Jum`ih. His denunciation of this man is even
sharper than that of the Shaykh. There
is no hint that this man deceived himself about the
injustice of his actions. Soon, Baha'u'llah promises,
"the breaths of chastisement will seize thee. . . "
He will not, Baha'u'llah prophesies, consume the wealth
that he had pillaged.

When Edward Browne visited
Isfahan a few years after the martyrdoms, he heard
of "the terrible letter" threatening the two clergymen
with divine chastisement. Most likely it immediately
began circulating in manuscript among the Baha'is.
It would have been convincing, for its prophecies
of disgrace and death for the two clergymen were soon
fulfilled. It was published in at least two early
collections of the writings of Baha'u'llah, Aqdas-i-Buzurg
(1314/1896) 200-208 and Majmu`ih (Cairo, 1920)
53-66. Baha'u'llah Himself quotes lengthy passages
in Epistle to the Son of the Wolf--itself addressed
to Aqa Najafi, the son of Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir:
pp. 79-86, 97-103. The entire text is included in
the Arabic and English editions of Tablets of Baha'u'llah,
Sect. 14. Almost the entire text of the tablet was
translated by Shoghi Effendi in ESW.

Baha'u'llah in ESW refers
to the tablet as "Lawh-i-Burhan." It is also known
as "Lawh-i-Raqsha'" ("Tablet of the She-Serpent").

See also: "Nahri family,"
"Muhammad-Baqir-i-Isfahani, Shaykh,"
"Muhammad-Husayn-i-Khatunabadi, Mir," "Isfahan."

Sources: For text and
translation see TB, sect. 14. RB 4:91-102. Ganj 145-46.
Baha’u’llah, King of Glory, 382. AAK 2:40-41.
DM/IK 13:2021, 2057. Nurayn 245-53.

Mir Muhammad-Husayn-i-Khatunabadi,
"the She-Serpent"

The cleric known in Baha'i
tradition as "the She-Serpent" (Raqsha') was
the Imam-Jum`ih of Isfahan and one of those responsible
for the execution in 1879 of the Nahri brothers, the
"King" and "Beloved of Martyrs." The Khatunabadis
were the descendants of Mir Muhammad-Salih, a distinguished
scholar of the early eighteenth century, and had held
the position of Imam-Jum`ah of Isfahan for about a
century. Mir Muhammad-Husayn was the brother of Mir
Siyyid Muhammad Sultanu'l-`Ulama', the Bab's host in
Isfahan in 1846. On his brother's death in 1874, he
inherited the family office, thus making him one of
the two or three highest ranked clergy in the city.
(The Imam-Jum`ah was the leader of Friday prayers
at the most important mosque in the city. The holders
of this office were, at least nominally, appointed
by the government, although here, as was often the
case, the office was effectively hereditary.) He does
not seem to have lent any particular distinction to
his office.

Mir Muhammad-Husayn's earliest
contact with the Babis was when his brother sent him
out of the city to meet the Bab, who was coming from
Shiraz. Since the Bab stayed for some time
in his brother's house, Mir Muhammad-Husayn must have
met him a number of times.

Mir Muhammad-Husayn's importance
in Baha'i history arises from the curious fact that
his bankers were Baha'is: the three Nahri brothers,
a family of wealthy merchants who had become Babis
at the time of the Bab's visits and who were now among
the most important and well-known Baha'is of Iran.
They would routinely pay the Imam-Jum`ih's debts as
they came in. The account eventually reached the very
large sum of 18,000 tomans. In early 1879 the brothers
presented this bill for payment. Mir Muhammad-Husayn
stalled, asking for an audit. Shaykh
Muhammad-Baqir, the most powerful cleric in Isfahan
and a bitter opponent of the Baha'is--proposed that
the three Nahri brothers, well-known as Baha'is--be
arrested as heretics. Their property would then be
forfeit and could be divided among the two clerics
and the governor, whose cooperation would be necessary.
The three brothers were arrested, two of them while
guests in the Imam-Jum`ih's house. The youngest recanted
and was released. The two older brothers refused and
were eventually executed at the insistence of the clergy.
Mir Muhammad-Husayn and Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir
personally delivered the death warrants to the prison.

After the executions of the
two brothers, the Imam-Jum`ih sent his servants to
seize their property and loot their houses, many of
their possessions being extremely valuable. A few
days later a dispute broke out between him and Zillu's-Sultan,
the governor. Several weeks later Mir Muhammad-Husayn
tried to force the issue by marching on the governorate
with his supporters to demand a larger share of the
plunder. When disorders continued, troops were sent
from Tehran, the Imam-Jum`ih was exiled to Mashhad,
and his property was plundered. He was allowed to
return from his exile in Mashhad a year or so
later. He died in Isfahan two years after his victims
on 21 June 1881 of a repulsive tumor on his neck.
He was buried in an unmarked grave by a few porters,
no one else daring to risk the anger of the governor
by attending his funeral. When the merchants closed
the bazaar to mourn his death, the governor's attendants
forced them to reopen their shops.

Baha'i tradition reports that
when someone expressed doubts about the wisdom of killing
the Nahri brothers, he had said, "Their blood be on
my neck." Thus his gruesome death was interpreted
as a punishment of his crime and the fulfillment of
Baha'u'llah's prophecy of his downfall.

Sources: BBR 271-74.
EBB 33-44. TB "Lawh-i-Burhan" `14, pp. 213-16. RB
4:73-102. God Passes By, 200-1, 232-33. DB
201. Browne, "Babis of Persia," p. 490-91.

Shaykh
Muhammad-Baqir-i-Isfahani, "the Wolf"

"The Wolf" was a leading mujtahid
of Isfahan responsible for a number of persecutions
of Baha'is. He born in 1234/1818-19 and was the son
of a prominent cleric in Isfahan. His mother was the
daughter of Ja`far Kashifu'l-Ghita',
one of the most important exponents of the Usuli legal
school. Muhammad-Baqir went to Najaf, where he studied
jurisprudence with the two greatest Shi`i legal
scholars of the time, Muhammad-Hasan an-Najafi and
Murtada al-Ansari. Having completed his studies, he
returned to Isfahan to assume the position of leader
of prayers in the Royal Mosque. About the same time,
the old Imam-Jum`ih and several other important clerics
in Isfahan died, abruptly making him the highest-ranking
cleric in the city. He acquired many students and
great religious authority in Isfahan and surrounding
regions. He wrote several books, none especially important.
Most of Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir's efforts
went into building up his religious, political, and
economic power. His political position was such that
he was sometimes able to challenge the governor directly,
doing such things as inflicting the death penalty against
the wishes of the authorities. He also acquired great
wealth, at least partly by hoarding grain in times
of famine.

In 1876 he was forced by the
authorities to leave Isfahan and retire to Mashhad.
He then went to Tehran, was reconciled to Zillu's-Sultan,
the governor, and returned to Isfahan on 16 April 1876.
In 1883 he fell from grace once more, being forced
to leave the city after the humiliation of having his
wife seduced by the governor. He died in Safar 1301/December
1883, shortly after arriving at Najaf.

Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir
had a number of children, several of them later prominent
clerics in Isfahan. The most important was Muhammad-Taqi,
better known as Aqa Najafi or to the Baha'is "the Son
of the Wolf."

Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir
was a relentless foe of heresy and waged a twenty-year
battle against Shaykhis, Babis, and especially
Baha'is. In 1864, he had several hundred Babis of
Najafabad arrested and wanted to put them all to death.
More moderate clerics prevented this, but four were
eventually killed--two of whom were under the protection
of the Shah--and many others beaten and robbed.

In 1874, shortly before the
arrival of Zillu's-Sultan, the new governor, he instigated
a major pogrom against the Baha'is of Isfahan. About
twenty were arrested, while hundreds of others took
refuge in the office of the British telegraph company
and the houses of the Europeans in the city. Shaykh
Muhammad-Baqir proclaimed from his pulpit that Muslims
were free to kill Baha'is and to do as they wished
with their property and women. The garrison intervened
to restore order, and eventually the Shah stopped
the persecutions.

In 1878 a Baha'i from the
village of Talkhunchih, Mulla Kazim,
was arrested there and delivered into the hands of
Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir. When he refused
to recant his faith, he was publicly beheaded in the
Maydan-i-Shah. His body was abused by the mob.
Two other Baha'is were also arrested. One was severely
beaten and his ears were cut off. A number of Baha'i
houses were also attacked.

In March 1879 Shaykh
Muhammad-Baqir; Mir Muhammad-Husayn, the new Imam-Jum`ih;
and Zillu's-Sultan plotted to kill three Baha'i Nahri
brothers. Zillu's-Sultan tried to withdraw from the
conspiracy when he was ordered to send two of the brothers
to Tehran, but some fifty clergymen, accompanied by
their supporters, closed the bazaar and marched to
the governorate. Zillu's-Sultan agreed to endorse
a death sentence issued by the clergy. Shaykh
Muhammad-Baqir and the Imam-Jum`ih personally supervised
the execution.

After this last incident Baha'u'llah
gave Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir the title
"Wolf" (Dhi'b) for his cruelty, denouncing him in the
Lawh-i-Burhan ("Tablet of the Proof"). In another
tablet (AQA 2:197-98, evidently written at the time
of one of the Shaykh's exiles, he prophesies
his final complete downfall.

After the Shaykh's
death, his son Muhammad-Taqi--better known as Aqa Najafi
or the "Son of the Wolf"--assumed his place as prayer
leader in the Royal Mosque and carried on the crusade
against the Baha'is.

Sources: A`yanu'sh-Shi`ih
9:186. BBR 243, 513, 268-74. EBB 33-40, 134, 259.
TB 203-26. God Passes By, 201, 232. AQA
2:197-98. Brown, "Babis of Persia" 491.

Aqa Najafi, "the Son of
the Wolf"

Shaykh Muhammad-Taqiy-i-NajafiÑusually
called Aqa Najafi, and entitled by Baha'u'llah "Son
of the Wolf"Ñwas a bitter opponent of the Baha'is.
He was born on 17 Rabi` II 1262/14 April 1846, the
son of Shaykh Muhammad-Baqir-i-Isfahani,
who was the leader of prayers at the Royal Mosque in
Isfahan. He was related by blood and marriage to many
prominent `ulama. He studied under his father in Isfahan
and then went to Najaf where he studied the usual subjects
under Mirzay-i-Shirazi, the highest-ranking
Shi`i cleric of the time, and others. Returning
to Isfahan, he was associated with his father and assumed
his father's position in the Royal Mosque on his death
in 1883. His title "Aqa Najafi" stressed his claim
to be regarded as one of the Najaf circle of religious
scholars.

Building on the wealth and
power accumulated by his father, Najafi became the
most powerful cleric in Isfahan and one of the wealthiest
men of the city. For over thirty years he waged a
bitter struggle for control of Isfahan with Zillu's-Sultan,
the Qajar prince-governor. In the process he accumulated
vast wealth, which he distributed generously to students
and other clerics. The rise of his power in Isfahan
was aided by the fall of Zillu's-Sultan from royal
favor in 1888.

Despite his hatred for the
representatives of the Qajar dynasty and his early
support for the nationalist revolt against the tobacco
concession in 1891-92, his support for the constitutional
revolution was ambiguous and inconsistent. He was
criticized and mistrusted by many of the constitutionalist
leaders, some of whom he had denounced as Babis and
heretics.

Like his father before him,
Aqa Najafi was a bitter and ruthless opponent of the
Baha'is. Najafi was one of the clergy who had signed
the death warrant of the two Nahri brothers and took
an active role in forcing the governor to carry out
the sentence.

After his father's death,
Najafi assumed the leading role in the persecution
of Baha'is in central Iran. He was largely responsible
for the persecutions in Sidih in 1889, in Najafabad
in 1889, 1899, and 1905, and in Isfahan and Yazd in
1903. In addition to his activities in Isfahan and
its vicinity, he wrote to `ulama in other cities urging
them to persecute the Baha'is. He also harassed the
Muslims who attended the Christian missionary schools
and the Jews. Such was Najafi's hatred of the Baha'is
that he is said to have prohibited the recitation of
the famous Ramadan dawn prayer, traditionally thought
to contain the greatest name of God, because it contained
the name "Baha."

Though the leading `ulama
in Najaf did not usually openly endorse Najafi's pogroms,
they did not repudiate him and helped prevent the government
from acting against him.

Despite Najafi's thirty-year
crusade against the Baha'is, he is best known among
Baha'is for the Epistle to the Son of the Wolf. Baha'u'llah's
last major work, this book is addressed to Aqa Najafi
and contains Baha'u'llah's own summary of the history
and teachings of his religion. The "Shaykh"
addressed throughout the book is Najafi.

Aqa Najafi had fifteen children
by three permanent and two temporary wives. Several
of his children were of moderate prominence in clerical
circles in Isfahan, as their descendants are still.

Najafi is variously said to
have written forty or a hundred books. He published
a number of them, but it is said that some of these
were actually written by others.

His wealth is also a source
of controversy. Though a clerical source speaks of
his generosity, there seems little doubt that much
of his wealth was ill-gotten. He cooperated with the
governor to corner the market in wheat during a famine.
On one occasion he had an official tortured and killed
who had complained that Najafi had hoarded hundreds
of tons of wheat while people starved. He threatened
revenue officers to avoid paying taxes. The wealthy
of Isfahan suspected that the Baha'is he attacked were
chosen for the wealth that might be seized from them,
and they feared him, even if they were not themselves
Baha'is.

Aqa Najafi's character is
a matter of disagreement. The clerical biographers
generally praise him. "He was among the great scholars
and clerics of Isfahan. . . He was almost without peer
through the centuries in his political skill and ability
to deal with the government." (Makarim) He has also
been called a murderer, opportunist, hoarder, and plagiarist.
He was hated in his day by the government, foreign
diplomats, and missionaries, and feared above all others
by the Baha'is. His fellow clergy admired him, then
and now, as a zealous defender of their faith.

He died 11 Sha`ban
1332/5 July 1914 in Isfahan and was buried near the
Maydan-i-Shah in Isfahan.

Sources: EIr "Aqa
Najafi." Makarim 1662-67. A`yanu'sh-Shi`ih 9:196.
BBR 280-88, 363, 376-85, 395-96, 426-36, 514. EBB
38, 132-33, 151-53, 259. Momen, Sh`i 133, 140-41.
Algar, Religion 16, 102, 128, 173, 180-81, 209, 212,
220, 231-32. Ishr. 40. DM/IK1:46, 110.

Sultan-Mas`ud Mirza Zillu's-Sultan

Born on 5 Jan. 1850, Sultan-Mas`ud
Mirza Zillu's-Sultan

was the eldest surviving son
of Nasiri'd-Din Shah and long-time governor
of Isfahan. An important political figure in late
Qajar Iran, he is important in Baha'i history for his
role in the persecutions of Baha'is in the Isfahan
area. Though Zillu's-Sultan was the eldest of Nasiri'd-Din
Shah's sons to survive to adulthood, he was
passed over for the throne because his mother, `Iffatu's-Saltanih,
was a temporary wife and not of noble blood, so the
next son, Muzaffaru'd-Din Mirza, was designated heir-apparent.
His original title was Yaminu'd-Dawlih, but in 1869
he received the title Zillu's-Sultan, "shadow of the
king."

He became governor of Mazandaran
at age 11 and of Fars at 13. In 1874 he became governor
of Isfahan. He ruled sternly, suppressed disorders,
and paid taxes promptly to the central government.
With these commendations, additional provinces were
added to his government until by 1882 he governed about
40% of Iran, including such important areas as Yazd,
Fars with its capital of Shiraz, and Kirmanshah.
In addition, he built up an efficient provincial army
containing 21,000 men, 6,000 horse, and ten batteries
of artillery--a force that by Iranian standards was
large, well-armed, and well-trained. He ruled regally
in Isfahan, flattering English diplomats who supposed
him to be enlightened and pro-British.

This situation abruptly ended
in 1888. Nasiri'd-Din Shah, suspecting that
Zillu's-Sultan planned to contest the throne with his
gentler brother on his father's death, detained him
while he was visiting Tehran and announced that Zillu's-Sultan
had "resigned" all his offices except the governorship
of Isfahan. His deputy-governors in the cities and
provinces formerly under his rule were dismissed and
the fine army disbanded. Zillu's-Sultan eventually
returned to Isfahan, an embittered and much weakened
man.

He remained governor of Isfahan
for twenty more years. These years were dominated
by a long struggle for control of Isfahan with the
powerful and unscrupulous mujtahid Aqa Najafi. After
the assassination of Nasiri'd-Din Shah, having
lost his own power and without the support he had once
hoped for from the English, he yielded to his younger
brother's accession to the throne. He was finally
dismissed from his governorship after the Constitutional
Revolution and exiled to Europe. He was allowed to
return during World War I and died not long after his
return in Isfahan on 2 July 1918.

Zillu's-Sultan's relations
with the Baha'is were complex and ambiguous. On his
first arrival as governor in Isfahan, he was greeted
with a persecution of Baha'is instigated by Shaykh
Muhammd-Baqir. He sought to the prevent the news from
reaching Tehran. In 1879 he consented to the arrest
of the Nahri brothers, the "King' and "Beloved of Martyrs."
It seems likely that his interest in the matter was
the innocent extortion scarcely distinguishable from
tax collection and that he did not particularly want
them killed. Nonetheless, confronted on the one hand
with the obstinate refusal of the two brothers to recant
and on the other by a mob led by sixty clerics, he
consented to their deaths. In this he disobeyed his
orders from the Shah to send them to Tehran.
After their deaths, he took such a large share of
their plundered wealth that the Imam-Jum`ih, cheated
in the transaction, raised another riot in protest.

In the various persecutions
that took place in Isfahan and its vicinity through
the rest of his governorship, Zillu's-Sultan generally
played a passive role, pleading his inability to confront
the clergy, especially the formidable Aqa Najafi.
When possible he discouraged the pogroms but rarely
took active measures to stop them. Zillu's-Sultan
was not himself actively hostile to the Baha'is and
in any case hated the clergy. It is said that Zillu's-Sultan
did instigate the persecution of the Baha'is of Yazd
in 1891 to divert attention from himself after he had
been indirectly implicated in a plot against the Shah.

On at least one occasion Zillu's-Sultan
attempted to enlist the Baha'is in his schemes to gain
the throne for himself. He sent a messenger to Baha'u'llah,
Haji Muhammad-`Aliy-i-Sayyah-i-Mahallati. Baha'u'llah
rejected this overture politely but firmly and later
remarked to his companions that had he sent Zillu's-Sultan's
letter to Nasiri'd-Din Shah, it would surely
have resulted in the prince's death.

In the fall of 1911 Zillu's-Sultan
approached `Abdu'l-Baha in Paris, hoping for his help
in securing his return to Iran and reacquiring certain
properties of his that had come into the hands of Baha'is.
`Abdu'l-Baha said that Zillu's-Sultan would return
to Iran and that the property in question would be
given to him without payment. Discovering that one
of `Abdu'l-Baha's attendants was a son of one of the
brothers he had put to death thirty years before, he
muttered excuses. `Abdu'l-Baha said that he knew the
part Zillu's-Sultan had played and what his motive
had been.

Zillu's-Sultan married Hamdamu'l-Muluk,
the daughter of Nasiri'd-Din Shah's sister and
Mirza Taqi Khan, the former prime minister.
His son Jalalu'd-Dawlih was governor of Yazd and played
a large part in the persecutions of the Baha'is there.

Zillu's-Sultan tried to portray
himself to foreigners as a progressive and pro-British
reformer. The astute Curzon, however, saw him as driven
by the single ambition to supplant his brother as heir
apparent and believed that he had also made overtures
to the Russians. In fact, although he was a vigorous
and in many ways capable ruler, there was much less
to him than his English admirers saw. His rule was
marred by cruelties: persecutions of Baha'is, the treacherous
killing of a Bakhtiyari leader, and persecutions
of Jews and others, mostly instigated by the clergy
but tolerated by the prince. Foreigners were appalled
by the damage he inflicted to some of the great monuments
of Isfahan, though in this he cannot be said to have
been better or worse than his contemporaries.

His relations with the Baha'is
were consistently duplicitous. He was willing to present
himself as sympathetic to the Baha'is and even to solicit
their aid, but he abandoned them when it suited his
political purposes.

Sources: Curzon 1:416-21
and passim. Browne, Year 114-15. BBR 268-90, 301-5,
376-85 passim, 524. EBB 33-44, 79-80. Baha’u’llah,
King of Glory, 409-10, 431-34. AB 161-62. CH
186-87. Makarim 1814-15.

Khomeini

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini--properly
Imam Ayatu'llah Ruhu'llah al-Musavi al-Kumayni, the
leader of the Iranian revolution of 1979, was bitterly
hostile to the Baha'is and sanctioned the persecutions
that took place under the Islamic revolutionary government
of Iran.

Life. Khomeini was
born in about 1900 in the impoverished oasis town of
Khumayn, south of Tehran. His grandfather,
a member of a Persian family living in Kashmir, had
studied in Karbila and settled in Khumayn at
the invitation of a local chief around 1840. While
Khomeini was still an infant, his father was killed
in a dispute with a local landlord, leaving Khomeini
to be raised by a somewhat more prosperous uncle.
His uncle and aunt wished him to become a traditional
physician (hakim), but he showed talent for
Islamic learning. World War I having made travel to
the Shi`i centers in Iraq impractical, he chose
to study in the nearby town of Arak, eventually becoming
a favored student of Shaykh `Abdu'l-Karim
Ha'iri Yazdi (1859-1937).

Khomeini followed his teacher
to Qum in 1922, where the latter led the revival of
the town as a center of Shi`i learning and became
its chief religious authority. By the end of the 1930s
Khomeini had begun teaching the slightly unorthodox
disciplines of mysticism and philosophy. In 1930 he
married Batul Saqafi, the daughter of a prominent cleric
of Tehran, whom he adored and by whom he had five children.
By 1937-38 he was prosperous enough to perform the
pilgrimage to Mecca and spend several months in the
shrine cities of Iraq.

During these years Khomeini
had been so angered by the secular and anti-clerical
policies of Rida Shah Pahlavi that in 1944 he
published a vitriolic anti-government pamphlet called
Kashfu'l-Asrar, a work that foreshadows his
later ideas on Islamic government. He was also influenced
by the antisemitic propaganda of the Nazis, which left
him with an abiding belief in a Jewish conspiracy against
Islam.

When Ayatu'llah Burujirdi
(1875-1962) came to Qum at the beginning of 1945, Khomeini
became a close advisor, carrying out religious and
political missions on Bururjirdi's behalf that helped
secure the latter's position as chief religious authority
of the Shi`i world. Burujirdi firmly discouraged
Khomeini's involvement in anti-government politics
and terrorism.

During the 1950s Khomeini
turned his attention to the problem of becoming a Grand
Ayatu'llah--marja`u't-taqlid, a supreme authority
on religious matters. He wrote a number of books,
thus establishing his scholarly credentials. His increasing
personal wealth allowed him to gather a large circle
of students. After about 1958 his position as an Ayatu'llah
of the second rank was secure. Nevertheless, his prospects
were limited by the presence of a number of more senior
Ayatu'llahs, all of whom he was not likely to outlive.
Moreover, his interests lay in philosophy, mysticism,
and even poetry--not the jurisprudence that was the
chief interest of his class. Even three decades later
an air of doubt still attached to his claim to be a
Grand Ayatu'llah.

In 1962 and 1963 the government
introduced a number of reforms: large-scale land reforms,
women's sufferage, and the elimination of religious
tests for local offices. The first struck at the independence
of the religious institutions, which were dependent
on their large endowments of rental farmland, while
the latter two were seen by the clergy as anti-Islamic.
Large demonstrations took place throughout the country.
Khomeini took a leading role in agitating against
the measures, speaking against the Shah in bold
and abusive language. The protests reached their height
in 1963 at `Ashura, the anniversary of the martyrdom
of Husayn, which fell that year at the beginning of
June. By the time troops had restored order, hundreds
were dead. Khomeini, along with other clerical leaders
of the protests, was arrested and brought to Tehran
where he was held for ten months before being released
in April 1964. His preaching remained defiant. That
November he was arrested again for his opposition to
a bill removing American military personnel from the
jurisdiction of the Iranian courts. He was exiled
to Turkey. The following year he settled in Najaf,
the chief Shi`i scholarly center of Iraq, where
he lived until 1978.

Thought and writings.
Khomeini's chief intellectual importance is for his
theory of Islamic government, a subject on which he
held very different views from the majority of modern
Shi`i clerics. Traditionally, Shi`is
accepted the separation of church and state in the
absence of the Hidden Imam. Khomeini argued that many
of the fundamental laws of Islam presumed the existence
of an Islamic government. Also, people are weak and,
for the most part, will fall into sin without the influence
of a government to enforce religious law. In our time
Islamic states had fallen into the hands of those who
served the purposes of non-Muslim imperialists. Khomeini
painted a stark picture of the division of society
into a tiny minority of rich and corrupt oppressors
exploiting the mass of oppressed Muslims. The solution
was to establish true Islamic governments. The proper
leaders for such governments were the Islamic clergy
because of their knowledge of divine law and their
commitment to justice. This last is the famous doctrine
of the "guardianship of the jurisconsult" (vilayat-i-faqih).
Khomeini presented this message in books, pamphlets,
and fiery sermons smuggled into Iran on casettes.

Though Khomeini's scholarly
output was much less than that of other Grand Ayatu'llahs,
he did write a number of books. These were:

Tahriru'l-Vasilah and
Tawdihu'l-Masa'il, manuals on ritual obligations
of the sort conventionally written by Grand Ayatu'llahs.

Kitabu'l-Bay`, a treatise
on the law of contracts that provided a vehicle for
his denial of the legitimacy of the secular state.

Islamic Government (Hukumat-i-Islami),
a compilation of his lectures on government, his most
influential work.

Misbahu'l-Hidayat,
on mystical philosophy.

To this must now be added
his Last Will and Testament, written in 1983 and constituting
his political testament.

There are also a number of
collections of speeches, letters, and the like.

Khomeini and the Iranian
Revolution. While in Najaf he developed his theory
of Islamic government and built up a loose revolutionary
network within Iran. Eventually his uncompromising
opposition to the Shah's regime won him support
from other anti-government groups, who hoped to use
him for their own purposes. Early in 1978 riots broke
out in major Iranian cities, resulting in many deaths.
Riots continued through the summer and fall, encouraged
by Khomeini's network of supporters. Expelled from
Iraq in October, Khomeini settled in Paris, by now
the recognized leader of the revolution. After the
Shah's departure from Iran, Khomeini returned
to Iran in triumph on 31 January and within days was
the unquestioned ruler of the country though he himself
held no government post.

Khomeini moved quickly to
consolidate his Islamic regime by executing many leaders
of the old government. By consistently supporting
the most radical elements of the revolution, he was
able to maintain his own position and eliminate other
elements of the revolutionary coalition, such as Marxists,
secular nationalists, and even rival Ayatu'llahs.
Though various political groups coalesced out of the
clerical coalition that had brought him to power, Khomeini
retained supreme control, able to frustrate policies
that he objected to. Under his authority Iran pursued
a xenophobic foreign policy, resulting in disasters
such as American hostage crisis, the eight-year Iran-Iraq
War, and the American economic blockade.

Since Khomeini's program was
primarily religious and moral, devoted to the moral
and spiritual reform of Islamic society, he had few
concrete economic and political programs, apart from
a generalized hostility towards the West.

In the last years of his life,
he was rumored to be ill. In any case, he played little
role in day-to-day affairs, living in seculsion in
a heavily fortified village near Tehran. Nonetheless,
he retained the capacity to intervene in affairs if
he chose, as his condemnation of the British author
Salman Rushdie in 1989 proved. He died of complications
following surgery on 4 June 1989 in Tehran.

Khomeini and the Baha'is.
Khomeini shared the distaste of many (though not
all) Shi`i clerics for Baha'is. His first contact
with Baha'is was evidently in Simnan in 1930, where
he tried to organize an anti-Baha'i meeting. Later
his hatred for Baha'is, Jews, and the Pahlavi regime
coalesced, convincing him that the three groups were
in league to destroy Islam. Thus Khomeini supported
the anti-Baha'i pogroms of the 1950s and in 1963 accused
the government of using local government reforms as
a device to favor the Baha'is.

After his return to Iran in
1979 Khomeini refused to include Baha'is among the
religious minorities protected by the Islamic regime.
There can be little doubt that the persecutions of
the Baha'is in Iran under the Islamic regime were conducted
with the consent of Khomeini, though they were generally
initiated by particular groups within the revolutionary
coalition and carried out by lower-level officials.

Sources: Almost every
book published about the Iranian Revolution deals with
Khomeini at length. An imperfect and generally hostile
biography is Amir Taheri, The Spirit of Allah
(Bethesda: Adler ` Adler, 1986). A study of the development
of his intellectual views is found in Hamid Dabashi,
Theology of Discontent (New York: NYU Press,
1993), ch. 8 and passim. Khomeini's works have been
zealously published in Iran since the revolution though
some post hoc editing has taken place. A representative
sample by a good scholar is Islam and Revolution:
Writings and Declarations of Imam Khomeini, trans.
Hamid Algar (Berkeley: Mizan Press, 1981). There are
many translations of varying quality produced by or
on behalf of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Miscellaneous
historical and doctrinal topics

Seven Proofs

The Persian. Dala'il-i-Sab`ih
is a major polemical work of the Bab in which he justifies
his religion and his claims to prophethood to an unidentified
and evidently sceptical inquirer who is said to have
written and asked for proofs of the Bab's mission.
There are actually two works with this title, a longer
version in Persian and a shorter version in Arabic.
The Persian text mentions that it being written in
Maku and that four years of the revelation had elapsed,
that is in late 1847 or early 1848. The individual
for whom the work was written is not known, but the
text mentions that he was a student of Siyyid Kazim
and had met Mulla Husayn and the content indicates
that he was not a confirmed believer. Azal claimed
that the recipient was the Bab's secretary, Siyyid
Husayn Yazdi, and Fadil-i-Mazandarani believed that
the recipient was Mulla Muhammad-Taqi Harawi, a Shaykhi
who was converted by Mulla Husayn in Isfahan but who
later abandoned the religion and wrote a refutation
of the Bab (Brown, Catalogue and Description,
p. 448; AAK 4:109). Since the former remained a firm
Babi and the latter is referred to as a third person
in the text, the matter is still unsettled (the preceding
is based on MacEoin, Sources, pp. 86Ð87).

The Seven Proofs seems to
have been popular among the Babis; after the death
of the Bab Mirza Ahmad Katib was able to earn a modest
living copying it and the Persian Bayan for the Babis
(DB 592), and at least thirteen manuscripts of the
Persian text and three of the Arabic text exist in
the hands of various Babi and Baha'i scribes.

The doctrines of the Seven
Proofs closely resemble those of the Bayan, which was
written about the same time. The chief theme of the
work is the standard by which the Bab's claim to prophethood
is to be evaluated. He argues that according to the
Qur'an, a prophet is to be judged by his verses (ayat),
a word that Muslims interpreted as meaning both "writings"
and "evidentiary signs." Taking for granted that his
own writings were comparable to the Qur'an, he argued
that only God can reveal scripture and that the greatest
miracle of Muhammad was that no one until the Bab had
been able to compose anything comparable to the Qur'an.
The verses of God must be greater than the miracles
of the prophets of old, since the Qur'an, the only
evidentiary miracle of Muhammad, abrogated their religions.
Finally, whereas it took Muhammad twenty-three years
to reveal the Qur'an, the Bab, who composed his works
with extreme rapidity, had revealed works of comparable
size in two days and nights, despite his not having
had a conventional theological education.

The Bab, arguing against the
usual Muslim reluctance to accept the possibility of
revelation after Muhammad, points out that the Muslim
belief that Islam abrodgated Judaism and Christianity
implies the obligation to accept other prophets if
they come with inimitable revealed writings. This
obligations applies to the Babis as well, who were
counselled to accept Him Whom God shall make manifest,
the messiah of the Babis, whom Baha'is identify with
Baha'u'llah.

The Persian Seven Proofs contains
a number of passages of historical importance, the
most important being the Bab's explanation of the gradual
revelation of his station.

Sources: An edition
has been published by the Azalis in Iran; Abu'l-Fadl
Bayda'i, ed., Dala'il-i-Sab`ih (Tehran: Ism-i-A`zam,
n.d.). Known MSS are listed in MacEoin, Sources,
p. 185. I have used Cambridge Browne F.25 in the preparation
of this article. I have not seen the Arabic version.
A full French translation is A. L. M. Nicolas, Le
Livre des Sept Preuves (Paris, 1902). English
selections are found in SWB ??. See also AAK 4:108Ð15;
Amanat, Resurrection 161, 193Ð94, 199, 375,
384; BBR 37, 39; MH 2:496; QI 202, 206, 1645Ð52; God
Passes By, 26; Muhadarat 837-39.

Suratu'l-Haykal

The "Tablet of the
Temple" is a major Arabic tablet of Baha'u'llah containing
a mystical interpretation of the body (haykal)
of the Manifestation of God. Surah, the term
used for chapters of the Qur'an,.is used for many of
Baha'u'llah's Arabic writings, especially those written
in the style of the Qur'an. Haykal is a loan
word in Arabic. Its Hebrew cognate hkal means
"temple," particularly the Jerusalem temple. In Arabic,
in addition to meaning a Jewish or Christian temple,
it meant the body or form of something, particularly
the human body, or something large. In the Bab's usage,
a haykal is a talisman, particularly one in
the form of a five-pointed star, which in many traditions
represents the human body. In the Suratu'l-Haykal,
the primary sense of haykal is the human body,
particularly the body of the manifestation of God,
but the meaning "temple" is also present.

Another tablet of Baha'u'llah
states that the Suratu'l-Haykal was first written in
Edirne but was revised in `Akka, probably in 1869 (UHJ
memo). Thus it contains no obvious allusions to Baha'u'llah's
exile to `Akka. The numerous passages criticizing
the Azali Babis confirm its dating to the late Edirne
or early `Akka periods. The existence of two editions
probably explains the numerous variations between the
two published texts. It was not written for a particular
individual; when asked about the matter Baha'u'llah
said that he himself was both the addresser and addressee
(Asraru'l-Athar, 5:277).

It was one of the earliest
works of Baha'u'llah to be translated into English.
However, the translation was poor and its recondite
mystical symbolism was difficult for Western Baha'is
to comprehend. The translation went out of circulation
and the tablet is today little known to Western Baha'is
apart from some passages translated by Baha'u'llah.

Contents: The Suratu'l-Haykal
begins with an invocation and a prayer in which Baha'u'llah
praises God as the author of revelation and thanks
Him for the afflication he has undergone for His sake.
He describes how in his greatest afflication, the
Maiden (huriyah) appeared to him calling joyfully,
"This is the Best-Beloved of the worlds, and yet ye
comprehend not." She then addresses the Babis who
had not accepted Baha'u'llah, warning them that God
would raise up another people in their place if they
did not aid Baha'u'llah. The Babis, she says, are
the blindest of people, since they deny the like of
that by which they prove the truth of their own religionÑpresumably
a reference to Baha'u'llah's claim that his own writings
too are divinely inspired. She calls on "this temple"
to arise since all contingent beings are resurrected
by him. She addresses the eye, the ear, and the tongue
of Baha'u'llah, calling on his eye, for example, to
look only at the beauty of God, not at the heavens
or the earth.

Baha'u'llah replies to the
maiden, telling her how Azal, the brother whom he had
raised, had tried to kill him. He tells her that when
this act became known, Azal had written to the Babis
saying that Baha'u'llah had tried to kill him.
(The context suggests that Baha'u'llah's discovery
of Azal's plot was the occasion of writing this table,
but it is not certain.)

Baha'u'llah now moves to the
central theme of the tablet, the exposition of the
metaphysical significance of the haykal. The
four Arabic letters of the word are each associated
with an attribute of God whose Arabic name contains
that letter and with an aspect of God's relation with
the universe:

ha': huwiyih (essence):
God's will

ya: qadir (power, which
is spelled QDYR in Arabic): God's sovereignty

kaf: karam (generosity):
God's bounteousness

lam: fadl (grace):
God's grace

Elsewhere in the tablet he
meditates on the spiritual significance of various
parts of the body of the manifestation: the hem of
his robe, which purifies by its touch; the foot, created
from the steel of might to be steadfast in the path
of God; his breast, which reflects the lights of God
upon all things; and the heart, the repository of all
knowledge and from which new and wondrous sciences
will come forth. Baha'u'llah is told that his temple
has been made the fountainhead of each of God's names
and attributes. He has thus been given the power to
recreate all things, bringing forth suns from motes
of dust. He is called the "Self of God," for the saying
"there is no God but I" applies to Baha'u'llah.

The tablet returns often to
the theme of the disbelief of the Babis, criticizing
Babi leaders for priding themselves on such titles
as "mirror" and "letter," though it is Baha'u'llah
who is the creator of the letters and mirrors. God's
acceptance of their pious deeds is, he warns, dependent
on their belief. He warns that their unbelief will
lead the mass of believers astray. He criticizes those
who accepted the new faith but came to him with questions
about the Shi`ite Imams and Babs, in the end losing
their faith. These, he warns, are like the Jewish
leaders with Jesus. Finally, he insists that it was
he who was prophesied by the Bab in his writings.
He calls himself the Primal Point, a title of the Bab,
thus identifying himself with the Bab.

The Suratu'l-Haykal defies
easy summary, for it is a dense tapestry of mystical
imagery drawn from esoteric Shi`ism, the Qur'an, the
writings of the Bab, and even the Bible.

Relation to other texts.
At Baha'u'llah's orders, the Suratu'l-Haykal was written
as one point of a five-pointed star, with the tablets
to the kings forming the other points. To judge by
the first publication of this tablet, these other tables
were those addressed to the Pope, Napoleon III, the
Czar of Russia, Queen Victoria, and the Shah of Iran.
Of this combined tablet he says, "Thus have We built
the Temple with the hands of power and might, could
ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you
in the Book. . . " (PDC 47), evidently an allusion
to Rev. 21:22Ð23, which in earlier Arabic translations
of the Bible evidently said, "the glory of God [baha'u'llah]
is its light," a passage quoted by Baha'u'llah elsewhere.
Shoghi Effendi identifies an allusion to "the temple
of the Lord" that will be built by "the man whose name
is the Branch" foretold in Zachariah 6:12Ð13 (God
Passes By, 213). In addition to the Bible there
is the famous tradition of Kumayl, a well-known mystical
tradition of Shi`ism, which identifies one of the five
stages of reality as "a light that shines from the
morn of eternity and illumines the temples of unity
(hayakilu't-tawhid). Shi`ite commentators identify
the "temples of unity" as the prophets and imams.
Elsewhere the Imam Husayn is called "the temple of
revelation" (haykalu'l-wahy wa't-tanzil; `Abbas
Qummi, Muntaha'l-Amal, Tehran, 1371/1951, p.
286).

Sources. The text
has been published at least three times: AQA 1:2Ð49;
Kitab-i-Mubin, Tehran, 120 B.E./1963, pp. 2Ð38;
and AQA 4:268Ð300. The early English translation made
by Anton Haddad is Surat'ul-Hykl: Sura of the Temple
(Chicago: Behais Supply and Publishing Board, 1900.
Short quotations are translated by Shoghi Effendi
in PDC 47Ð48, WOB 109Ð10, 138Ð39, 169; God Passes
By, 102, 212. See also RB 3:133Ð46. Research
Department, Baha'i World Center, "Questions about the
Suratu'l-Haykal," unpublished memo, 5 September 1993.
Khazeh Fananapazir, personal communication.

Lawh-i-Aqdas

The "Most Holy Tablet"
is an Arabic letter addressed to a Baha'i, apparently
of Christian background. He may have been Faris Effendi,
the Syrian Christian converted by Nabil-i-Zarandi while
they were jailed together in Alexandria in 1868. It
was written in `Akka, but the exact date is unknown.
Its Arabic uses many Christian terms and quotations
from the New Testament. The title--properly al-Lawhu'l-Aqdas--is
given by Baha'u'llah Himself in the heading of the
tablet. It is sometimes referred to as the "Tablet"
or "Message to the Christians." It is to be classed
with the tablets to the kings and rulers revealed in
the Edirne and early `Akka periods.

After the initial salutation
addressed to the unnamed Christian Baha'i, the bulk
of the tablet is addressed to the Christian community
as a whole--the "followers of the Son," the priests,
the bishops, and the monks.

Baha'u'llah begins by asking
the Christians why they failed to recognize him as
the return of Christ. He points to the Pharisees who
had lived in expectation of the Messiah and had known
the prophecies of the Old Testament yet had rejected
Christ. The monks who fail to recognize Baha'u'llah
are like these.

Baha'u'llah then eloquently
announces his own claim to be the return of Christ,
"come down from heaven, even as he came down from it
the first time." This announcement is expressed in
the prophetic language of the Bible and the Qur'an
with allusions to the Kingdom of Heaven, the River
Jordan, Sinai, the Father, the Hour, and the Face of
God. He chides the Christians for not heeding the
voice of the Bab, "the Crier. . . in the wilderness"--words
that the New Testament applies to John the Baptist.

He calls the priests to leave
their churches and their bells and not to be veiled
by the name of Christ, for Baha'u'llah has glorified
Christ. Now they should summon the people to the Most
Great Name of Baha'u'llah. They should ponder the
fact that although the light of his revelation appeared
in the East, its effects were manifested in the West--perhaps
an allusion to the extraordinary technical progress
of Europe in the nineteenth century. As for the bishops,
he says that they are the stars whose fall had been
prophesied by Christ Himself. He promises the monks
that if they follow him, he will make them his heirs,
though if they fail to do so, he will endure this with
patience. The tablet now becomes a dialogue between
Baha'u'llah and Bethlehem and Sinai, in which these
two holy places of Christianity and Judaism bear witness
to Baha'u'llah's station.

Baha'u'llah addresses the
recipient of the letter again, praising him for recognizing
his Lord. The Muslims had persecuted Baha'u'llah without
just cause, but such people are like the dead. He
should not be disturbed by what they say and should
remain steadfast.

Baha'u'llah asks the recipient
to greet on his behalf another Baha'i, whom he praises
with wordplay on the man's name, Murad, which means
"desired."

The tablet closes with a set
of beatitudes proclaiming the blessedness of those
who have recognized Baha'u'llah and his station.

Sources: The Lawh-i-Aqdas
was first published in Kitab-i-Mubin, a collection
of Baha'u'llah's writings published in Bombay in 18__
[and reprinted as AQA 1????] Shoghi Effendi translated
several passages in PDC, along with similar passages
addressed to the Christian priests. These are incorporated
in the full translation found in TB.

The Arabic text is found in
AQA 1:___ and TB/P, ch. 2. The full English text is
in TB, ch. 2. Extracts translated by Shoghi Effendi
are in PDC 42, 105-7, 110. Eric Bowes, "Baha'u'llah's
Message to the Christians" (n.p.: Baha'i Publications
Australia, 1986) is a brief commentary addressed to
a Christian audience. It includes the full English
translation. Information on the Lawh-i-Aqdas is found
in Ganj-i-Shaygan 164-68, DM/IK 13:2011-14,
and RB 4:227-35. Information on Faris Effendi, the
probable recipient, is found in the sources mentioned
and in RB 3:5-11 and Baha’u’llah, King of Glory,
267-68.

Philosophy

Philosophy (falsafah, from
Gr. philosophia, "love of wisdom"; hikmat, lit. "wisdom.")
is the investigation of the underlying principles of
reality and knowledge by rational means. Philosophy
is distinguished from religion by its reliance on rational
investigation rather than revelation. Traditionally,
the natural sciences were considered part of philosophy,
but modern thought now confines philosophy to those
subjects that cannot be investigated by empirical experiment.

The history of philosophy
is complex, and it is not possible to explain here
even the various conceptions of the meaning and content
of philosophy. Moreover, little research has been
done into the philosophical aspects and antecedants
of Baha'i thought, and almost nothing has been done
to integrate the ideas of the Baha'i writings with
modern philosophy. Therefore, this article will mainly
discuss philosophy as part of the historical background
of Baha'i thought and the references to philosophy
in the Baha'i writings.

Islamic philosophy as background
to Baha'i thought

History of Islamic
philosophy. Philosophy reached the Islamic world
in the eighth century through the translation of a
large number of Greek philosophic, scientific, and
medical works. The Greek philosophical corpus in Arabic
eventually included most of the works of Aristotle,
extracts or summaries of the works of Plato, and various
treatises and commentaries of later Hellenistic philosophers.
By the ninth century there was an indigenous school
of Islamic philosophy, the most important representatives
of which were al-Kindi (9th cent.), al-Farabi (d. 950),
and Ibn-Sina (980Ð1037), known in the West as Avicenna.
These early Islamic philosophers expounded a system
in which Aristotle's logic, physics, psychology, and
ontology were combined with a neoplatonic metaphysics
of emanation. Though later philosophers made many
modifications, this system remains the basis of the
Islamic tradition of philosophy up to the present.
Thus, the reader should be aware that `philosophy'
in Islam refers primarily to the Greek tradition of
philosophy, although some strains of Islamic mystical
theology came to be included in the philosophical curriculum.
Other kinds of Islamic thought, notably dogmatic theology,
might also be included as `Islamic philosophy', but
following tradition they are not discussed here.

Philosophy, however, never
completely overcame opposition from Islamic theologians
and jurists who held that certain doctrines of philosophical
metaphysics were contrary to Islam. As a result, many
of the distinctive features of Islamic philosophy resulted
from the philosophers' attempts to reconcile Greek
philosophy with revealed religion and specifically
Islam. Al-Farabi, the first great Islamic philosopher,
taught that the doctrines of prophetic religion--particularly
concepts such as heaven and hell that were most disputed
between philosophers and theologians--were expressions
of philosophical truths in language suitable for the
masses of people incapable of grasping literal philosophic
truth. Since both philosophers of the Platonic tradition
and Muslim scholars considered religions to be primarily
legal systems, religion thus became a branch of political
philosophy. Philosophy and religion expressed the
same truths on different levels. Al-Farabi's approach
was carried on by Spanish Arab philosophers such as
Ibn-Rushd (Averroes1126Ð1198) and greatly influenced
both Jewish and Christian philosophy in the Middle
Ages. In Islam, however, this approach to reconciling
religion and philosophy died out after Averroes.

In the eastern lands of Islam
Ibn-Sina was more influential. In contrast to al-Farabi,
who like Plato made political philosophy central to
his system, Ibn-Sina mainly confined himself to abstract
issues and began to explore the philosophical implications
of mysticism. As-Suhravardi (1154Ð91) systematically
integrated mysticism and philosophy, producing a system
reinterpreting Ibn-Sina's system on the basis of the
concept of divine light.

The great mystical theologian
Ibn-`Arabi (1165Ð1240) produced a wonderfully complex
system of mystical theology that came to be called
"the Unity of Being" (vahdatu'l-vujud). In
his system all the creatures of the universe are the
self-manifestations of God. His works encompassed
all the lore of Islamic thought and mysticism and burst
on the Islamic world like a bombshell. Even for thinkers
bitterly opposed to him, his system was immensely influential.

Islamic philosophy reached
its greatest heights in seventeenth century Iran in
the so-called "School of Isfahan," whose greatest representative
was Mulla Sadra. In Sadra's system the rationalism
of Ibn-Sina and the mysticism of as-Suhravardi and
Ibn-`Arabi were combined. Although philosophy was
still a matter of suspicion to most Islamic clerics,
a continuous tradition of philosophy has survived carried
on by Shi`i clergy from Mulla Sadra and the
School of Isfahan down to the present.

The Shaykhis
were the most recent distinctive school to arise in
Islamic philosophy. Shaykh Ahmad al-Ahsa'i,
a Shi`i Arab from eastern Arabia, propounded
an elaborate system in which an extreme reverence for
the imams was combined with a philosophical system
owing much to Mulla Sadra. His most distinctive contribution
was the elaboration of an older idea in which a world
of immaterial images intermediate between the physical
world and the world of pure spirit served as the locale
for heaven, hell, and the miraculous events of the
last judgment. Like many Islamic philosophers before
him, Shaykh Ahmad was bitterly attacked
by orthodox clergy. After the death of his successor,
Siyyid Kazim-i-Rashti, a large number of his
followers became Babis. The remaining Shaykhis
broke into several factions and emphasized the Shi`i
orthodoxy of their views, modifying or concealing their
most distinctive doctrines.

The philosophical tradition
deriving from Ibn-Sina and Mulla Sadra has continued
in the theological seminaries of Iran up to the present.
Although it has never ceased to attract the suspicions
of some of the clergy, in recent decades it has attracted
considerable interest and respect in the West. A number
of prominent figures in the 1979 Islamic revolution
in Iran were philosophers of this tradition, including
Khomeini himself.

Doctrines of Islamic philosophy.
Though naturally there is immense variation in the
views and approaches of Islamic philosophers over the
last twelve centuries, some useful generalizations
can be made. Islamic philosophy is based for the most
part on the works of Aristotle, which Islamic philosophers
understood as a systematic treatmentment of philosophy
and science. Where appropriate works of Aristotle
were not available, other classical works filled the
gap, notably the substitution of Platonic works of
political philosophy for the untranslated Politics
of Aristotle and the addition of a late textbook of
Neoplatonic metaphysics, misattributed in translation
under the title of The Theology of Aristotle.
After al-Farabi's abortive attempt to organize philosophy
on the basis of Platonic political philosophy, almost
every Islamic philosoper organized his works on the
basis of some variation of a systematic division of
the sciences worked out by Ibn-Sina:

Theoretical

Logic

Mathematics

Physics (Natural Science)

Metaphysics

First Philosophy (ntology)

Theology

Practical

Ethics

Economics (Household Management)

Politics

While logic, the sciences,
and even ethics eventually were accepted as useful
tools even in Islamic jurisprudence, metaphysical doctrines
came into direct conflict with Islamic dogmatic theology.
While there are innumerable variations, Islamic philosophers
generally shared a view of the universe something like
the following:

God is that one being whose
existence is necessary in itself. God in His essence
is absolutely one and simple. Since an absolutely
simple cause cannot be the direct cause of the complexity
of the world, God in His simplicity cannot be the direct
cause of all the particulars of the world, so that
the tradition Judeo-Christian-Islamic account of God
created the world by simple fiat cannot be accepted.
Instead, God creates directly one other being--an
immaterial intellect or mind variously known as the
primal intellect, the primal will, the first angel,
and the proximate light. This immaterial intellect
creates another, which in turn creates another of still
lower rank. The Islamic philosophers accepted the
Ptolemaic astronomy, in which the earth was at the
center of a set of concentric spheres, each associated
with a planet and each moved by an immaterial intellect.
It is the very complex interrelationships among the
planets and their motions that account for the complexities
of the sublunar world in which we live. The world
itself is eternal, without beginning or end in time.

This metaphysical system came
into conflict with Islamic theology and its representatives
on several grounds. First was the question of authority.
The philosophers claimed to derive doctrines about
God, the universe, and the soul from pure reason.
Islamic philosophers worked prophecy into their systems
and were for the most part sincere Muslims, but it
was clear that prophecy was subordinate to philosophy.
Second, there were several fundamental philosophical
doctrines that directly conflicted with the usual interpretation
of Islam: God did not create the universe from nothing
at a particular moment of time. It was difficult to
explain how God could know particulars or how His providence
could care for the individual person. The night-journey
of Muhammad, heaven and hell, and the last judgment
could not be taken literally. Philosophers were accused
of denying the immortality of the individual soul.

Earlier Islamic philosophers
had attempted to defuse these criticisms, explaining
prophecy and its symbolic elements by subsuming prophecy
under political philosophy and explaining the contradictions
between philosophy and religion in terms of the rhetorical
difficulties of conveying philosophical truths to ordinary
people. Later Islamic philosophy drew on mysticism
and theories about the imagination to solve such difficulties.
As it had in later Greek philosophy, philosophy became
an ethical and mystical pursuit for the individual,
not simply a subject of intellectual investigation.
Thus, philosophical investigation was to some extent
protected by the prestige of mysticism. In addition,
new attempts were made explain religion in terms of
philosophy. The most interesting was the doctrine
of the World of Image. In the material world an image
is normally a form subsisting in matter. The divine
world of the intellects had no images, only pure intellect.
The later philosophers, following Ibn-`Arabi--posited
a world in which images could exist without matter.
This explained a whole range of phenomena ranging
from the images in mirrors, imagination, and dreams
to the visions of mystics, heaven and hell, and the
last judgment. The Shaykhis developed
this idea to its highest degree, arguing that men lived
both in this world and several levels of the world
of image. The material body, for example, dies in
this world but the image body in the world of image
is resurrected as promised in the Qur'an.

The Bab and philosophy

The Bab in the Bayan
prohibited the study of philosophy (qawa`id-i-hikmiya),
along with logic, religious law and legal theory, philology,
and grammar, except insofar as these disciplines might
be necessary for reading his works. He did allow the
study of dogmatic theology (`ilm-i-kalam).
The volume of his writings and the fact that he Himself
was devoid of these sciences made their study unnecessary
(Persian Bayan 4:10). Though the Bab condemned the
study of abstract sciences, many of his most influential
followers were drawn from the Shaykhis
and may be presumed to have had philosophical training
and interests. However, in the few disturbed years
before the suppression of the Babis, it is not likely
that any of them had much time for philosophical activity.
The Bab's writings show some trace of Shaykhi
philosophy and certainly presuppose issues dealt with
in Shaykhi and Islamic philosophy, but
they do not deal directly with philosophical issues.
The relationship of the thought of the Bab and his
followers to Islamic philosophy needs much more study.

Baha'u'llah and philosophy

Though Baha'u'llah
condemned "such sciences as begin in mere words and
end in mere words," he did not renew the Bab's explicit
condemnation of philosophy. He is not known to have
made any particular study of philosophy, but his writings
show an easy familiarity with the concepts and main
issues of Islamic philosophy. Though none of his writings
can be said to be philosophical in a technical sense,
he often uses philosophical terminology and sometimes
treats specifically philosophical questions. An example
is the Tablet of Wisdom (or of philosophy: `Lawh-i-Hikmat'),
written in reply to questions about the eternity of
the universe submitted by the prominent Baha'i philosopher
Aqa Muhammad-i-Qa'ini, Nabil-i-Akbar. In this tablet
Baha'u'llah answers this classical philosophical question,
though in a way that indicates that much of the dispute
about it derives from the limitations of men's minds.
He goes on to summarize the history of the ancient
philosophers, citing the common Islamic belief that
the Greek philosophers were in contact with the prophets
of Israel as evidence that the deistic philosophers
drew their fundamental inspiration from prophetic religion.
`Abdu'l-Baha's Secret of Divine Civilization,
written about the same time, also gives this account
of the history of philosophy.

It should be noted that philosophers
were one of the groups addressed in the Suriy-i-Muluk.

`Abdu'l-Baha and philosophy

`Abdu'l-Baha's writings
also show familiarity with Islamic philosophy, in addition
to those ideas of European philosophy and science that
were becoming known in the Middle East. His earliest
major work, the commentary on the famous Islamic tradition
"I was a hidden treasure," is a philosophical and mystical
refutation of Ibn-`Arabi's doctrine of the unity of
being. The Secret of Divine Civilization touches
many of the themes relating to philosophy that characterize
`Abdu'l-Baha's later references to the subject: philosophy
as a sign of civilization, that the fundamentals of
philosophy derive from the prophets, the praise of
the great ancient philosophers, and the comparison
of the early believers in each religion to philosophers.
These themes are expanded in `Abdu'l-Baha's talks
in Europe and America, where he also criticizes modern
materialistic philosophy, by which he means a naive
faith in the universal applicability of the methods
of physical science. This he distinguishes from the
deistic philosophy of the ancients and of more reflective
moderns.

In such works as Some Answered
Questions, `Abdu'l-Baha frequently uses the concepts
and arguments of Islamic philosophy when he discusses
scientific, methaphysical, and theological topics.
Often he cites the views of the ancient philosophers
in confirmation of his own views. Among the philosophical
subjects specifically addressed by `Abdu'l-Baha in
his writings and talks are proofs for the existence
of God, personal eschatology, epistemology, free will,
the nature of religion and evil, and substantial motion.
Insofar as they assume a philosophy, the writings
of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha employ the late Avicennan
philosophy of illumination current in nineteenth century
Iran. Whether this philosophy is integrally connected
with the Baha'i teachings or whether it is a rhetorical
device sometimes useful for conveying them remains
to be answered.

Shoghi Effendi and philosophy

Shoghi Effendi, who
was educated in Western schools and had studied political
economy and philosophy in college, showed little direct
interest in philosophy in his writings. Though he
permitted the study of philosophy, he generally encouraged
Baha'is to pursue more practical interests at this
time. He makes little reference to contemporary philosophical
schools other than to reiterate `Abdu'l-Baha's criticism
of "materialistic philosophers" and to comment that
this sort of philosophy was an intellectual fad that
would one day pass. His most specific comment on philosophy
is his sharp criticism of the contemporary schools
of Hegelian political philosophy, particularly Communism,
nationalism, and fascism.

Current Baha'i law allowing
the study of philosophy is based on several interpretations
of Shoghi Effendi in which he distinguished between
"fruitless excursions into metaphysical hairsplitting"
and "a sound branch of learning like philosophy" (UD
445).

Philosophical writings
by Baha'is

Among the numerous
clerics who became Baha'is during the lifetimes of
the Bab and Baha'u'llah were a number of men trained
in philosophy. In addition to the many former Shaykhis
who may be presumed to have a greater or lesser training
in philosophy, we may include Vahid, Siyyid Yahyay-i-Darabi,
the Babi leader of Yazd and Nayriz. A number of prominent
Baha'is of the time of Baha'u'llah were also trained
as philosophers, the most notable being Aqa Muhammad-i-Qa'ini,
known as Nabil-i-Akbar, and Mirza Abu'l-Fadl-i-Gulpaygani.
Though both these men wrote on Baha'i subjects, not
surprisingly they dealt mostly with theological subjects
and the defense of their new religion.

It is interesting that the
two greatest modern Iranian Baha'i scholars, Fadil-i-Mazandarani
and `Abdu'l-Hamid Ishraq-Khavari, were
both former `ulama trained in philosophy. Though both
wrote mainly on historical and theological topics,
Mazandarani's great compilation of Baha'i writings,
Amr va-Khalq, shows his knowledge of philosophical
issues.

Three other recent Baha'i
authors have written specifically on philosophy. `Azizu'llah
Sulaymani, better known for his Baha'i biographical
dictionary, prepared a textbook of traditional Islamic
philosophy for the use of Baha'i students. This work,
Rashahat-i-Hikmat, is intended to familiarize
the students with traditional philosophy for use in
understanding Baha'i scripture and for teaching their
faith to those trained in this philosophy. It makes
no attempt to integrate modern Western philosophy or
science. Dr. `Ali-Murad Davudi was chairman of the
philosophy department at Tehran University until his
disappearance shortly after the Islamic Revolution.
He wrote a number of works on the history of Greek
and Islamic philosophy, in addition to articles on
Baha'i philosophical and theological themes. Ruhi
Afnan, a cousin of Shoghi Effendi expelled as a covenant-breaker,
wrote several works on the history of philosophy and
its interrelationship with religion. These include
an ambitious attempt to correlate Babi and Baha'i thought
with the rationalist philosophies of Descartes and
Spinoza.

Only recently have Western
Baha'is begun to write on philosophical themes. Some
examples are listed among the sources mentioned below.

The Greek philosophers
and the Jews

Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha
praise the "deistic" (ilahi, muta'allih) philosophers
of the Greeks. In a famous tablet to the Swiss scientist
A. H. Forel, `Abdu'l-Baha writes:

As to deistic philosophers,
such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, they are indeed
worthy of esteem and of the highest praise, for they
have rendered distinguished services to mankind. (BW
15:37.)

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.),
for example, is mentioned a number of times, usually
favorably. Aristotle's works had been the primary
influence on Islamic philosophy. Islamic philosophers
defended Aristotle and the other pagan philosophers
as sages of antiquity who through reason and mystical
insight or through contact with the Hebrew prophets
had attained knowledge of the unity of God. Various
wise sayings were attributed to him. Baha'u'llah's
reference to him in the Tablet of Wisdom (para. 47/TB
147) and many of `Abdu'l-Baha's references to him reflect
this view of Aristotle. `Abdu'l-Baha thus contrasts
him with the modern materialist philosophers and scientists
(PUP 327, 356-57/KAB 2:299, BW 15:37) and compares
the continued fame of his learning with the oblivion
of the empires of his day (PUP 348/KAB 2:268).
On the other hand, his learning was limited compared
to that of the Prophets and of God (PT 19, SAQ 5:para.
6/p. 15). `Abdu'l-Baha attributes a type of pantheism
to him (SAQ 82: para. 2/p. 290).

There has been considerable
confusion about Baha'u'llah's account of the Greek
philosophers, as elaborated by `Abdu'l-Baha. In his
Tablet of Wisdom, Baha'u'llah had praised Hippocrates,
Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Apollonius of Tyana, and
Hermes Trismegistus. Empedocles, he said, had been
a contemporary of David and Pythagoras a contemporary
of Solomon. Thus, "the essence and fundamentals of
philosophy have emanated from the Prophets" (TB 9,
para. 26, pp. 145). Socrates is praised for having
taught monotheism, an offence for which the ignorant
put him to death.

With the circulation of Baha'i
writings in the West further questions arose. Western
Baha'is questioned why the chronology implicit in the
Tablet of Wisdom differed from the Western histories.
Forel had evidently written to question `Abdu'l-Baha's
criticism of "materialist" philosophers. Other questions
might have been asked had the Western Baha'is of `Abdu'l-Baha's
time known more of classical history: why was Empedocles
placed before Pythagoras? Why did Baha'u'llah seemingly
accept the historicity of Hermes Trismegistus, given
that Western scholars had known for three hundred years
that the works attributed to him were spurious? Explaining
that Baha'u'llah's "Tablet of Wisdom was written in
accordance with certain histories of the East," `Abdu'l-Baha
states that histories from the period before Alexander
the Great had many discrepancies and that such discrepancies
were to be found even in the various versions of the
Bible (Research Department, p. 2). To Forel he explained
that there had been two schools of ancient philosophers,
one deistic and one materialistic. His condemnation
of philosophers had applied only to the materialists
(BW 15:40). The explanation for Socrates' monotheism
is that he studied in the Holy Land, for the Greeks
were polytheists and so Socrates' monotheism must have
had another source. Hippocrates had also lived in
Syria, in the city of Tyre (SAQ 14Ð15, 25.55; SDC 77;
PUP 362Ð63, 406).

The difficulty with `Abdu'l-Baha's
account is that it is not in accordance with what is
known about the lives of Greek philosophers. Empedocles
and Pythagoras were not contemporaries of David and
Solomon. There is no evidence that Socrates went to
Syria. Socrates did not teach monotheism. So why
did `Abdu'l-Baha say and write these things? There
are two kinds of answers: theological and historical.

The theological answer is
simpler. In the time of `Abdu'l-Baha, Western science,
and increasingly Western philosophy, were thoroughly
positivistic, sometimes in a very simplistic way.
`Abdu'l-Baha, as had many religious thinkers before
him, cited the religiously-oriented Greek philosophers
as evidence that reason did not necessarily imply irreligion.
Pythagoras and Plato are old friends of monotheistic
religion. Such statements are additional examples
of Baha'u'llah's and `Abdu'l-Baha's habit of using
their thorough command of high Islamic culture to explicate
Baha'i teachings. But what are the materials that
they drew on?

The key to understanding the
historical origins of `Abdu'l-Baha's account is found
in his statement that "the Tablet of Wisdom was written
in accordance with certain histories of the East."
The pre-modern Islamic world had a very imperfect
knowledge of the history of Greece in general and of
Greek philosophy in particular. `Abdu'l-Baha's account
can be explained by his reliance on the Islamic accounts
of the Greek philosophers. The details of his account
can be explained in three stages:

1. The two schools of Greek
philosophy. On this point `Abdu'l-Baha is on solid
ground. The later Greek historians of philosophy were
fond of arranging philosophers in "schools" or "successions."
Diogenes Leartius, the author of the most comprehensive
surviving classical history of Greek philosophy, divides
the philosophers into the Ionians and the Italians.
The Ionians were the pre-Socratic physicists, or as
it might be translated, "materialists." This succession
included the atomists and those pre-Socratics who attempted
to find a physical first principle of being. The Italians
were the Pythagoreans and Empedocleans, whose interests
were more theological and religious (Diogenes Laertius
1.13Ð14). The same notion is found in pseudo-Plutarch
(Aetius), De placita philosophorum (1.3). Here
we find Pythagoras, Empedocles, Socrates, Plato, and
Aristotle listed among the Italians. This work was
translated into Arabic, and this chapter was incorporated
into various well known Arabic histories of philosophy
(e.g., Shahrazuri [13th cent.], Nuzhat al-Arwah,
ed. Ahmed [Haidarabad: Da'iratu'l-Ma`arifi'l-Osmania,
1396/1976], 1:20). The Italian school acquired added
importance when it was identified by the Illuminationist
school of Islamic philosophers with the "divine sages"
of the Greeks. The Ionians were mostly forgotten by
the Muslims. Thus to later Iranian intellectuals familiar
with philosophy, the Greek philosophers of importance
were the "divine" or "deistic" philosophers of the
Italian school: Pythagoras, Empedocles, Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle. This was a tradition that both Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha know and cite.

2. "Those properly called
wise." Medieval Muslim scholars attempting to
understand the history of Greek thought were confronted
by a variety of fragmentary accounts, none of which
were sufficiently detailed to serve as the basis of
a coherent and comprehensive history. As a result
a variety of independent short accounts were transmitted,
most of which eventually dropped out of circulation.
The most persistent such tradition, found in works
written from the tenth century on, was a list of "those
properly called wise": Luqman, Empedocles, Pythagoras,
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Accounts influenced
by it can be recognized by the error of placing Empedocles
before Pythagoras. According to this account, Luqman
lived in Syria at the time of David and was the first
to be called "wise" (or "a sage" or philosopher, hakim).
Empedocles came to Syria and studied with Luqman.
Pythagoras went to Egypt,where he studied with the
disciples of Solomon. Socrates was a follower of Pythagoras,
who was put to death for refuting polytheism with rational
arguments. Finally, there was Plato, who was Socrates'
student. This tradition would have been known to any
well-educated nineteenth century Iranian.

This account can be traced
back as far as the tenth century philosopher al-`Amiri
and probably derives in whole or part from some Christian
source. It was common for early Christian theologians
to trace the origins of Greek philosophy to Jewish
sources. They found it a useful strategy for undermining
their most formidable pagan opponents, the Neoplatonic
philosophers. Needless to say, there is no evidence
of intellectual contact between the Greeks and Jews
before the conquests of Alexander and little evidence
of significant intellectual contact until even later.
The identification of the Jews as the original source
of philosophy was useful for medieval Muslims as well,
since the Islamic version of the theory of progressive
revelation did not provide an obvious explanation for
pagan philosophy. That this particular account is
the origin of Baha'u'llah's and `Abdu'l-Baha's versions
of the history of Greek philosophy is obvious from
a variety of large and small features.

3. Oral simplification
and quoting from memory. There is one major remaining
incongruity: `Abdu'l-Baha's statement that Socrates
studied in Syria. No such statement is known either
in Greek or Islamic sources--or for that matter, in
Baha'u'llah's writings. `Abdu'l-Baha writes the following:

It is recorded in eastern
histories that Socrates journeyed to Palestine and
Syria and there, from men learned in the things of
God, acquired certain spiritual truths; that when he
returned to Greece, he promulgated two beliefs: one,
the unity of God, and the other, the immortality of
the soul after its separation from the body; that these
concepts, so foreign to their thought, raised a great
commotion among the Greeks, until in the end they gave
him poison and killed him. . . .Eastern histories also
state that Hippocrates sojourned for a long time in
the town of Tyre, and this is a city in Syria. (SWAB
25, p. 55)

This passage attributes two
innovations to Socrates: the unity of God and the immortality
of the soul. In the Islamic versions of the tradition
we have been discussing, these doctrinal innovations
are attributed to Empedocles, not Socrates. Hippocrates
is not said to have lived in Tyre; Pythagoras was.
In each of these cases a less familiar name in the
Islamic tradition--Empedocles and Pythagoras--has been
replaced by a more familiar name--Socrates and Hippocrates.
In the absence of a textual source embodying the confusion,
the probable explanation is simply that `Abdu'l-Baha
read the story in some history and later retold it
several times, having confused Socrates with Empedocles.

As for the larger question
of whether the early Greek philosophers could have
been influenced by Judaism, the answer is no. There
is no surviving reference in Greek to the Jews dating
earlier than the conquests of Alexander, which took
place in Aristotle's lifetime. It is also quite certain
that no such references were known in the first century
A.D., since had they existed Jewish apologists such
as Philo and Josephus would certainly have eagerly
cited them, as would slightly later Christian writers.
The reason why there was no such contact is simple
enough; the Greeks and Jews had no common language.
The Jews of that time used Aramaic as a lingua franca;
the Greeks used Greek. There would have been nowhere
they would have met with a common language. Plausible
arguments can be made for a Zoroastrian influence,
or even an Egyptian influence, on early Greek philosophy,
but not for a Jewish influence.

Sources: The principle
Baha'i scriptures dealing with philosophical subjects
are the Tablet of Wisdom (TB 9:137Ð52), SAQ (especially
parts 4 and 5), PUP (20Ð22, 87Ð91, 253Ð55, 326Ð27,
355Ð61), and Tablet to Dr. Forel (BWF 336Ð48). Baha'i
writers on philosophy have include `A. M. Davudi, Insan
dar @A'yin-i-Baha'i and Uluhiyat va Mazhariyat;
William Hatcher, Logic and Logos; Julio
Savi, The Eternal Quest for God; John Hatcher,
The Purpose of Physical Reality; B. Hoff Conow,
The Baha'i Teachings; Udo Schaefer, The Imperishable
Dominion; M. Momen, "Relativism: a Basis for Baha'i
Metaphysics," in SBBR 5:185Ð217; Robert Parry, "Philosophical
Theology in Baha'i Scholarship," BSB Oct. 1992, 6/4Ð7/2:
66Ð91. Ruhi Afnan, the Revelation of Baha'u'llah
and the Bab: Book 1: Descartes' Theory of Knowledge
(New York: Philosophical Library, 1970); idem,
Baha'u'llah and the Bab Confront Modern Thinkers:
Book 2: Spinoza: Concerning God (New York: Philosophical
Library, 1977). The text of the tradition of "the
five properly called wise" is found, with thorough
commentary, in Everett K. Rowson, A Muslim Philosopher
on the Soul and its Fate (American Oriental Series
70; New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1988), 70Ð89,
203Ð63. On Socrates in Islamic sources, see Ilai Alon,
Socrates in Mediaeval Arabic Literature (Islamic
Philsophy, Theology, and Science, Texts and Studies
X; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991). On texts relating
to Socrates in the Baha'i writings, see Research Department,
Baha'i World Center, Memorandum to Universal House
of Justice, 22 October 1995, which was kindly shared
with me by Robert Johnston. On the history of Greek
philosophy in the Tablet of Wisdom, see Juan R. I.
Cole, "Problems of chronology *****Wendy, you must
have this reference.****

Dreams

The attitude towards dreams
displayed in Babi and Baha'i history and literature
is firmly rooted in Iranian tradition. Iranians have
generally accepted the possibility of significant true
dreams. Thus, the sophisticated philosophical tradition
of which the Shaykhi school was a part explained dreams
as a contact with the World of Image, an intermediary
world between the material and purely spiritual realms.
The authority of true dreams was unquestioned in the
Iranian, the Islamic, and the Shi`ite traditions.
The Shah-Namih, the Iranian national epic, reports
a number of dreams foreshadowing the rise or fall of
rulers and thus granting political legitimacy. The
Qur'an itself was sometimes revealed to Muhammad in
dreams. The Prophet Joseph was the archetype of dream-interpreters
(Q 12:4, 36Ð49). The Shi`ite Imams received inspiration
through true dreams.

The most important class of
dream for the spiritual background of the Baha'i Faith
is that in which a religious figure appears and initiates
or gives knowledge to an individual. The tradition
of receiving revelation in a dream goes back in Iran
to Zoroaster. Throughout the history of Islamic Iran,
claims to religious knowledge or authority have been
made on the basis of dreams in which the Prophet, the
Imams, angels, or other supernatural individuals appeared.
Such dreams took on particular importance for Shi`ism,
since it was believed that the Twelfth Imam was in
concealment but still concerned with the affairs of
his community. It was through dreams that he most
commonly instructed his followers. For Shaykh Ahmad
Ahsa'i, the founder of the Shaykhi school, such dreams
were central. He saw the Imams and the Prophet many
times in dreams and had received from them the authority
to teach (Amanat, Resurrection 131-32, 168).
During the period prior to his declaration of his
mission to Mulla Husayn, the Bab had significant dreams.
It was a dream in which he drank a drop of the blood
of the Imam Husayn's severed head that begin his prophethood.
Likewise, Baha'u'llah's prophethood first came to
him during dreams in the Siyah-Chal.

True dreams may also be symbolic
and require interpretationÑas the example of Joseph
shows. In Baha'i history the most famous interpretation
of a dream is that of Baha'u'llah's father. According
to Nabil (DB 119) Baha'u'llah's father had dreamed
of his son swimming in the ocean as fish clung to his
hair. A dream interpreter had been summoned and explained
this as a prophecy of the boy's future greatness.
Likewise, a mujtahid's dreams warn him of Baha'u'llah's
greatness (DB 111Ð12), and a dream tells a merchant
to prepare to be the Bab's host (DB 217). Such dreams
have continued to play a role in Baha'i piety ever
since.

In Baha'i theology, dreams
are significant only as evidence of the objective existence
of the spiritual realm. Both Baha'u''llah and `Abdu'l-Baha
say that true dreams, dreams in which problems are
solved, and the power to travel beyond one's own body
in dreams are evidence that man's soul is immaterial
(SV 32Ð33; GWB 79:151Ð53; SAQ 61:227Ð28).

In the modern Baha'i community,
dreams have no official authority (LoG 1739:513Ð14,
1745:515), but they often play a role in the spiritual
lives of individuals. Two themes are particularly
significant. Dreams in which `Abdu'l-Baha appears,
often to give some spiritual advice or practical instruction,
seem to be not uncommon and are generally viewed as
spiritually significant. Second, dreams sometimes
play a role in teaching successes. A Baha'i teacher
might report being guided by a dream to a place or
an individual. Sometimes, Baha'i teachers report being
told that a dream, either of them , of `Abdu'l-Baha,
or of some other recognizable Baha'i image, had presaged
their coming. Though such reports have no canonical
authority and perhaps properly belong to the realm
of Baha'i folklore, they do play a role in modern Baha'i
spirituality.

Sources: On dreams
in Iran see H. Ziai, EIr, s.v. "Dreams and Dream
Interpretation."

Evolution: a note

From the mid-nineteenth
century to the present, the issue of conflict between
science and religion has been preeminently identified
with the dispute about evolution and human origins.
The religious implications of Charles Darwin's theory
of evolution by natural selection were recognized as
soon as his The Origin of Species was published
in 1859. Not only did Darwin's theory discredit traditional
religious accounts of the origin of man, such as those
found in Genesis and the Qur'an, it seemed to make
man an animal like any other and thus cast into doubt
any accout positing a supernatural aspect of human
beings. The controversies concerning evolution in
the Christian world are well known and still continue,
especially among evangelical Protestants. Darwin's
theory became well known in the Middle East with a
few decades of its publication through popular accounts
in Arabic and other Islamic languages. A Shi`i cleric
in Najaf wrote a two volume refutation of Darwin soon
after the publication of the first book on the subject
in Arabic. Thus, by the time `Abdu'l-Baha came into
contact with Westerners around the beginning of the
twentieth century, evolution was a subject on which
any serious religious thinker--Middle Eastern, American,
or European--would be expected to take a position on.

`Abdu'l-Baha's best known
statement on the subject is in Some Answered Questions
(ch. 45Ð51). Though no detailed study of this
text and its background has been made, it is usually
understood to advance a theory that man evolved from
a more primitive form to his present state but that
he was always a distinct species, not directly related
to other animals. Such a theory has no scientific
support.

`Abdu'l-Baha's statements
on evolution reflect the unease of many thoughtful
religious people of the time at the use and misuse
of Darwinist concepts. Evolution was being used as
a justification for the abandonment of traditional
religious and spiritual ideas, of standards of decency
and kindness, and of the social solidarity that made
the rich and powerful responsible for the well-being
of the poorer and weaker members of society. The formulation
given in this talk is clearly `Abdu'l-Baha''s attempt
to offer a way out of this dilemma, using the philosophical
and theological concepts of the sophisticated Iranian
philosophical tradition, which since the work of the
great philosopher Mulla Sadra in the 17th century,
had seen the transformation of substance as a key to
understanding the deepest nature of being and the godhead.
Thus, his statements on evolution should be read not
literally as corrections to a particular scientific
theory but as affirmations that scientific truth must
be understood in the context of a spiritual view of
the universe.

R.M.S. Titanic

The biggest news story
during the first few weeks of `Abdu'l-Baha's stay in
America was the sinking of the British passenger steamship
Titanic of the famous White Star Line. He had reached
America on 11 April 1912, a few days before the disaster.

The largest and most luxurious
liner built to that day, the Titanic sank after striking
an iceberg on her maiden voyage from England to New
York on 15 April 1912. Of the 2235 people aboard 1522
drowned or froze, including many prominent English
and Americans. News of the disaster reached America
the next day and filled the papers for weeks to come.
Following a speech to the Persian-American Association
in Washington, D.C., on 20 April, he was asked about
the disaster by reporters. He replied that Europeans
and Americans seemed possessed by a desire for speed,
that it was a pity if such a loss of life had indeed
resulted from nothing more important than the desire
to save a few hours (Ward, 239 Days, citing
Washington Evening Star, 21 April 1912).

At a reception on 23 April,
he returned to the topic of the disaster. `Abdu'l-Baha,
who had chosen to come to America on the more modest
Cedric of the same line, remarked that he had
traveled as far as Naples with some of those who died--presumably
some of the many Syrians among the immigrants in steerage,
almost all of whom died. Explaining that in everything
there is a divine wisdom, he then spoke of death as
the gate to the other worlds of God and said that the
disaster showed both the need for man's technical skill
and his ultimate dependence on God (PUP 46Ð48). `Abdu'l-Baha's
remarks are notable for avoiding both the most common
reactions to the disaster: excessive sentimentality
and intemperate criticism of society, the owners, crew,
or survivors.

Appendices

Personal
Names

A source of particular confusion
for Westerners studying Baha'i history are the complex
system of names used by Persians, particularly prior
to the modernization of Persian names in the twentieth
century. This appendix is intended as a guide to these
names and the the Baha'i laws and customs governing
personal names.

Baha'i laws and customs
relating to personal names.

Islamic customs
concerning personal names. Islamic given names
were almost always Arabic religious names of one of
the following classes:

forms of the name of the Prophet,
such as Muhammad, Abu'l-Qasim, Ahmad, and Mustafa;

names of other holy persons,
such as prophets, imams, and companions of the prophet;

names related to God, such
as `Abdu'llah ("servant of God") and `Abdu'r-Rahman
("servant of the All-Merciful");

for women, names of the wives
of the prophet and other holy women, such as Fatimih,
`A'ishih, and Maryam.

Old Arabic names identified
by Muhammad as unlucky or inappropriate or born by
famous villains of Islamic history fell out of use.
These naming practices were commended by piety and
desire for good fortune and were not laws strictly
speaking.

Babi laws governing names.
In the Persian Bayan the Bab strongly recommended
the use of names relating to God--attributes of God
such as Baha'u'llah, "splendor of God;" Jalalu'llah,
"glory of God;" and Jamalu'llah "beauty of God" or
names of servitude such as `Abdu'llah and Dhikru'llah
"mention of God"--or names of the Shi`i Holy Family--Muhammad,
`Ali, Fatimih, Hasan, and Husayn. Thus the world would
gradually be filled with the names of God (5:4). He
specifically allowed the use of the name `Abdu'l-Bayan,
bayan ("exposition") being in the eyes of the
Bab a name of God (3:4).

Baha'i laws governing names.
There are very few specific Baha'i laws governing
personal names. `Abdu'l-Baha said that children are
not to be named Baha'u'llah, Bab, or Primal Point (Nuqtiy-i-UUla,
another common title of the Bab). Girls are not to
be named Khayru'n-Nisa' ("best of women"), for
this title is reserved for the mother and first wife
of the Bab. The name `Abdu'l-Baha may, however, be
used. Baha'u'llah, writing through his secretary,
says that in this day the names Diya', Badi`, Husayn,
and `Ali are particularly pleasing. In a letter through
his secretary addressed to the Arab Baha'is he says
that they should name their sons Husayn or `Ali (i.e.,
Baha'u'llah's own names) and give them the title (laqab)
`Abdu'l-Baha. Girls should be given the title Amatu'l-Baha
and be named Dhikriyyih, Nuriyyih, Sahihiyyih,
or `Izziyyih (Amr va-Khalq, 3:59-62). These last probably
should be understood as recommendations rather than
binding laws.

Baha'i practices relating
to personal names. The Bab, Baha'u'llah, and `Abdu'l-Baha,
as well as some of the Babi leaders, all were accustomed
to give their followers religious names and titles.
Similar practices existed among Muslims, especially
the clergy, but it was carried much further among the
Babis and the Baha'is. This seems to have served several
purposes. First, a new name indicated a new spiritual
identity. Thus, when Baha'u'llah gave the participants
in the conference at Badasht new names, it symbolized
their membership in a new and independent religion.
Second, the titles given to Babi and Baha'i leaders
indicated their rank. Thus, Mulla Husayn Bushru'i
was given the titles "Babu'l-Bab" ("gate of the gate")
and "Qa'im of the People of Khurasan," a messianic
title. `Abdu'l-Baha was entitled Most Great Branch,
hinting at his station as his father's successor.
Third, religious names were used for security, to protect
the identity of individual believers. Thus, letters
were commonly addressed with names, letters, and numbers
that were both religious symbols and codes.

The names and titles conferred
by the Bab and Baha'u'llah were most commonly names
and attributes of God numerically equivalent according
to the Abjad reckoning to the individual's given name.
Thus, Muhammads were commonly entitled Nabil, both
being equivalent to 92 according to the sum of the
numerical values of the individual letters. Yahya
became Vahid (28). Second, names were sometimes given
because of their meaning or for some reason no longer
clear. For example, the Babi heroine Qurratu'l-`Ayn
("solace of the eyes," which name itself was a nickname
given her by her teacher) was given the name Tahirih
("The Pure One") to indicate her unimpeachable status
within the Faith. Third, a name or title might be
a variation of the individual's previous name or title.
Thus, the Babi leader in Zanjan, whose clerical rank
prior to his conversion had been Hujjatu'l-Islam ("proof
of Islam") was given the title Hujjat ("proof"), a
title of the Hidden Imam previously born by the Bab
Himself. Haji Mirza Muhammad-Taqi Afnan, the builder
of the Baha'i temple in `Ishqabad, was called
by `Abdu'l-Baha Vakilu'l-Haqq ("deputy of God") after
his government title of Vakilu'd-Dawlih ("deputy of
the state"). Fourth, names and titles were given because
of the individual's activities. Thus, Mirza Aqa Jan
Kashani was known as Khadimu'llah ("the
attendant of God") because he was Baha'u'llah's private
secretary. Fifth, sometimes religious names were given
to children at the request of the parents.

When in 1925 Iranians were
required to choose Western-style family names, forms
of these religious names and titles were often used
as surnames. Thus, the family of a Muhammad who had
been addressed by Baha'u'llah as Nabil might chose
to be known as Nabili ("of Nabil") or Nabilzadih ("son
of Nabil"). In other cases, a striking word from a
tablet addressed to the individual in a Tablet might
be adopted as a surname. In other cases an arbitrary
word of Baha'i religious significance might be chosen
as a surname.

Modern Iranian Baha'i given
names are of three sorts. First, names of Babi and
Baha'i saints and heroes, virtues and spiritual qualities,
and attributes of God. Second, and less common, the
old Islamic names. Third, the common Iranian secular
names drawn from Persian history, mythology, and poetic
imagery.

Outside of Iran, names and
titles given by the central figures were much less
common, both because the Baha'i Faith did not spread
outside the Islamic world until the time of `Abdu'l-Baha
and because Western-style names are rarely changed.
`Abdu'l-Baha did sometimes give "Persian"--i.e., Baha'i
religious--names to Western believers, but though these
were treasured, they were not often used in public.
He also frequently named children. Shoghi Effendi
does not seem to have named children nor, with a few
exceptions, given personal titles. Modern Baha'is
do frequently give their children Baha'i names, usually
those of well-known heroes and heroines such as Tahirih,
Vahid, Bahiyyih Khanum, and Hands of the Cause,
but this is by no means universal or obligatory.

A related practice is the
"naming ceremony," a meeting for prayers and celebration
at which an infant is formally named. This was sanctioned
by `Abdu'l-Baha as a substitute for the Christian baptismal
ceremony. Shoghi Effendi, however, did not encourage
this practice. (TAB 149-50; Lights of Guidance, `321;
Amr va-Khalq, 3:262.

Persian and Islamic names

Until 1925 Iranians
did not use modern-style names composed of a given
name and a surname and in fact did not have a single
fixed name at all. Instead, the names of individuals
were built up from given names, nicknames, titles,
and descriptions and varied considerably, depending
on the context in which the individual was mentioned
and his time of life. A single individual might be
known by quite different names in different times and
places. By examining the various parts of an individual's
name it is sometimes possible to deduce a good deal
about him. Most of what follows refers specifically
to men's names. To the extent that women were known
outside their families, their names were built up in
similar ways. More will be said about women's names
below.

It should be noted that titles
of honor and respect tended to become devalued with
time, both because of the Iranian taste for exaggerated
courtesy and because of corruption within the government
offices responsible for granting titles of nobility.
Thus, Khan, originally a title of high officers
of the state, became by the early twentieth century
the equivalent of "Mister."

Each element of the ninteenth
century Iranian name will be discussed in turn. After
that there will be brief discussions of women's names,
traditional Turkish and Arab names as they appear in
Baha'i history, and modern Middle Eastern names.

a. The given name (ism)
is the name given to a child at birth. In Iran
it was usually the name of a prophet or imam such as
Muhammad, `Ali, Husayn, or Ibrahim (Abraham), a variant
form of the name of a prophet or imam such as Ahmad
(an honorific form of Muhammad), Baqir, Sadiq (both
titles of particular imams), or Kalb-`Ali ("dog of
`Ali"), or a name relating to God such as `Abdu'llah,
Allah-Yar ("friend of God), Nasiri'd-Din ("champion
of the Faith"), or Fadlu'llah ("grace of God"). Sometimes
compound forms are used such as Husayn-`Ali, Muhammad-Javad,
or `Ali-Rida, each being a fuller form of the name
of an imam. Sometimes only the last element of the
compound is used, particularly if the second element
is only used with one particular first element. When
Muhammad or `Abd is the first element, it is particularly
likely to be dropped. Examples are Muhammad-Hasan
becoming Hasan, `Ali-Rida become Rida, and `Abdu'r-Rahim
becoming Rahim. Occasionally, ancient Persian names
such as Firuz and Farhad were used. These became very
common in the twentieth century but were less used
in the ninteenth. Turkish names such as Qilich
are occasionally seen.

Although the given name was
never changed, it is less useful than it might be for
identifying individuals. First, there were a great
many people with common names like Muhammad, `Ali,
and Husayn. Second, because these names were so common,
people were likely to be referred to be some nickname
or title, rather than by their given name.

b. Titles used before the
given name tended to show social or religious status.
The following are the most common:

Akhund: A Shi`i
clergyman. Roughly synonymous with mulla. In the
twentieth century "akhund" acquired the pejorative
sense of "ignorant priest."

Aqa: "sir" or "mister." Among
Baha'is it usually applied to men of lower social status,
such as servants. When it is used after the given
name, it indicates affectionate respect. In modern
Persian, it is the equivalent of "Mister." In Turkish
Aqa indicates high rank, and it is sometimes used that
way in Persian, as when `Abdu'l-Baha is referred to
as Aqa, "the Master."

Darvish or dervish:
a wandering mystic. The word usually has a slightly
unsavory connotation, but when used as a title for
a Muslim mystic, it indicates respect and that the
individual was known as an ascetic and mystic.

Hadrat: "His Majesty" or "His
Holiness," used in the form "Hadrat-i-so-and-so."
A title of extreme deference, used only of prophets,
kings, and people of the highest eminence. It is an
honorific used in speaking about someone, not part
of his name as such.

Haji, Hajj: "Pilgrim." Title
acquired by a man who has made the pilgrimage to Mecca.
Its female equivalent is Hajiyyah. It is most commonly
born by clergy and merchants. A "Haji Mulla Muhammad"
would be a cleric, while a "Haji Muhammad" would most
likely be a pious merchant.

Imam: (1) One of the twelve
descendants of the prophet Muhammad who were, according
to the Shi`ites, his legiimate successors.
(2) The leader of public prayers in a mosque. (3)
In modern usage, a Shi`ite cleric of high rank.

Jinab: "Threshold." Used
before a name in the form "Jinab-i-so-and-so." It
is used in speaking about someone important, learned,
or holy, but is less deferential than "Hadrat."

Karbila'i: Title acquired
by one who has visited the Shrine of the Imam Husayn
in Karbila. It is a less prestigious title than Haji.

Mashhadi: Title acquired
by one who has visited the tomb of the Imam Rida in
Mashhad in northwestern Iran. Because a visit
to Mashhad was less expensive than a pilgrimage
to Mecca or Karbila, this title tends to indicate a
lower social class than Haji and Karbila'i.

Mir: a contraction of "Amir,"
"prince," indicating descent from Muhammad. It is
equivalent to "Siyyid."

Mirza: contraction of "Amirzadih,"
"son of a prince." Prefixed to a name, it indicates
that the person is roughly equivalent socially to a
minor government official. As such it could indicate
anyone from a person who simply was literate to a high
government official who was not a member of one of
the ruling tribes. However, after a name it means
"prince." Thus, Mirza `Ali might be a clerk, whereas
`Ali Mirza would be the son or grandson of the Shah.

Mulla: A Shi`i clergyman.
Most mullas were professional clerics, but the title
was also sometimes used by those who had some theological
training but who earned a living some other way.

Pahlavan: a brave and athletic
man. In the nineteenth century, it seems to be a polite
title for lutis, the street toughs who played a major
role in the towns, frequently in alliance with the
clergy.

Shaykh: Elder.
In Baha'i history this title is usually used for Arab
clerics.

Siyyid: a descendant of Muhammad.
Originally, the title meant "lord" or "chief." It
is the modern Arabic word for "mister."

Sultan: King or sovereign.
The usual title of the head of the Ottoman Empire.

Ustad: master craftsman.

c. Titles used after the
given name--e.g., Muhammad Khan, Muhammad
Big, etc.--usually indicate high social station.

`Ali-Shah: Title of
certain mystical leaders in ninteenth century Iran.

Bagum: Lady, Dame. The female
equivalent of Big. A title of respect for a woman.

Big: (pronounced "bay") In
Iran a title of middle-ranking officials, especially
military. In Turkey it was a title of nobility.

Jan: "Heart." It is sometimes
used as a following title and indicates affection or
affectionate respect.

Khan: A secular title
of nobility. In ninteenth century Iran it was used
by high government officials who were not members of
the royal family, especially those from the Turkish
tribes that formed much of the ruling class in Iran.
In the early twentieth century, it was used by middle-class
men.

Khanum: Title of respect
or affection for women. In modern Persian, it precedes
the name and means Miss or Mrs.

Mirza: When placed after the
given name, a prince.

Pasha: Title given
to high political or military officials in the Ottoman
Empire.

Pur: Son of, placed after
the name. It is a common element of modern surnames.

Shah: King. Placed
after the given name, it is the title of the kings
of Iran. Placed before a name, it indicates a saint
or his shrine or a leader of mystics. Thus, Nasiri'd-Din
Shah was the king of Iran, but Shah `Abdu'l-`Azim
was the tomb of a descendant of an imam. See also
"`Ali-Shah" above.

Vazir: Minister. Title of
the holder of a high government post.

Zadih: Son of, placed after
the name. It is a common element in modern surnames.

d. Names from places, tribes,
and family. People with similar names were commonly
distinguished by their place of origin, tribe, or some
ancestor. Such names go at the end of the full name
and usually end in -i, a suffix roughly meaning "of."
Some examples are:

Shirazi, Isfahani,
Rashti, Nuri--of Shiraz, Isfahan, Rasht,
and Nur. Sometimes in Persian the -i is not used,
as in Salih-i-`Arab (for `Arabi), meaning Salih the
Arab. It should be noted that these names frequently
refer to where the individual or his ancestor used
to live, rather than where he currently is: Shaykh
`Abdu'r-Rahman was known to the Babis in Baghdad
as "Kirkuki," because he lived in Kirkuk, but in Kirkuk,
where everyone was "Kirkuki," he was known as Talibani,
the name of his family. Occasionally, such names are
the proper names of families, such as Baha'u'llah's
family, the Nuris.

e. Names from professions:
People were frequently nicknamed according to
their professions, such as Banna (builder), Mujtahid
(jurisconsult), Mustawfi (accountant), Katib (copyist),
Qahvih-Chi (coffee-maker), and Ashtchi
(soup-maker).

f. Titles of nobility (laqab,
alqab.) These took the form of two-word phrases,
usually in Arabic, such as Mu`tamidu'd-Dawlih (Trust
of the State, title of a governor), Maliku'sh-Shu`ara
(King of Poets, title of a prominent poet), Ra'isu't-Tujjar
(Chief of the Merchants, title of an important businessman),
Amir-Nizam ("Chief of State," title of the Prime Minister).
Under the Qajars such titles were granted by the Shah
and were graded to indicate the bearer's occupation
and importance. There were similar titles for noblewomen.
New titles were often given with promotions. Titles
were sometimes, but not always, inherited. In the
time of the Bab such titles were restricted to people
of considerable importance. By the beginning of the
twentieth century, the system had been thoroughly corrupted,
thousands of titles having been granted by dishonest
clerks. The system was abolished by Rida Shah
as part of his modernization of personal names in 1925
but these titles sometimes continued in informal use
or were adapted to form the newly required modern surnames.

These titles of nobility were
either used after the proper name and titles or in
place of it. Thus, the Iranian ambassador to Turkey
might be known as Haji Mirza Husayn Khan Mushiru'd-Dawlih
or just by his title of nobility, Mushiru'd-Dawlih.

Baha'i religious titles sometimes
were formed on the model of these titles of nobility,
as in Mahbubu'sh-Shuhada ("Beloved of
Martyrs").

g. Women's names. These
followed the same patterns as men's names. However,
because women were seldom in contact with many people
outside their own families, their names were generally
simpler. Frequently, they were known by such titles
as Khanum Jan or Bagum Khanum. These
really meant no more than "Grandma" or "the Madam,"
but in a society where women were not likely to be
known outside their family, they were sufficient.
In cases where women were known, they acquired names,
titles, and nicknames in the same way men did.

h. Arab names. Occasionally
classical Arabic names are found in Baha'i literature.
These take the following form:

[given name] ibn (son of)
[father's name] ibn [grandfather's name] etc. These
may be preceded by an honorific title (laqab) such
as Qutbu'd-Din (Axis of the Faith) or Nasiru'd-Din
(Champion of the Faith). After this comes a name of
the form "Abu Muhammad," meaning "Father of Muhammad,"
where Muhammad is, usually, the name of the man's eldest
son. Then comes the given name and chain of ancestors.
Finally there are names ending in -i identifying the
man's home city, tribe, or family.

Thus the thirteenth century
scientist known as Qutb al-Din Abu'th-Thana'
Mahmud ibn Mas`ud ibn al-Muslih al-Shirazi.
His given name was Mahmud, his father's name was Mas`ud,
and his grandfather's al-Muslih. Qutb al-Din was a
respectful title meaning "Pole of the Faith." Abu'th-Thana'
means "father of praise," a polite euphemism substituting
for the patronymic he would have borne had he fathered
a son. "Shirazi" indicates that he came from
Shiraz; before he left Shiraz he had been known
as "Kazaruni," from Kazarun, the family's ancestral
home. In practice, he is most commonly known as Qutb
al-Din Shirazi, a form of his name that his mother
would not have recognized.

The full name is not usually
used, and people are generally known by some distinctive
portion of the name. Thus there are people famous
in Islamic history known as Mu`awiyih (the given name),
Khalil ibn Ahmad (given and father's name),
Abu-Bakr (name of eldest son), Ibn-`Arabi (name of
an ancestor), Nizamu'l-Mulk (honorific title), and
al-Farabi (name of home city).

i. Turkish names. Such
Turkish names as are found in Baha'i history are usually
those of government officials and are rather similar
to Iranian names, although the titles have different
meanings. The reader should be aware, however, that
because the modern Republic of Turkey has adopted the
Roman alphabet, Ottoman Turkish names may be found
spelled either according to the transliteration scheme
for the Arabic alphabet or according to modern Turkish
spelling. Thus, Muammad may also be spelled Mehmet,
reflecting Turkish pronunciation. Modern Turks use
western-style given and surnames.

j. Examples of Persian
names. The following are few examples to aid the
reader in interpreting ninteenth century Persian names.

Siyyid `Ali-Muhammad-i-Shirazi:
the Bab. "Siyyid" indicates he was a descendant of
the prophet Muhammad. "`Ali-Muhammad" was his given
name and combines the names of the Prophet and his
adopted son, the first imam. "Shirazi" indicates
that he came from the town of Shiraz.

Mulla Husayn-i-Bushru'i,
also known as Babu'l-Bab: "Mulla" indicates that he
had had a religious education. "Husayn" was his given
name, for the third imam, and is apparently a shortened
form of his full name, which was Muhammad-Husayn.
"Bushru'i" is from Bushruyih, the village
he came from. "Babu'l-Bab" is a title meaning "Gate
of the Gate," given him by the Bab in recognition of
his having been the first believer.

Mulla Abu'l-Hasan-i-Ardikani,
also known as Haji Amin and Amin-i-Ilahi: "Mulla"
indicated that he had a religious education. "Abu'l-Hasan"
is his given name; it means "Father of Hasan" and is
a form of the name of an imam. He came from Ardikan.
"Haji" means "pilgrim;" while it usually refers to
someone who has been to Mecca, in this case it probably
refers to his having been the first outside Baha'i
to visit Baha'u'llah in `Akka. "Amin-i-Ilahi" means
"trustee of God"; he was the trustee of the huququ'llah,
the religious tax payable to Baha'u'llah.

Manuchihr Khan
Mu`tamidu'd-Dawlih, the governor of Isfahan who befriended
the Bab. "Manuchihr" was his given name, the
name of a legendary hero of pre-Islamic Iran. "Khan"
is the title of a high official, usually not of Persian
origin. "Mu`tamidu'd-Dawlih" means "trust of the state"
and was a title of nobility granted by the Shah.

Mulla Muhammad-i-Zarandi,
also known as Nabil-i-A`zam or Nabil-i-Zarandi. His
given name was Muhammad and he had a very modest religious
education. He came from the village of Zarand. Baha'u'llah
gave him the title of Nabil-i-A`zam, "the Most Great
Nabil," "Nabil" being numerically equivalent to "Muhammad."
He was called "Nabil-i-A`zam" or "Zarandi" to distinguish
him from several other Muhammads also known as "Nabil."

Asiyih Khanum, also
known as Navvabih Khanum, Navvab, Buyuk Khanum,
and Varaqiy-i-`Ulya: the first wife of Baha'u'llah.
Her given name was Asiyih. "Khanum," "lady,"
is added for politeness, as it would be for any respectable
lady. "Navvab," "Navvabih," and "Buyuk" all mean,
roughly, "Madam" or "Lady." Within the household there
would be no need for surnames or the like to tell who
was meant. "Varaqiy-i-`Ulya" means "Most exalted leaf."
Since the Manifestation of God is symbolized by a
tree, a leaf is a female member of the holy family.
Her daughter Bahiyyih Khanum bore this title
after her death.

Arabic

The most important language
of Baha'i scripture is Arabic. The following is intended
as an introduction to the language for those who encounter
Arabic words in Baha'i texts but who have no interest
in learning the language.

History. Arabic (Arab.:
al-`Arabiyyih, lughatu'l-`Arab, lisanu'l-`Arab; Pers.:
Tazi) is the old language of Central Arabia. It is
now spoken in the Arab countries and used as a liturgical
language throughout the Islamic world. It was often
used by the Bab, Baha'u'llah, and `Abdu'l-Baha, particularly
for authoritative texts, prayers, and communications
with Arab Baha'is./

Arabic is a member of the
Semitic family. Thus it is closely related to many
languages of the ancient Near East, notably Hebrew,
and more distantly to ancient Egyptian and many languages
of North and West Africa. It is attested in names
and fragments as early as the ninth century B.C. and
preseres, perhaps because of its long isolation, an
elaborate Semitic grammar already largely lost in biblical
Hebrew. The Classical Arabic now used evolved in the
sixth century in the poetry of Central Arabia. It
owes its importance to its use, with some elements
of the Hijazi dialect, in the Qur'an.

After the Islamic conquests
of the seventh century, Arabic gradually became the
spoken language of the Islamic areas where other Semitic
or Hamitic languages had formerly been spoken. Even
in areas such as Iran and Turkey where other vernaculars
remained in use, Arabic was the language of learning
until the early twentieth century. In the Islamic
world almost all works on religion or science were
written in Arabic, and its vocabulary permeated the
speech and writing of other Islamic languages. In
Persian, for example, almost any Arabic word could
be used; and a Persian text on religion, philosophy,
or science would often be almost indistinguishable
from Arabic.

The increasing importance
of Arabic led to a vast development in its vocabulary;
but largely because of the prestige of the Qur'an the
structure of the written language has not changed greatly
since the time of Muhammad. An educated Arab can still
read even pre-Islamic poetry without much difficulty.
The spoken dialects have, however, changed considerably
in the various Arab countries; but they have rarely
developed into independent written languages. Classical
Arabic is still normally spoken in formal situations
such as university lectures, political speeches, and
broadcasting.

Structure. Like other
Semitic languages Arabic is based on meaningful roots
of three consonants. These roots can be combined with
vowels and other consonants in several hundred forms,
each of which has a particular meaning. The root K.T.B.,
for example, has to do with writing; and when used
with the simple active participle form c1ac2ic3,
becomes katib, meaning "writer" or "scribe." C1ic2ac3
is an infinitive form; hence kitab means "writing"
or "book." Kataba means "he wrote," mukatabah "correspondence,"
maktub "letter," and so on. Word forms commonly seen
in English texts are usually nouns or adjectives (the
two are not strictly distinguished in Arabic) and include:

c1ac2ic3:
active participle: Nasir ("victorious") ??

mac1c2uc3:
passive participle: Mahbub ("beloved"); Majnun ("possessed
by jinn" or "mad"); Maqsud ("Desired One").

c1ac2c3:
noun: `Abd ("servant" or "slave").

There are only two verb tenses
in Arabic, perfect and imperfect, each of which may
refer to past, present, or future. Thus time is not
so precisely defined as in English (cf. KI:115).

Arabic has a set of consonants
different from English, some of which are nearly impossible
for an English speaker to pronounce. In Baha'i contexts
Arabic words are usually pronounced with the Persian
accent.

Arabic in the Baha'i writings.
Many of the Bab's works are written in Arabic--works
written in Qur'anic style, works on theology and law,
commentaries on the Qur'an, and the like. The Bab's
Arabic works pose many difficulties, not only because
of their abstrusity, but also because of their vocabulary
and complex sentence structure. The Bab's enemies
criticized his grammar and accused him of ignorance
of the most elementary rules of the language; he was
supposedly asked to conjugate qala ("to say"),
an exercise for a schoolchild, and to have been unable
to do so. In fact, the difficulty was that the Bab
was unwilling to accept the limitations of conventional
Arabic grammar and style and frequently used nonstandard
derived forms of words. While theoretically there
are a large number of words derivable from any Arabic
root, in fact only a small number are used. The Bab
used many more unknown in Arabic (for example, most
of the 360 words derived from baha' that he
included in a famous tablet.) The effect is a style
intense, unorthodox, challenging, and sometimes obscure.
The Bab Himself claimed that his verses and their
beauty were testimony to the truth of his revelation.
(SB:45, 109; BHD:141; BYP 2:1, 7:2.)

Although most of Baha'u'llah's
writings are in Persian, many of the most important
are in Arabic, and Arabic passages are often found
in tablets to educated Persians--the Arabic tending
to be more formal, the Persian more intimate. Baha'u'llah
often used Arabic when he was addressing the world
or writing something of universal relevance: the Kitab-i-Aqdas
is in Arabic, as are the tablets to the Kings, the
obligatory prayers, the marriage vows, and the prayers
of fasting and burial.

Baha'u'llah wrote a clean
and elegant Arabic, relatively free of both the unorthodox
elements of the Bab's style and the excessive decorativeness
of his contemporaries' literary Arabic. (Much the
same was true of his Persian style.) He generally
wrote in rhymed prose (saj`) in a style reminiscent
of the Qur'an, but somewhat simpler and without archaic
elements. His style is austere, concise, and elevated--well
translated by the King James English commonly used
in Baha'i translations of his writings. Baha'u'llah's
grammar and usage is sometimes influenced by Persian,
as is usual in Arabic written by Iranians. For this
reason Baha'u'llah was sometimes criticized for not
writing pure Arabic. Late in his life he initiated
a project to collect and edit his own writings; one
of the things that was done was to eliminate some of
the "Babi-ism" characteristic of his early Arabic writings.

Generally, Baha'u'llah expresses
Himself in terms familiar to his reader, often using
technical terms from the Islamic religious sciences,
the Qur'an, and Islamic mystical philosophy.

Though `Abdu'l-Baha was completely
fluent in Arabic (He spent most of his life in Arab
countries) and wrote many tablets in Arabic, the bulk
of his works are in Persian. His Arabic style was
of a high order, but somewhat more complex and conventional
than his Father's.

Shoghi Effendi also knew Arabic
well and often used Arabic elements in his Persian
writings, but he generally did not write in Arabic.

Other Arabic Baha'i Literature.
A good deal of Baha'i literature has been published
in the Arab countries, especially in Egypt: Arabic
Baha'i sacred writings, translations of English and
Persian works, and native Baha'i literature. Egypt
was a principal center of Baha'i publishing in the
early twentieth century. More recently, the Lebanese
Baha'i community has published a number of books in
Arabic. The Universal House of Justice uses English
in its communications with the Arab communities.

Sources: For a general
account of the Arabic language, see EI2, s.v.
"al-`Arabiya." On Arabic in Iran see EIr, s.v.
"Arabic." The classic popular introduction to Arabic
literature is R. A. Nicolson, A Literary History
of the Arabs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1907).

METADATA

Views3605 views since posted 2025-07-24; last edit 2025-10-30 07:44 UTC;

previous at archive.org.../walbridge_sacred_time
Language
English
Permission
author
Share

Shortlink: bahai-library.com/6987
Citation: ris/6987

select Collection:
Archives
Articles
Articles-unpublished
Audio
Bibliographies
BIC
Biographies
Books
Chronologies
Compilations
Compilations-NSA
Compilations-personal
Documents
East-asia
Encyclopedia
Essays
Etc
Excerpts
Fiction
Glossaries
Guardian
Histories
Introductory
Letters
Maps
Music
Newspapers
NSA-documents
NSA-letters
Personal
Pilgrims
Poetry
Presentations
Resources
Reviews
Scripts
Software
Statistics
Study
Talks
Theses
Transcripts
Translations
UHJ-documents
UHJ-letters
Video
Visual
Writings

home

sitemap

series

chronology

search:
author

title

date

tags

adv. search
languages

inventory

bibliography

abbreviations

links

about

contact

RSS

new

Choisissez un second texte à lire en parallèle — une traduction, ou tout autre texte.