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

It was represented--no doubt by this bitter foe--to the Turkish Government that Baha-'ullah and his followers were plotting against the existing order of things, and that when their efforts had been crowned with success, Baha-'ullah would be designated king.

[Footnote: For another form of the story, see Phelps, _Abbas Effendi_, p. 46.] This may really have been a dream of the Ezelites (we must subst.i.tute Subh-i-Ezel for Baha-'ullah); the Bahaites were of course horrified at the idea. But how should the Sultan discriminate? So the punishment fell on the innocent as well as the guilty, on the Bahaites as well as the Ezelites.

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

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

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

affirming that he had a vision on the previous night in which he had received this a.s.surance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PART III

BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL (continued)

SUBH-I-EZEL (OR AZAL)

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

According to Mirza Jani, the account which the history contains was given him by Mirza Huseyn 'Ali's half-brother, who represents that the later kindness of his own mother to the young child Yahya was owing to a prophetic dream which she had, and in which the Apostle of G.o.d and the King of Saintship figured as the child's protectors.

Evidently this part of the narrative is imaginative, and possibly it is the work of Mirza Jani. But there is no reason to doubt that what follows is based more or less on facts derived from Mirza Huseyn 'Ali. 'I busied myself,' says the latter, 'with the instruction of [Yahya]. The signs of his natural excellence and goodness of disposition were apparent in the mirror of his being. He ever loved gravity of demeanour, silence, courtesy, and modesty, avoiding the society of other children and their behaviour. I did not, however, know that he would become the possessor of [so high] a station. He studied Persian, but made little progress in Arabic. He wrote a good _nasta'lik_ hand, and was very fond of the poems of the mystics.'

The facts may be decked out.

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

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

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

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

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

Among the names and t.i.tles which the Ezelite book called _Eight Paradises_ declares to have been conferred by the Bab on his young disciple are Subh-i-Ezel (or Azal), Baha-'ullah, and the strange t.i.tle _Mir'at_ (Mirror). The two former--'Dawn of Eternity' and 'Splendour of G.o.d'--are referred to elsewhere. The third properly belongs to a cla.s.s of persons inferior to the 'Letters of the Living,' and to this cla.s.s Subh-i-Ezel, by his own admission, belongs. The t.i.tle Mir'at, therefore, involves some limitation of Ezel's dignity, and its object apparently is to prevent Subh-i-Ezel from claiming to be 'He whom G.o.d will make manifest.'

That is, the Bab in his last years had an intuition that the eternal day would not be ushered into existence by this impractical nature.

How, then, came the Bab to give Mirza Yahya such a name? Purely from cabbalistic reasons which do not concern us here. It was a mistake which only shows that the Bab was not infallible. Mirza Yahya had no great part to play in the ushering-in of the new cycle. Elsewhere the Bab is at the pains to recommend the elder of the half-brothers to attend to his junior's writing and spelling.

[Footnote: The Tablets (letters) are in the British Museum collection, in four books of Ezel, who wrote the copies at Baha-'ullah's dictation. The references are--I., No. 6251, p. 162; II., No. 5111, p. 253, to which copy Rizwan Ali, son of Ezel, has appended 'The brother of the Fruit' (Ezel); III., No. 6254, p. 236; IV., No. 6257, p. 158.] Now it was, of course, worth while to educate Mirza Yahya, whose feebleness in Arabic grammar was scandalous, but can we imagine Baha-'ullah and all the other 'letters' being pa.s.sed over by the Bab in favour of such an imperfectly educated young man? The so-called 'nomination' is a bare-faced forgery.

The statement of Gobineau that Subh-i-Ezel belonged to the 'Letters of the Living' of the First Unity is untrustworthy.

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

[Footnote: Others, however, give it him (_TN_, p. 353).]

I must confess that Subh-i-Ezel's account of the fortune of the Bab's relics appears to me, as well as to M. Nicolas, [Footnote: _AMB_, p. 380 n.] unsatisfactory and (in one point) contradictory.

How, for instance, did he get possession of the relics? And, is there any independent evidence for the intermingling of the parts of the two corpses? How did he procure a crystal coffin to receive the relics?

How comes it that there were Bahaites at the time of the Bab's death, and how was Subh-i-Ezel able to conceal the crystal coffin, etc., from his brother Baha-'ullah?

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

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

SUBSEQUENT DISCOVERIES

The historical work of the Ezelite party, called _The Eight Paradises_, makes Ezel nineteen years of age when he came forward as an expounder of religious mysteries and wrote letters to the Bab.

On receiving the first letter, we are told that the Bab (or, as we should rather now call him, the Point) instantly prostrated himself in thankfulness, testifying that he was a mighty Luminary, and spoke by the Self-shining Light, by revelation. Imprisoned as he was at Maku, the Point of Knowledge could not take counsel with all his fellow-workers or disciples, but he sent the writings of this brilliant novice (if he really was so brilliant) to each of the 'Letters of the Living,' and to the chief believers, at the same time conferring on him a number of t.i.tles, including Subh-i-Ezel ('Dawn of Eternity') and Baha-'ullah ('Splendour of G.o.d ').

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

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

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

dignity of 'Second Point.'

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

DAYYAN

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

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

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

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

MIRZA HAYDAR 'ALI