# A New Religion, Babism

*Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-19 — 1 clipping.*

---

> Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Paul Carus, A New Religion, Babism, bahai-library.com.
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
> 
> The Open Court
> 
> A MONTHLY MAGAZINE
> 
> Devoted to the Science of Religion, the Religion of Science, and the
> Extension of the Religious Parliament Idea
> 
> ⎧ E. C. Hegeler.
> Editor: Dr. Paul Carus              Associates: ⎨
> ⎩ Mary Carus.
> 
> VOL. XVIII. (no. 6)                     June, 1904.                                 NO. 577
> 
> A NEW RELIGION,
> 
> BABISM.
> 
> BY THE EDITOR
> 
> BABISM is the youngest faith upon earth and it promises to play a not insignificant part
> among the religions of the world. It originated, as all other great religions, in the Orient,
> and is remarkable for many reasons, and worthy of a closer study.
> Babists believe in a personal god and positive revelations. They recognize the holy
> books and miracles of other previous religions, especially Judaism, Christianity, and
> Islam, and their faith may, in a certain sense, be characterized as a product of all three.
> It contains elements of all Semitic religions and yet it is different and possesses specific
> qualities of its own. It rose into existence suddenly with an outburst of unparalleled
> religious enthusiasm, and like the Christian faith of the second and third century, its
> growth was favored by the martyrdom of its adherents.
> The first Western historian of Babism was Count Gobineau,1 a French traveller and
> historian who was attracted to it by the dramatic features of the movement and the
> heroism of its martyrs. His reports were completed and brought up to date by Prof.
> 
> Religions et Philosophies dans l’Asie Centrale
> Edward G. Browne, Lecturer in Persian at the University of Cambridge, England, who
> studied it with great sympathy and made through English translations the main sources
> of these remarkable historic events accessible to Western readers.
> Concerning the significance of Babism, Professor Browne says: “Here is something,
> whether wise or unwise, whether tending towards the amelioration of mankind or the
> reverse, which seems to many hundreds, if not thousands, of our fellow-creatures worth
> 
> [page 356]
> 
> suffering and dying for, and which on this ground alone, must be accounted worthy of
> our most attentive study.”2
> This Episode of the Bab, which is so extremely interesting on account of the
> development of a religion in the 19th century before our very eyes and under conditions
> which still allow a careful investigation of the historic facts, is briefly told as follows:
> Mirza Ali Muhammed was born in Shiraz, Persia. In 1844, when about twenty years
> old, he was possessed of great religious enthusiasm and became a source of inspiration
> to all the people whom he met. When asked whether he was the manifestation of “the
> Glory of God,” he declared that they should not worship him as the one whom God
> shall manifest, “for,” said he, “I am only the gate through which man can come to the
> love of God.” His adherents spread all over the country, and he selected eighteen from
> his disciples who were considered the main supporters and apostles of the new faith. He
> called them “the Letters of the Living,” referring to the eighteen letters of the Persian
> alphabet, and included himself as the nineteenth of that number, calling himself the
> “Point”; and these nineteen persons constituted the sacred hierarchy called “the First
> Unity.”
> Now it happened that an avowed Babist, but one of those unfortunates who should
> be confined in lunatic asylums, made an attack upon the Shah of Persia, and thus
> Babism excited the suspicions of the Persian government. Although the assailant of the
> Shah expressly declared that he had committed the crime not at the instigation of any
> other person, the Persian officials believed in the existence of a great conspiracy and
> proceeded with great severity against all Babists. The Bab himself and other devotees of
> the new faith were imprisoned and those only were set free who recanted. Seven of the
> leaders could not be prevailed upon to abandon their belief, and so they died gladly and
> joyously for the faith that was in them. Adherents of orthodox Islam, the national faith
> of Persia, witnessed with admiration the death of the Babists, and many among them
> became convinced that it was a spark of divine inspiration that gave them the power to
> face death so boldly and so joyfully.
> 
> A Traveller’s Narrative, Written to Illustrate the Episode of the Bab. Edited in the original
> Persian and translated into English, with an introduction and explanatory notes by Edward S.
> Brown, M.A., M.B.
> The Bab himself was also condemned to die. He with one of his favorite followers
> was hung up on a rope at the entrance of their prison and a troop of soldiers fired a
> volley at the command
> 
> [page 357]
> 
> of their officer. When the smoke settled the witnessing crowds saw to their great
> astonishment the two men quite unharmed, for none of the balls had taken effect, but
> had only severed the ropes on
> 
> [photo of A Group of Believers in Port Said, with Sayid3 Nor Ul-Din, a first cousin of
> the Bab, in the center.]
> 
> which they had been suspended. The officer in charge declared that he had attended to
> his duty and refused to continue the execution.
> 
> [page 358]
> 
> He was supplanted by another and the prisoners were again suspended on ropes. A
> second volley ended the lives of these two martyrs of the new faith.
> The Bab was dead, but his religion had become an established fact by his
> martyrdom.
> During the time of his imprisonment the Bab had frequently written letters to his
> eighteen favorite disciples whom he called “the Letters of the Living,” to strengthen
> them in their faith under the persecution of the powers of this world. The first and
> second of the “Living Letters” had died a martyr’s death. They belonged to the seven
> great martyrs and the one who held the fourth place in the Babist hierarchy was Mirza
> Yahya, called by the Bab Subh i Ezel, that is “Morning of the Eternal;” or Hazrat, that
> is “Highness of the Eternal;” or Ismn i Ezel, that is “Name of the Eternal.” He left
> Persia, disguised as a dervish, and went to Baghdad, where he joined his exiled brother
> Mirza Huseyan Ali. When the Turkish government sent his brother to the city of Akka
> he was sent to Famagusta, Cyprus, where he is still living.
> During Mirza Yahya’s leadership of the Babists, Mirza Huseyan Ali, a half-brother
> of Yahya, rose into prominence. He had endured much persecution at the hands of the
> Persian government, and after imprisonment of a few months he was finally exiled into
> Baghdad. He stayed there for about twelve years, under the supervision of the Turkish
> police. Two years out of the twelve of his exile at Baghdad, he spent in the mountains
> near where the Kurds lived, not a far distance from the city of Souleymaniah. Then he
> 
> Sayid is a title meaning “lord.” All members of the Koreish tribe, to which the family of
> Muhammed belonged, claim a right to the title.
> was summoned to Constantinople, and was removed to Adrianople. The Turkish
> government did not deem him sufficiently dangerous to have him executed, but
> banished him to Acre, Syria, and he lived comparatively at peace with the government.
> In Acre he was restrained in all his actions and limited to a special territory, but he
> showed so much lovingkindness to all the people around him, especially to the poor and
> suffering, that even the Turkish police respected him and thought him a saint. He lived
> in poverty. Whatever he owned, he gave away to those whom he saw in need of
> assistance, and he died peacefully at an advanced age, leaving four sons and three
> daughters.
> This Mirza Huseyn4 Ali suddenly came to the conclusion during his stay at
> Adrianople that he himself was Beha Ullah, “the Glory of God,” the manifestation
> whose appearance the Bab had foretold. The members of his party who had followed
> him
> 
> [page 359]
> 
> [photo of A Group of Believers in Egypt.]
> 
> [page 360]
> 
> into exile recognized his authority and other Babists in Persia followed their example.
> 
> [photo of A Meeting of Believers in Ashkabad, Russia.5]
> 
> Huseyn Ali is now almost universally recognised as Beha Ullah, that is the one in
> whom God’s glory has become manifest.
> 
> [page 361]
> 
> In the meantime his half-brother Mirza Yahya continues to regard himself as the
> legitimate leader of the Babists. His adherents have dwindled down to a small minority,
> but their arguments as to the justice of the claims of the fourth “Living Letter” who by
> right of
> 
> [photo of A Group of Believers at Akka.6]
> 
> Note – change of spelling in published article.
> The portrait which appears above the assembly is that of Abbas Effendi, one of the sons of
> Beha Ullah.
> The young man in the center is the son-in-law of Abbas Effendi.
> priority has ascended to the first place in the hierarchy of the Babists and was actually
> recognised as the legitimate successor to the leadership by the Bab himself before he
> suffered martyrdom, avail
> 
> [page 362]
> 
> nothing. The Babists of Persia interpret the undeniable facts of their history in a
> different way. They declare that Mirza Huseyn Ali had been recognised by the Bab
> himself and that for the sake of protecting the one in whom God would manifest
> himself, from the persecution of the government, he misdirected the hostility of spies
> and persecutors, and addressed Mirza Yahya with such terms as would indicate him to
> be the leader of Babism, second in authority to no one but to himself, the Bab. Mirza
> Yahya according to the partisans of Mirza Huseyn Ali was merely “a man of straw” and
> the prominence given him by the Bab was a mere blind.
> Whatever the truth may have been, Professor Browne believes that Mirza Yahya
> held the first position among the Babists next to the Bab himself. The Bab did not claim
> that his revelation was final and demanded of his followers that they should continually
> expect the advent of him whom God shall manifest. The Bab had extended to his
> disciples the hope that God would not delay his manifestation for more than 1511 or
> 2001 years (numbers calculated after a complicated fashion from some significant
> words), but there is no historic evidence that he had recognised the manifestation of the
> “Glory of God” in Mirza Huseyn Ali. “Yet,” declares Professor Browne, “in spite of
> facts the future of Babism seems to belong to the latter and the adherents of Yahya are
> rather decreasing than increasing.”
> The adherents of Mirza Yahya are called the Ezelis and the adherents of Mirza
> Huseyn Ali are called the Behais, or Anglicised, Behaists, since they believe that the
> Glory of God, Beha Ullah, has become manifest in Mirza Huseyn Ali.
> It is of great interest to study the growth of the movement and to watch the
> development of its historical documents. Among the older sources of information is a
> manuscript entitled Tarikh i Jadid which the history of Babism describing the
> conditions of Babism at the time of the Bab. Here the difference between the Ezelis and
> the Behais has not yet made its appearance. The two brothers are merely prominent
> leaders and both considered as shining lights among the disciples of their great master,
> the Bab. It is instructive to notice how both the Ezelis and the Behais reject the
> authority of the Tarikh i Jadid, and thus it is probable that no copies will be preserved
> except the three which by fortunate accidents found their way West, viz.; the one in
> possession of Professor Browne, one belonging to the British Museum, and the third
> one acquired by the Institute of Oriental Languages of St. Petersburg. It is not likely that
> the manuscript will be propagated in the original home
> [page 363]
> 
> of its author, Persia. The author claims to be a foreigner, but as Professor Browne has
> convincingly shown, he is a Persian who for good reasons has to conceal his name, and
> Professor Browne seems to think that he knows the name of the author, or, as he
> suggests, the two authors.
> 
> [photo of Ibn Abher, a Teacher of Behaism, in Chains.]
> 
> Among other histories of Babism, we have the reports of the Persian government,
> written by historians who, though recognising the courage of the Babists martyrs,
> misrepresent the movement almost as badly as Christian authors decry the gnostic and
> other sects which have now disappeared and can no longer be studied in their own
> original documents.
> 
> [page 364]
> 
> The Behaist sources, which become more and more numerous, speak of Mirza
> Yahya with indifference and almost slightingly, while they extol from the beginning the
> name of Mirza Huseyn Ali whom they recognise as Beha Ullah, the manifestation of the
> Glory of God.
> 
> *                 *                      *
> 
> To characterise the enthusiasm engendered by Babism, I will quote from a lecture7
> delivered before the International Congress of the History of Religions, held at Paris in
> 1900, by Monsieur H. Arakélian, who had just come back from Persia where he had
> devoted himself to a study of this new religion. He says:
> “The Shah [intent on checking the spread of heresy] tried first peaceful methods. He
> sent Seid Yahya Darabi, the high priest, (Mousted) of Teheran, and head of the Shiite
> hierarchy, a wise and great theologian, and of repute, with a great following of eminent
> doctors of theology for a religious discussion with the Bab to Shiraz. Darabi was sure
> that even in the first meeting he would succeed in demonstrating to the people that the
> Bab was a false Mahdi, a charlatan and a distorter of the sacred dogmas of Islam and
> that he deserved to suffer the punishment of stoning; but imagine the surprise of
> Muhammed Shah, of his viziers and his mullahs, when after a few meetings Darabi
> declared that the Bab was the true Mahdi who was expected by the faithful and sent by
> the omnipotent Allah to preach the truth. Darabi not only gave up his sacerdotal
> 
> “La Légende d’Alexandre-le-Grand chez les Arméniens,” Actes du premier Congres
> International d’Histoire des Religions. Paris: Ernest Leroux, Éditeur. 1902.
> functions, but after the manner of a true and zealous apostle began to travel over Persia
> and to preach the commandments of the Bab. The scandal for the Islam and Shiite
> clergy was immense. The clergy hurled its thunders of anathema against every Shiite
> who would give his adhesion to the new heresy. The government declared that all
> belongings of a Moslem who was suspected of favoring Babist ideas should be
> confiscated, and the clergy went further still. They preached that to kill a Babist was an
> act agreeable to Allah, and the murderer in recompense for his deed would enjoy all the
> happiness of true Moslems in Paradise. But the persecution, as is always the case, had
> quite contrary results from those expected. The number of proselytes increased from
> day to day.”
> Another incident quoted from the same source is not less characteristic:
> “The greatest sensation was caused and an extraordinary im-
> 
> [page 365]
> 
> pulse was given to the propaganda of Babism among the Persian women by the young
> daughter of the famous Mousted of Kazvine. a city where are concentrated the
> theological schools of Shiitism, highly celebrated among the Moslems. The young
> heroine whose name was Kourrat-el-ayné (i e. “light of the eyes”), was the first Persian
> Musselman woman who revolted against the yoke of Islam
> 
> [photo of Mirza Badi, the Carrier of the Message to the Shah of Persia, in Chains.]
> 
> and defended the rights of women. She refused to wear the customary veil or charshave
> and appeared in public with uncovered face, a thing unheard of in Persia. She wrote
> verses and composed songs in glorification of the liberty and equality of men and
> women. Her songs and verses were of great literary finish. They are today
> 
> [page 366]
> 
> still read and admired. Her eloquence, her zeal, and the profound ardor with which she
> preached the new doctrine in the streets of Kazvine, and above all her marvelous beauty
> attracted multitudes of proselytes; and when her uncle, the successor of her father in
> rank of Mousted of Kazvine, cursed and excommunicated her, Kourrat-el-ayne was
> obliged to leave the city, but an overzealous Babist, and admirer of her talent and
> beauty took revenge by killing her uncle, who was forthwith regarded by the Shiites as
> a martyr. Kourrat-el-ayne was obliged to leave the city, but an overzealous Babist and8
> persecution of Babists in 1852 on the order of Nassredin Shah and her body thrown into
> 
> Note – error in published article.
> a pit. Her literary works, her religious hymns, her mystic philosophical verses have
> been published, and are admired by Babists and even by the Moslems.”
> Monsieur H. Arakélian, whom we quoted above, believes that Babism or rather
> Behaism will by and by become the religion of Persia. At the same time, he believes
> that Behaism is a higher development of Babism. Here are his own words, quoted from
> his lecture delivered in 1900 at the International Congress of the History of Religions:
> “Persia, this deplorable wreck of the ancient kingdom of Iran-Turan, of yore so
> glorious, at present confesses the religion of Shiite Muhammedanism. Shiitism preaches
> that after the twelve preachers called Imams, the gate (Bab) of science and truth has
> been closed to man; and this doctrine engendered various sects and heresies, several of
> which (for instance, the Sufis, the Dawudis, the Dahris, the Ali-Allahis) continue their
> existence to the present day, but none of them has attained so great a development or
> counts so many numbers of adherents as Babism or Behaism, for the number of Babists
> is actually calculated to be three millions in Persia, and two millions in Caucasia, in the
> trans-Caspian countries, in Bukhara, Central Asia, and in Asia Minor, among the
> Musselman countries, which is together about five millions. Since the total population
> of Persia is merely seven millions we find that almost half of them confess, although in
> secret, Babism, and, in the opinion of those who have visited Persia and have come in
> contact with the people, there is no doubt that Babism is the future religion of the
> country.
> “Babism is a reaction against the enslaving regime of Islam, a protest against the
> moral oppression which it has exercised and is still exercising over the poor Persian
> people, otherwise so intelligent, so peaceful, so capable of developing a high culture,
> not inferior to other races. Shiite Islam has, through its antihuman and retrogressive
> ideas, through its principle that the gate of science and truth is shut
> 
> [page 367]
> 
> forever to men since the twelve imams, by its disdain and contempt of other nations and
> of secular sciences, thrown Persia and the Persians into a state of economical poverty
> and in a deplorable moral and intellectual condition. The yoke of Islam has been so
> crushing that it has become insufferable, and now Babism rises with vigor against it and
> opposes to it its two principles Ihtihade and Ittifak
> 
> [photo of One of the Later Martyrs.]
> 
> (the unity and solidarity of the human race), for these two principles constitute the
> essential doctrines of Babism, principles which are diametrically opposed to the
> principles of Islam.”
> Monsieur Arakélian judges of Babism more from the standpoint of the Persians
> themselves than of Christian outsiders. He recognises Babism as a progress from the
> traditional Muhammedanism
> 
> [page 368]
> 
> and thus the significance of Babism appears to him in a different light than it would to
> Christians of Western countries, who will naturally be inclined to regard it as a rival of
> Christianity. M. Arakélian points out that the religion of the Bab forms a transition only
> to the broader religion of Beha Ullah. The Bab is in all essential points still a
> Muhammedan, while the doctrines of Babism have broadened out into an altruistic and
> universal religion. Mr. Arakelian says:
> “The founder of Babism has not freed himself of several traditions of Islam. The
> revolution which he inaugurated in the Moslem religion retains certain fundamental
> principles of the faith of Muhammed. (1) The Bab gives preference to the Arabian
> language in which the Koran is written and which is considered sacred among the
> Musselmans. (2.) The Bab preached that one should conquer also the kingdom of this
> world and that one ought to propagate the new religion by force. One should follow in
> this respect the example of Muhammed. (3) He recommended the custom of the hadj
> pilgrimage. (4) He forbade severely the study of foreign languages, above all the dead
> languages. He even recommended in the Beyane to burn secular books and requested
> his followers not to study the secular sciences. (5) He declared his desire not to tolerate
> any individual of another religion in the future kingdom of the Babists. Upon the whole
> he never intended to substitute a new religion for Islam but only proposed to reform the
> religion preached by Muhammed.
> “The work of his successor Beha Ullah was a thorough revolution which upset the
> foundation of Islam. Beha Ullah endows Babism with a cosmopolitan, a truly liberal
> humanitarian, and philanthropic, spirit. He modified Babism in the line of the evolution
> which all universal religions have taken, and if he did not succeed in every point, (for
> he was not a scholar versed in the history of religions and knew only the religions of
> Moses, Jesus, and Muhammed) we must grant that the doctrine preached by him,
> Behaism, is one of the most altruistic religions.
> “Two principles constitute the basis of Behaism Ihtihade and Ittifak, unity and
> solidarity (viz., of mankind). Its aim is “the kingdom of hearts.” Therefore, there should
> be no conquest, no dominion, and no adhesion to political ideas. All men are equal and
> brothers. There are no great ones, no small ones, no nobility, no plebs. All men are
> children of one great country, the earth. There is no special country, — that is to say,
> the idea of patriotism does not exist among the Behaists; the cosmopolitan idea
> dominates entirely. With this respect Beha said that it would be better if all nations, all
> 
> [page 369]
> mankind, would use one language and one universal writing. All the nations are good
> before God. There are no preferred ones. There are no chosen people, no such claims
> are allowed as were made by the Jews and the Moslems. There is no difference between
> the human races, white and negro and yellow; all are equal.
> “Woman is respected, and she enjoys the same rights with man. Marriage cannot be
> contracted without the consent of the young couple. Monogamy is recommended. There
> is only one exception made. If a wife be barren, a man is allowed to take a second wife
> without separating from the first one, but concubinage is strictly forbidden. Women can
> have property in their own right.
> “The study of the secular sciences and of foreign languages is considered
> indispensable. Babists are held to be under obligations to obey and respect the laws of
> the country which they inhabit. Among the forms of government, republicanism is
> deemed the best, or, at any rate, such a form under which all citizens should have the
> same rights and the same duties. Even war for the sake of the faith, the sacred war,
> should be abolished, and Beha recommends to regulate the differences between nations
> by an international tribunal.
> “Beha not only forbids lying of every kind, even where it would serve a good
> purpose, but he remonstrated also against flattery and against a habit of Moslems, that
> of kissing the hands of the clergy or of persons of respect. He forbade asceticism and
> declared that the celibate was not agreeable to God. Babists believe in three prophets.
> Moses, Jesus, and Muhammed, and they regard them to be of equal dignity. The
> believer in the Bab or Beha must first of all believe in the three prophets. Jesus is called
> ‘the Son of God.’ Pilgrimages and masses for the dead or requiems are regarded as
> useless. Fasts are not required.
> “The Babists believe in a future life and in eternity, but they do not admit the
> existence of Hell, or of Paradise, or of Purgatory. Everyone will receive his rewards and
> punishments according to his deeds, but no man knows in what way. As a child in the
> womb of its mother has no idea of the outer world to which it will go, so man of the
> present world can not have any idea of the life after death.”
> Monsieur Arakélian concludes his article with the following comments:
> “There are many stories invented by the malevolence and fanaticism of the
> Moslems concerning the Babists, the Bab and Beha, but a careful study of their sacred
> books puts to naught all these legends. Babism is founded upon altruistic, humanitarian,
> and peaceable principles. It has nothing in common with Islam and agrees according
> 
> [page 370]
> 
> to my opinion much better with the character and inspirations of the Aryan Persians.
> Babism may be regarded as the future religion of Persia and its final victory would in
> my opinion be a great blessing for that country.”
> BEHAISM IN CHICAGO.
> 
> Babism has been introduced into the United States and it may count several
> thousand adherents. The preacher of Babism at Chicago is Ibrahim Kheiralla, and he
> has published a statement of his belief under the name “Beha Ullah.” which means “the
> Glory of God.”9
> Mr. Kheiralla was born in Mount Lebanon, Syria, and is now a citizen of the United
> States. He received his instruction from Abd-el-Karim Effendi Teharani at Cairo,
> Egypt, and restates the belief of the Babists in its purity, adding thereto his own private
> reasons such as he found necessary to convince himself of the truth of his religion. Mr.
> Kheiralla’s teacher was a Mohammedan and so he stated the doctrine from the
> Mohammedan standpoint, while he himself was a Christian from Syria, and thus he
> deemed it necessary to restate the foundations of his faith with a view of refuting
> Christian errors and establishing the Babist conviction as unequivocal truth. The present
> book is meant to be a proof of Babism, which, at least to the author, seems irrefutable.
> Critical minds, however, will naturally find flaws in the few assumptions from which he
> starts, and so his arguments will fail to be convincing to a great number of people.
> Mr. Kheiralla starts his argument with a chapter on the soul. He opposes Rev. Philip
> Moxom, who declares a scientific proof of immortality at present to be impossible. Mr.
> Kheiralla proposes to offer scientific proof. He thinks there is no need of resorting to
> occultism, and trusts that the solution of the difficulties is at hand. He recapitulates the
> evidence which Babism offers as follows: “We possess nine intellectual faculties. They
> cannot be the result of the combination of material elements, which compose the body.
> Back of them must be an intelligent essence, which possesses and exercises these nine
> faculties, and which they qualify. Something cannot come from nothing. This proves
> the existence of the soul.”
> The second chapter deals with the mind, the third with life, sleep, breathing and the
> involuntary motions, descanting also on insanity. Having established the reality of the
> soul and its immor-
> 
> [page 371]
> 
> tality he proceeds to speak of God in chapters 4 and 5, where he rather assumes than
> proves his existence and perfection. He says: “God is one. From Him proceed all things
> which exist, and all His laws, spiritual and material, are in perfect harmony.”
> 
> Beha ‘U’llah (The Glory of God), by Ibrahim George Kheiralla, assisted by Howard MacNutt.
> 1900. I. G. Kheiralla, Publisher. Chicago.
> Babism rejects miracles, but not from unbelief. Babists argue that it would not be
> impossible for God to do miracles, but God being perfect, His laws must be perfect and
> cannot be annulled, or changed, or temporarily laid aside. The miracles related to in the
> Bible are not meant to be understood in a literal sense. They are “symbolical
> expressions of spiritual truth.”
> One instance will be sufficient. Mr. Kheiralla says of the burning bush of Moses:
> “In order to explain to the Israelites, how God had appeared to him, Moses used the
> ‘bush’ as a figure of speech to represent his heart. The symbol is a perfect one. As many
> branches spring from the bush rooted in the earth, so, from the heart, spring the arteries
> and veins which run through the body. Therefore, God appeared to Moses in his heart,
> in the form of fire. ‘Fire’ is the symbol of the spirit of God, and of His love toward His
> creatures; and as every symbol has two points, positive and negative, so ‘fire’ means
> sometimes ‘love’ and sometimes ‘hatred.’”
> The stick of Moses and Aaron, Jonah and the whale, Joshua commanding the sun to
> stand still, the Tower of Babel, the Apostles speaking many languages, Christ changing
> water into wine, the loaves and fishes, the devils going into the swine, the raising of
> Lazarus, and the Star of Bethlehem, are explained in a similar way.
> Babism is opposed to the doctrine of resurrection. Paul’s explanation of the spiritual
> body in I Corinthians, xv.50. concerning the spiritualised resurrection bodies, is spoken
> of as illogical and false. Mr. Kheiralla says: “Scripture, science and philosophy clearly
> prove the impossibility of the resurrection of the body. That souls return to earth in new
> and different bodies, however, is demonstrable from the light of all inquiry.
> Furthermore, it can be shown that this is the true resurrection of Scripture.”
> The Babist view of prayer is perhaps not different from the Christian view. “Prayer
> is worship * * * God does not need our worship * * * We worship God and petition
> Him for our own interests and benefits, for powers, gifts, and higher development.” God
> has promised to hear and answer our petitions and thus the benefit we can derive from
> prayer is “absolutely certain, for He never fails in the fulfillment of His promises.”
> The Babist views differ most essentially from the Christian
> 
> [page 372]
> 
> in the conception of salvation and vicarious atonement. Salvation by blood is rigorously
> rejected, and thus we are told that Christ’s death was not a payment of our sins: “The
> heavy yoke imposed upon Christians of the present day, arises from their claiming
> Messiahship for Jesus.”
> Jesus is regarded not as the Saviour of the world but after all as the Christ. Mr.
> Kheiralla says:
> “We fully believe in our great Master, Jesus the Christ, and in all His teachings. He
> is the highest among all the creatures in the great universe; the first begotten Son of
> God, and His Agent; the Creator is His God, and He is His dearest Son. But we know
> that our salvation is not through His death, but through the great mercy of the Father.
> “Salvation is not escape or exemption from the everlasting torture of hell. True
> salvation is the victory of accomplishment by the soul; the attainment of a privilege
> afforded us by God, in allowing us to come upon the earth.
> “Hell is eternal regret for the loss of that privilege; hell is the soul’s failure to
> accomplish.”
> As to the Bible, we are told that “The truth is in the Bible, but all the Bible is not the
> truth.” The great revelation of God on earth had not been manifest when Christ
> appeared, and Mr. Kheiralla takes great pains to show that none of the prophecies had
> been fulfilled on the appearance of Christ. On the other hand he endeavors to prove that
> the great revelation of God has become manifest in Beha Ullah. Here the typical
> characteristics of the Babist faith appear.
> The Babists in Chicago belong to the branch of the Behaists, that is they believe that
> Beha Ullah was the manifestation of God, the coming of which the Bab had prophesied.
> Mr. Kheiralla proves by arguments which seem to be very convincing to him and to
> Babists that no other interpretation of the signs by which we shall know Him shall be
> permitted. Beha Ullah, that is “the Glory of God,” was exiled from Persia and lived
> during the end of his life at Akka (Acre), and he must have died there. His sons and
> daughters have inherited spiritual dominion over the Babists. Beha Ullah left four sons,
> called the “Branches,” and three daughters, called the “Leaves.” The oldest son is called
> the “Greatest Branch,” the second the “Mightiest Branch,” the third the “Holiest
> Branch,” and the fourth the “Most Luminous Branch.” They are not like their father, a
> manifestation of “the Glory of God,” but they are simply men to whom the Babists look
> up to with reverence.
> Mr. Kheiralla’s book embodies a number of interesting pictures, among which we
> will mention portraits of the four branches, a tablet with the handwriting of the Bab in
> the shape of a pentagonal star, the tomb of Beha Ullah.
> 
> [TO BE CONCLUDED.]
> The Open Court
> 
> A MONTHLY MAGAZINE
> 
> Devoted to the Science of Religion, the Religion of Science, and the
> Extension of the Religious Parliament Idea
> 
> ⎧ E. C. Hegeler.
> Editor: Dr. Paul Carus            Associates: ⎨
> ⎩ Mary Carus.
> 
> VOL. XVIII. (no. 7)                July, 1904.                                   NO. 578
> 
> A NEW RELIGION.
> 
> BY THE EDITOR.
> 
> [concluded.]
> 
> ABBAS EFFENDI.
> 
> Babism counts more adherents in Persia than one might expect considering the fact that
> it is a proscribed faith. It counts adherents also in Mesopotamia and in Syria and other
> parts of the world. Even America can claim a goodly number of adherents to the new
> faith. In Chicago there is a Babist congregation, the speaker and representative of which
> is Ibrahim George Kheiralla, and a New York lawyer, Mr. Myron H. Phelps, visited
> Abbas Effendi, the present representative of Mirza Huseyn Ali’s family. We shall in the
> following pages present a resumé of both books, that of Mr. Phelps, which gives a
> description of the life and teachings of Abbas Effendi. and that of Mr. Kheiralla, which
> describes the faith and doctrines of the Babists who believe in Beha Ullah.
> Mr. Myron H. Phelps believes that the Christian idea has lost its hold on the
> Western nations. Materialism is increasing and the ethical, social, and political
> standards need some fresh spiritual impulse, but where shall we find it, if Christianity
> itself cannot give it. Mr. Phelps believes that it may be supplied by the teachings of
> Beha Ullah and his son and spiritual successor Abbas Effendi. Convinced of the
> importance of the Babist faith, Mr. Phelps went on a pilgrimage to Acre and visited the
> present representative of the most prominent branch of the Babist faith, Abbas Effendi,
> the son of Beha Ullah, and he undertook to write down for Western readers his life and
> teachings as he had it stated by Abbas Effendi himself.
> The introduction to the book has been written by the Nestor of the Babist religion,
> Professor Edward G. Browne, whom he had the good fortune to meet in Cairo.
> Professor Browne in the preface dwells on the continued spread of the Babist faith, and
> he asks:
> 
> [page 399]
> 
> “How is it that the Christian Doctrine, the highest and noblest which the world has
> ever known, though supported by all the resources of Western civilisation, can only
> count its converts in Muhammedan lands by twos and threes, while Babism can reckon
> 
> [photo of Abbas Effendi. Gusn-i-Azam (The Greatest Branch). Taken over thirty years
> ago.]
> 
> them by thousands? The answer, to my mind, is plain as the sun at midday. Western
> Christianity, save in the rarest cases, is more Western than Christian, more racial than
> religious; and, by dallying with doctrines plainly incompatible with the obvious
> meaning
> 
> [page 400]
> 
> of its Founder’s words, such as the theories of ‘racial supremacy,’ ‘imperial destiny,’
> ‘survival of the fittest,’ and the like, grows steadily more rather than less material. Did
> Christ belong to a ‘dominant
> 
> [photo of Muhammad-Ali Effendi. Gusn-i-Akbar (The Mightiest Branch) . Taken
> 1900.]
> 
> race,’ or even to a European or ‘white’ race? Nay, the ‘dominant race’ was represented
> by Pontius Pilate, the governor, who was
> 
> [page 401]
> 
> compelled to abandon his personal leanings toward clemency under constraint of
> ‘political necessities’ arising out of Rome’s ‘imperial destiny.’
> “It is in manifest conflict with several other theories of life which practically
> regulate the conduct of all States and most individuals in the Western world.
> “Many even of the most excellent and earnest Christian missionaries — not to speak
> of laymen — whom Europe and America send to Asia and Africa would be far less
> shocked at the idea of receiving on terms of intimacy in the house or at their table a
> white-skinned atheist than a dark-skinned believer. The dark-skinned races to whom the
> Christian missionaries go are not fools, and have no object in practising that curious
> self-deception wherewith so many excellent and well-meaning European and American
> Christians blind themselves to the obvious fact that they attach much more importance
> to race than religion; they clearly see the inconsistency of those who, while professing
> to believe that the God they worship incarnated Himself in the form of an Asiatic man,
> — for this is what it comes to, — do nevertheless habitually and almost instinctively
> express, both in speech and action, contempt for the ‘native’ of Asia.”
> There is an additional reason which gives the advantage to the Babist propagandists
> over the Christian missionary. While the latter explicitly or by implication rejects the
> Koran and Mohammed’s prophetic mission, the former admits both and only denies
> their finality. Christian missionaries waste most of their efforts in proving the errors of
> Islam, but they forget that in destroying the Moslem’s faith in their own religion, they
> are mostly making converts to scepticism or atheism, and they very rarely succeed in
> convincing them of the truth of Christianity. The Babist does not destroy but builds
> upon the religious convictions of people. He finds a foundation ready laid, but the
> Christian missionary deems it necessary to destroy the foundation and finds himself
> incapable of laying another one.
> Babism makes a new synthesis of old ideas. It is the entire Eastern civilisation
> united into a new yet thoroughly consistent system. Not only do the Babists incorporate
> in their faith the traditions of the Old and New Testaments, and of the Koran, but also
> some most significant documents of the Manichaeans of the Ismaili propagandists, the
> early Sufis, and also the spirit of profane poets such as Hafiz, the immortal poet of love
> and wine. Professor Browne in his introductory comments to Mr. Phelps’ book further
> 
> [page 402]
> 
> calls special attention to the attitude of the Babists with whom love
> of Beha Ullah is paramount. It is interesting to notice first, their
> uncertainty as to the authorship of many of their own religious
> 
> [photo of Zia ‘Ullah Effendi. Gusni-At’har (The Holiest Branch). Departed October,
> 1898.]
> 
> books; second the unfixed character of most important doctrines such as immortality of
> the soul; third, their inclination to ignore
> [page 403]
> 
> and even suppress facts which they regard as useless or hurtful to their present aims. All
> these marks are characteristic of a growing faith. The Babists are by no means broad
> and tolerant. If they came into power in Persia, a case which is by no means impossible,
> the presecuted would be apt to turn persecutors.
> The Behaists are especially fond of listening to the reading of the epistles of Beha
> Ullah which are mostly rhapsodies, interspersed with ethical maxims, rarely touching
> on questions of metaphysics, ontology, or eschatology. They show a dislike to historical
> investigation and says Professor Browne, “Some of them even showed great dislike at
> his attempts to trace the evolution of Babi doctrine from the Shia sect of Muhammedans
> through that of the Shaykhi school (in which the Bab and many of his early disciples
> were educated), to the forms which it successively assumed in the hands of the Bab and
> his followers.” An English diplomat who knew the Babists thoroughly once said to
> Professor Browne: “They regard you as one who, having before his eyes a beautiful
> flower, is not content to enjoy its beauty and fragrance, but must needs grub at its roots
> to ascertain from what foul manure it derived its sustenance.”
> The first part of Mr. Phelps’s book is devoted to Beha Ullah’s life which we learn
> here from the lips of his daughter Behiah Khanum, one of the Three Leaves, so-called,
> of the new prophet’s family. The story is interesting in so far as it adds the zest of a
> personal narrative to the history of Beha Ullah as related by Professor Browme in his
> several accounts of the Babist movement. We learn also of the accusations made against
> Mirza Yahya who is supposed to have poisoned Beha Ullah, the father of Abbas
> Effendi, but the attending physician walked around the bed of the patient, and repeated
> three times, “I will give my life — I will give my life — I will give my life.” Nine days
> later the physician died. Another physician was called in, but he looked upon the case as
> hopeless. Nevertheless Beha Ullah grew stronger and finally overcame the effects of the
> poison.
> A footnote informs us that the Ezelis, the adherents of Mirza Yahya, claim that
> Beha Ullah had prepared the poison for the purpose of killing Mirza Yahya, but the dish
> of rice containing the poison was prepared with onions, a taste which Yahya disliked;
> and Beha Ullah, thinking that his scheme had been betrayed, deemed it best to take a
> little of the poisoned rice, whereupon he almost died of its effects. Mr. Phelps simply
> states the narrative without giving his own opinion, and there is no need to believe the
> accusa-
> 
> [page 404]
> 
> [photo of Badi ‘Ullah Effendi. Gusn-i-Anwar (The Most Luminous Branch). Taken
> 1900.
> [page 405]
> 
> tion of either party. It is quite common that fanatics are apt to accuse their rivals in
> dignity of the absurdest crimes, and we have here a highly colored story on both sides
> which may be paralleled in almost all the religions of history. The fact that Beha Ullah
> fell sick cannot be doubted; that he had eaten rice together with his half-brother, his
> rival in the leadership of the Babist faith, may also be true, but that either had made an
> attempt to poison the other may be regarded as highly improbable.
> When Beha Ullah died a new schism split up the Babist church, and Abbas Effendi.
> the “Greatest Branch,” became the recognised leader of one party, and Mohammed Ali
> Effendi, the “Mightiest Branch,” the leader of another party.
> The philosophy of Behaism, especially its psychology and its ethics, are related by
> Mr. Phelps, and he adds a few discourses all of which are greatly interesting on the
> standards of truth, on the nature of God and the universe, on spirit, the parable of the
> seed, reincarnation, heavenly wisdom, on heaven and hell, on love, talks to children, the
> poor, the prayer, and similar topics.
> A most charming picture of Abbas Effendi’s daily life is given in the first chapter
> and brings the personal appearance of the man more home to us than can be done by an
> exposition of his philosophy and psychology. Mr. Phelps describes the master of Akka
> in the first chapter of his book.
> 
> THE MASTER OF AKKA.
> 
> “Imagine that we are in the ancient house of the still more ancient city of Akka,
> which was for a month my home. The room in which we are faces the opposite wall of a
> narrow paved street, which an active man might clear at a single bound. Above is the
> bright sun of Palestine; to the right a glimpse of the old sea-wall and the blue
> Mediterranean. As we sit we hear a singular sound rising from the pavement thirty feet
> below — faint at first, and increasing. It is like the murmur of human voices. We open
> the window and look down. We see a crowd of human beings with patched and tattered
> garments. Let us descend to the street and see who these are.
> “It is a noteworthy gathering. Many of these men are blind: many more are pale,
> emaciated, or aged. Some are on crutches; some are so feeble that they can barely walk.
> Most of the women are closely veiled, but enough are uncovered to cause us well to
> believe that, if veils were lifted, more pain and misery would be seen.
> 
> [page 406]
> [photo of Mousa Effendi, El Kaleem. The Eldest Brother of Beha Ullah.”10
> 
> [page 407]
> 
> Some of them carry babes with pinched and sallow faces. There are perhaps a hundred
> in this gathering, and besides, many children. They are of all the races one meets in
> these streets — Syrians, Arabs, Ethiopians, and many others.
> “These people are ranged against the walls or seated on the ground, apparently in an
> attitude of expectation; — for what do they wait? Let us wait with them.
> “We have not long to wait. A door opens and a man comes out. He is of middle
> stature, strongly built. He wears flowing light-coloured robes. On his head is a light buff
> fez with a white cloth wound about it. He is perhaps sixty years of age. His long grey
> hair rests on his shoulders. His forhead is broad, full, and high, his nose slightly
> aquiline, his moustaches and beard, the latter full though not heavy, nearly white. His
> eyes are grey and blue, large, and both soft and penetrating. His bearing is simple, but
> there is grace, dignity, and even majesty about his movements. He passes through the
> crowd, and as he goes utters words of salutation. We do not understand them. but we
> see the benignity and the kindliness of his countenance. He stations himself at a narrow
> angle of the street and motions to the people to come towards him. They crowd up a
> little too insistently. He pushes them gently back and lets them pass him one by one. As
> they come they hold their hands extended. In each open palm he places some small
> coins. He knows them all. He caresses them with his hand on the face, on the shoulders,
> on the head. Some he stops and questions. An aged negro who hobbles up, he greets
> with some kindly inquiry; the old man’s broad face breaks into a sunny smile, his white
> teeth glistening against his ebony skin as he replies. He stops a woman with a babe and
> fondly strokes the child. As they pass, some kiss his hand. To all he says, ‘Marhabbah,
> marhahbah’ — ‘Well done, well done!’
> “So they all pass him. The children have been crowding around him with extended
> hands, but to them he has not given. However, at the end, as he turns to go, he throws a
> handful of coppers over his shoulder, for which they scramble.
> “During this time this friend of the poor has not been unattended. Several men
> wearing red fezes, and with earnest and kindly faces, followed him from the house,
> stood near him and aided him in regulating the crowd, and now, with reverent manner
> and at a respectful distance, follow him away. When they address him they call him
> ‘Master.’
> “This scene you may see almost any day of the year in the
> 
> [page 408]
> 
> Mousa means “Moses,” and El Kaleem “ Speaker With God.”
> [photo of Khadim Ullah. The Servant of Beha Ullah.11 Khadim Ullah served Beha Ullah
> faithfully for over forty years. He survived his master and died in 1901. We are
> informed that he supported the cause of Mohammed Ali Effendi.]
> 
> [page 409]
> 
> streets of Akka. There are other scenes like it, which come only at the beginning of the
> winter season. In the cold weather which is approaching, the poor will suffer, for, as in
> all cities, they are thinly clad. Some day at this season, if you are advised of the place
> and time, you may see the poor of Akka gathered at one of the shops where clothes are
> sold, receiving cloaks from the Master. Upon many, especially the most infirm or
> crippled, he himself places the garment, adjusts it with his own hands, and strokes it
> approvingly, as if to say, ‘There! Now you will do well’ There are five or six hundred
> poor in Akka, to all of whom he gives a warm garment each year.
> “On feast days he visits the poor at their homes. He chats with them, inquires into
> their health and comfort, mentions by name those who are absent, and leaves gifts for
> all.
> “Nor is it the beggars only that he remembers. Those respectable poor who cannot
> beg, but must suffer in silence — those whose daily labor will not support their families
> — to these he sends bread secretly. His left hand knoweth not what his right hand
> doeth.
> “All the people know him and love him — the rich and the poor, the young and the
> old — even the babe leaping in its mother’s arms. If he hears of anyone sick in the city
> — Moslem or Christian, or of any other sect, it matters not — he is each day at their
> bedside, or sends a trusty messenger. If a physician is needed, and the patient poor, he
> brings or sends one. and also the necessary medicine. If he finds a leaking roof or a
> broken window menacing health, he summons a workman, and waits himself to see the
> breach repaired. If any one is in trouble, — if a son or a brother is thrown into prison, or
> he is threatened at law, or falls into any difficulty too heavy for him, — it is to the
> Master that he straightway makes appeal for counsel or for aid. Indeed, for counsel all
> come to him, rich as well as poor. He is the kind father of all the people.
> “This man who gives so freely must be rich, you think? No far otherwise. Once his
> family was the wealthiest in all Persia. But this friend of the lowly, like the Galilean,
> has been oppressed by the great. For fifty years he and his family have been exiles and
> prisoners. Their property has been confiscated and wasted, and but little has been left to
> him. Now that he has not much he must spend little for himself that he may give more
> to the poor. His garments are usually of cotton, and the cheapest that can be bought.
> Often his friends in Persia — for this man is indeed rich in friends, thousands and tens
> of thousands who would eagerly lay
> The name Khadim Ullah means “Servant of God.”
> [page 410]
> 
> down their lives at his word — send him costly garments. These he wears once, out of
> respect for the sender; then he gives them away.
> “He does not permit his family to have luxuries. He himself eats but once a day, and
> then bread, olives, and cheese suffice him.
> 
> [photo of A Preacher of Behaism.]
> 
> “His room is small and bare, with only a matting on the stone floor. His habit is to
> sleep upon this floor. Not long ago a friend, thinking that this must be hard for a man of
> advancing years, presented him with a bed fitted with springs and mattress. So these
> stand in his room also, but are rarely used. ‘For how,’ he says,
> 
> [page 411]
> 
> ‘can I bear to sleep in luxury when so many of the poor have not even shelter?’ So he
> lies upon the floor and covers himself only with his cloak.
> “For more than thirty-four years this man has been a prisoner at Akka. But his
> jailors have become his friends. The Governor of the city, the Commander of the Army
> Corps, respect and honour him as though he were their brother. No man’s opinion or
> recommendation has greater weight with them. He is the beloved of all the city, high
> and low.
> “This master is as simple as his soul is great. He claims nothing for himself —
> neither comfort, nor honour, nor repose. Three or four hours of sleep suffice him; all the
> remainder of his time and all his strength are given to the succour of those who suffer,
> in spirit or in body. ‘I am,’ he says, ‘the servant of God.’
> “Such is Abbas Effendi, the Master of Akka.”
> 
> THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS OF BEHAISM.
> 
> For the sake of completeness we have to add that the Behaist Church has been rent
> again by a schism which at first sight seem to be a personal matter, — question of
> leadership.
> For a long time Abbas Effendi, the oldest son of Beha Ullah, has been the
> recognised head of the Church. He is the son of the wife whom Beha Ullah married
> first, some time before he had declared himself to be the Manifestation of God, and this
> Abbas is known to Behaists as “the greatest branch.” Three young half-brothers of
> Abbas Effendi were born to Beha Ullah by another wife and among them Mohammed
> Ali was called by his father “the mightiest branch.”
> For a long time the leadership of “the greatest branch” was accepted without
> objection, but finally a dissension arose between Abbas Effendi on one side and his
> younger half-brothers on the other, and the Behaists in Persia and other countries began
> to doubt the divine inspiration of “the greatest branch.” In fact some of them declared
> that Abbas Effendi has changed the doctrine of his father and has introduced some
> innovations which are contrary to the spirit of Behaism. It seems that several Behaists,
> including some of the congregations that exist in the United States, no longer recognise
> Beha Ullah’s oldest son “the greatest branch,” but look to Mohammed Ali, “the
> mightiest branch,” as their spiritual guide and head of the Church. Abbas Effendi claims
> that his authority is absolute and that it rests on the testament left him by his father
> 
> [page 412]
> 
> [photo of The Tomb of Beha Ullah. The Interior of the Tomb. The Palace of Behji.]
> 
> [page 413]
> 
> Beha Ullah, and it is true that Beha Ullah declared that his sons, among them “the
> greatest branch,” should spread his fragrances, but similar declarations have been made
> of the other branch, and so the opponents of Abbas Effendi claim that Beha Ullah
> intended to have his son, Mohammed Ali, succeed Abbas Effendi, and that the
> leadership at present has passed to “the mightiest branch.”
> We here will omit as much as possible purely personal complaints and limit our
> report to matters of doctrine.
> The report of Mr. Phelps already indicates that Abbas Effendi must somehow have
> become acquainted with ideas that seem to be Buddhistic, and a critical reader of Mr.
> Phelps’ book might be inclined to think that these thoughts were imputed to him by his
> interviewer, for Mr. Phelps is well acquainted with Buddhism, and so he might have
> suggested some of the answers that indicate a similarity with Buddhist doctrines, but
> such is not the case. Abbas Effendi has actually gone away from the simple Semitic
> soul conception, and teaches a theory of reincarnation that might not be unacceptable to
> the disciples of Shakya Muni. On the other hand, he surrenders the rigidity of
> monotheism, which has always been the cardinal point in the religion of the Semites,
> the Jews as well as the Mohammedans, and propounds a philosophical trinity that
> would appeal to Christians influenced by modern philosophy.
> A lady, Mrs. Rosamond Templeton, who visited Acre and showed great interest in
> Behaism, although she herself is not a Behaist but a Christian, tried to reconcile the two
> parties and proposed that the brothers should meet on a certain date at the tomb of their
> father, which is considered as their common shrine, and show their testaments because
> Abbas Effendi bases upon his testament the claim of leadership. But Abbas Effendi
> would not accede to the terms. He insisted on his claims and refused to show his
> father’s testament to his brothers. Mrs. Templeton’s correspondence is published as a
> pamphlet12 and we here reproduce the most essential passages of her letter to Abbas
> Effendi:
> “The principal accusation which you made against your brothers was that they have
> refused to obey you as the chief of the religion of ‘Bab’ at d’Acre.
> “You state that your authority is based on a Testament given by your venerable
> father, and you say that this Testament is in your possession and that it has been read by
> Colonel Bedrey-Bey. On leaving your house I went directly to the house of your
> brothers in order to present to them your objection. Their answer is that they
> 
> [page 414]
> 
> are absolutely ready to obey the Testament, which has been given by their father on
> condition that they can see this Testament written by the hand of Beha Ullah. This
> question, therefore, is a simple one. Effendi; I propose that you, Abbas Effendi,
> Mohammed Ali Effendi,
> 
> [photo of A Tablet in the Handwriting of the Bab.]
> 
> Bedi Ullah Effendi and myself, with three witnesses chosen by you and three chosen by
> your brothers, an interpreter, an English photographer whom I will bring — I propose
> that these twelve persons shall meet at the sacred tomb of your father at noon on the 7th
> day of
> 
> [page 415]
> 
> December to read the Testament of Beha Ullah and to take a photograph of that
> Testament. You said that I had judged between you and your brothers without hearing
> the two sides, your side and theirs; therefore, Effendi, in order to avoid this fault with
> which you justly reproach me I have written to Mohammed Ali Effendi and to Bedi
> Ullah Effendi, asking that they also shall present their Tes-
> 
> [photo of A Letter of Beha ‘U’llah to Ibrahim Kheiralla.]
> 
> taments during the reunion at the tomb of your father. Will you be good enough to give
> me your answer, written in Arabic, in your own handwriting, as I have asked the same
> courtesy from your brothers?
> Facts for Behaists. Translated and edited by I. G Kheiralla. 1901.
> “If you refuse to show and to photograph the Testament upon which you found your
> authority, you cannot require the acceptance of that authority, for it is certain that if the
> Testament gave you
> 
> [page 4l6]
> 
> this authority you would be quite ready to read it before witnesses and to send
> photographic copies of it to Persia.”
> Having refused to submit his father’s Testament to the inspection of his brothers,
> the opponents of Abbas Effendi declare that he cannot make good his claim. Moreover,
> they believe the Beha Ullah was the great and only manifestation of God and that his
> sons are only venerable expounders of his doctrines but not new manifestations. In
> other words, they are regarded as inferior to him, and Beha Ullah alone is believed to be
> ‘exalted above all those who are upon the earth and in heaven.’ Mr. Kheiralla in the
> name of the Behaists that have rejected Abbas Effendi’s claim declares:
> “Beha Ullah, since He declared Himself, has conclusively proved from all
> Scriptures that He was the Promised One. He has uttered tablets and written epistles
> which attracted the hearts and refreshed the souls. The noble life He lived astonished
> and impressed the people, and His fame spread to all countries. All who knew him
> acknowledged His Supremacy and were awed by the loftiness and greatness of His
> character.
> “His claim that He was the Promised One of the Holy Scriptures and that His
> Appearance was the Greatest, and that it will take place only once in every five
> thousand years, may be found in His many writings. He also proved that a higher virtue
> and greater grace distinguished His day.”
> The teachings of Abbas Effendi may be characterised by the following quotations:13
> Abbas Effendi, in reply to a question of a Behaist concerning the return of spirit (i.e.
> reincarnation), distinguishes five kinds of spirit. He says:
> “As to what thou askest concerning the Spirit and its return to this world of
> humanity, and this elemental space, know that the Spirit in general is divided into five
> sorts, the Vegetable Spirit, the Animal Spirit, the Human Spirit, the Spirit of Faith, and
> the Divine Spirit of Sanctity.”
> For the three first spirits there is no light, for they are subject to “reversions,
> production and corruption.” In other words they are mortal. They originate and pass
> away. There is immortality only for the Spirit of Faith and the Divine Spirit of Sanctity.
> Abbas Effendi says:
> 
> Tablets from Abdul Beha Abbas to some American Believers in the Year 1900. The Truth
> Concerning: (A) Re-Incarnation; (B) Vicarious Atonement; (C) The Trinity ; (D) Real
> Christianity. Published by the Board of Counsel, Carnegie Hall, New York, 1901.
> [page 417]
> 
> “The Spirit of Faith, which is of the Kingdom (of God) consists of the all-
> comprehending Grace, and the Perfect Attainment (or salvation, fruition, achievement,
> etc., as above), and the power of Sanctity, and the Divine Effulgence from the Sun of
> Truth on Luminous, Light-seeking essences, from the Presence of the Divine Unity.
> And by this Spirit is the Life of the Spirit of man, when it is fortified thereby, as Christ
> (to whom be Glory!) saith: ‘That which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.’ And this Spirit
> hath both restitution and return, inasmuch as it consists of the Light of God, and the
> unconditioned Grace. So, having regard to this state and station, Christ (to whom be
> Glory!) announced that John the Baptist was Elias, ‘who was for to come’ before
> Christ. (Matt. xi:14.) And the likeness of this station is as that of lamps kindled (from
> one another): for these, in respect to their glasses and oil-burners, are different, but in
> respect to their Light, ONE, and in respect to their illumination, ONE; nay, each one is
> identical with the other, without imputation of plurality, or diversity, or multiplicity, or
> separateness. This is the Truth, and beyond the Truth there is only error.”
> The idea of trinity appeals to Abbas Effendi and he defends it on the following
> considerations:
> “There are necessarily three things, the Giver of the Grace, and the Grace, and the
> Recipient of the Grace; the Source of the Effulgence, and the Effulgence, and the
> Recipient of the Effulgence; the Illuminator, and the Illumination, and the Illuminated.
> Look at the Mosaic cycle — the Lord, and Moses, and the Fire (i.e., the Burning Bush),
> the intermediary; and in the Messianic cycle, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
> Ghost the intermediary; and in the Muhammedan cyle [sic], the Lord and the Apostle
> (or Messenger Mohammed) and Gabriel (for, as the Mohammedans believe, Gabriel
> brought the Revelation from God to Muhammad,) the intermediary. Look at the Sun
> and its rays, and the heat which results from its rays: the rays and the heat are but two
> effects of the Sun, but inseparable from it and sent out from it; yet the Sun is one in its
> essence, unique in its real identity, single in its Attributes, neither is it possible that
> anything should resemble it. Such is the Essence of the Truth concerning the Unity, the
> real doctrine of the Singularity, the undiluted reality as to the (Divine) Sanctity.
> “As to the question concerning the Atonement on the part of the Holy Redeemer, I
> have explained this to thee by word of mouth in a plain and detailed manner, devoid of
> ambiguities, and I have made it clear to thee as the Sun at noonday, (1.)
> “And I ask God to open unto thee the Gates, that thou mayest
> 
> [page 4l8]
> 
> thyself apprehend the true meanings of these mysteries: Verily. He is the confirmer, the
> Beneficent, the Merciful.”
> While he approaches Christianity in the question of trinity, Abbas Effendi rejects
> “Vicarious Atonement.” He says:
> “There is no such thing as ‘Vicarious Atonement,’ as held and taught by the
> theologians and ‘Churches.’ As it was the custom in the old times to offer sacrifices for
> sins, so did Christ (Glory be to Him!) say in substance, ‘I offer myself as an example
> and as a sacrifice for the safety and salvation of the people, i.e., I am willing to accept
> every disaster and calamity for the sake of guiding the people’ — even death, for He
> was necessarily opposing everybody. I have accepted all things that the people may
> know the Truth as it is. If I wish to guide you to Jerusalem, I must personally accept the
> hardships of the journey first. So Jesus Christ first accepted all the trials, sufferings and
> death for the purpose of quieting the people. Had He not so accepted He could not have
> finished His Work.”
> Reincarnation is explained by the instance of John the Baptist who according to
> Christ was Elijah. Abbas Effendi says:
> “John the Baptist was right in saying that he was not Elijah, considering material
> body, name, time (he came 900 years after Elijah), place, etc. Christ was right in
> declaring that John the Baptist was Elijah in Spirit; thus both were right. The Divine
> Spirit is One only, no matter how many it is manifested in or through.”
> Mr. Kheiralla had visited Acre after he had become a believer in Beha Ullah. He
> saw Abbas Effendi and accepted him at the time as the representative of Behaism, but
> when he became acquainted with Abbas Effendi’s doctrine of immortality which to him
> implies destruction of personal identity, and when he heard of the complaints of Abbas
> Effendi’s younger brothers, he changed his mind and became an adherent of “the
> mightiest branch.” Mr. Kheiralla says in his Behaist pamphlet which appeared under the
> title “The Three Questions”:
> “While I was in Syria visiting, I was not allowed by the diplomatic policy of Abbas
> Effendi to meet any of the Branches, his brothers, or any of the family, or any of their
> followers, just like all those who went there and visited him. So I remained ignorant of
> the facts.
> “Abbas Effendi had, while there, honored me to the utmost degree in the presence
> of his followers. This was the chief cause of my delusion. It is the case of all those who
> have been there to visit him.
> 
> [page 419]
> 
> For he and his followers are past masters in the art of treating visitors wonderfully
> fine.”
> As to points of doctrine the views of Behaism represented by Mr. Kheiralla may be
> condensed in the following quotations:
> “Abbas Effendi has taught plainly that the human spirit is perishable, like the
> vegetable spirit, and the end of it is corruption or mortality; and that it ‘consists of the
> rational (or logical, reasonable) faculty which apprehends general ideas and things
> intelligible and perceptible.’
> “The Pre-existence of man’s soul was taught by Beha Ullah, by the prophets and by
> Christ.
> “Beha Ullah taught us in the book of Heykle, that there are some souls in the
> Pavillion of Greatness and Might, who though they have never been upon the earth, yet
> they shall come here to help the Cause of God and promulgate His Word.
> “Beha Ullah taught us also, that if we come to this earth and do not attain the truth
> for which we came, we shall return to the spiritual realms and resume the positions in
> which we were before our coming to this earth.
> “The Bible, as well as the Koran, teaches, that God cometh to judge the living and
> the dead. How can this be true if there were no Return of the Soul?
> “So we see, that the teachings of Abbas Effendi are not in accordance with the
> teachings of Beha, neither with the teachings of Christ whom he quoted. Christ taught
> us, as did Beha, that the human soul or spirit is immortal, and that it keeps its identity
> after death and that it has its own existence and is distinguishable from all other spirits
> or souls. For Christ taught that the soul of the rich man, after death, went to Hell, and
> there it kept its own individuality and was separated from the Spirit of Abraham, and
> from that of Lazarus; and that it conversed with Abraham from Hell to Heaven, and that
> it was not ‘the Spirit of Faith, which is of the Kingdom of God.’
> “Beha Ullah taught, that His appearance has ended the manifestations, for one
> complete thousand years; but He foretold us that somebody will claim to be a
> manifestation, and warned us from following him.
> “Abbas Effendi has proved beyond doubt, that he is the one against whom the
> warning was uttered.
> “Beha Ullah strictly taught us, in nearly every tablet He uttered to observe the
> Oneness and Singleness of God. He declared Himself to be the Father and Comforter.
> In the letter to the Pope,
> 
> [page 420]
> 
> He said: ‘This is indeed the Father, whereof Isaiah gave you tidings, and the Comforter
> whom the Spirit (Christ) promised.’
> “Beha Ullah taught, in many of his utterances, that there is no son to Him, no
> successor, no equal, no agent.
> “Abbas Effendi teaches, that he is divinely the son of Beha Ullah, and His
> successor. If he is the successor of Beha, he is equal to Beha, for the successor is not
> less than the succeeded. Also the son is not less than the Father. In both cases. Abbas
> Effendi is a claimant; and the teachings of Beha Ullah do not permit this.
> “Beha Ullah had forseen the probability of the schism and so he left the following
> rule for the settlement of disputed points in Kitab-i-Ackdas, p. 20; he said:
> “‘If ye differ in a matter, bring it to God, so long as the Sun is shining from the
> Horizon of this heaven; but when He sets, bring it to what he uttered, verily it suffices
> the worlds.’
> “Abbas Effendi, and his disciples teach that Beha Ullah was like all the other
> prophets; only he was a greater Manifestation, because He was a larger Mirror.
> According to their teachings we must conclude that Beha Ullah was not what He
> claimed, and was not the Father whom the Christians expected. If Beha Ullah was like
> Jesus, He would be merely a vine, like Jesus, though a larger one. But He cannot be the
> Lord of the vineyard, because the Lord of the vineyard cannot be one of the vines which
> He planted. Jesus said, that He was the vine, the disciples were the branches, and the
> Father was the Husbandman, There is a great difference between the vines and the Lord
> of the vineyard or the Husbandman. Beha’s superiority is not realized by Abbas
> Effendi, or for some reason he does not wish to confess it.
> “This point is the greatest one in this religion; for the followers of Beha must
> believe, that Yahoah, the ‘Everlasting Father,’ Beha, is the known God who appeared
> and spoke in Jesus Christ, in Moses, in Abraham, who were His ministers, and at the
> latter days He came himself in the flesh, to judge the living and the dead; and that the
> Unknown Being which cannot be known from the beginning which has no beginning to
> the end which has no end, hath appeared and spoke in Beha Ullah just as Beha Ullah
> appeared and spoke in Jesus Christ and in the other prophets. This Infinite being, the
> ‘Unknowable’ Creator of heavens and earths is called by Beha Ullah the ‘Eternal
> Identity.’ Beha said: ‘Zatul Azel cannot be seen.’”
>
> — *A New Religion, Babism (Used by permission of the curator)*