6.   Allegations against Mirza Muhammad Ali

6.4  Allegations of ‘Preparing Information for Ottomans

6.4.1. Abbas Effendi’s Account
According to Sir Abbas Effendi, in his Will and Testament, “what is the most detestable deviation is his [i.e. Mirza Muhammad Ali’s] alliance with the enemies of god and strangers”.
“Few months ago, in concert with a number of persons, he has broken the Covenant [i.e. Mirza Muhammad Ali] prepared an information, in which no slander and calumny was left unsaid. In it, God defend us, [Sir Abbas Effendi] Abdul Baha was declared to be an implacable enemy and the ill-wisher of the Centre of august Sovereignty [i.e. imperial Ottoman Crown], [to which were superadded] many a such heinous false accusations”.
“They perturbed the mind of the imperial government, At last a commission of Inspection arrived from the seat of His Imperial Majesty’s government [i.e. Istanbul]”.
“Contrary to royal enquiry and justice, nay, with the extreme of justice, the commission conducted inspection, that is to say, the ill-wishers of the Trust besieged the Commission, and, still more, they elaborated and enlarged upon the contents of the information”.
“And the Commission, in its turn, without investigation, acknowledged as true that, god forbid, this servant had raised aloft a banner in this city; had summoned the people together under it; had erected upon Mount Carmel a fortress; had reduced all the inhabitants of these regions into submission and obedience to him; had caused schism in the Religion of Islam; had covenanted with the Christians; and, god forbid, had purposed to cause the gravest breach in the august sovereignty ….”
“But Alas! The Commission of inspection acknowledged as true these-false statements of my brother [Mirza Muhammad Ali] and the ill-wishers, and submitted them to the presence of the Sultan”. “Now this prisoner is overwhelmed by the most great deluge pending the issuance of His Majesty’s may god strengthen him for justice, Iradé, either for me or against me.” (table above S/N 3).

This was Sir Abbas Effendi’s account of the allegations, according to which, alleged information against him by Mirza Muhammad Ali and conspirators led to the despatch of a Commission of inspection, who took the allegations for gospel without investigation, and presented them to the Sultan. This irregular procedure, according to Sir Abbas Effendi, kept him in suspended animation pending the signification of His Majesty’s pleasure in the form of an Irade “either in my favour or against me”. Sir Abbas Effendi does not state whether His Majesty was ever pleased to signify his pleasure in this respect.

6.4.2. ANSA’s Account
Contradicting “the Centre of the Covenant” Sir Abbas Effendi, alleged victim of the allegation, “the American National Spiritual Assembly, acting with the advice and approval of the First Guardian Shoghi Effendi, in revised edition of 1937 of Esslemont’s Bahaullah and the New Era, PP. 73-75,” states that there were “two Commissions, one in “1904”, and the other in “1907”.
According to this account Sir Abbas Effendi “refused the charges and expressed his entire readiness to submit to any sentence the tribunal chose to impose.” Sir Abbas Effendi, the account goes on, “declared that if they should throw him into jail, drag him through the streets, curse him, spit upon him, stone him, heap him all sorts of ignominy, hang him or shoot him he would still be happy.” Unfortunately the account does not state before which of “the two commission” Sir Abbas Effendi “refuted the charges” and made these “statements”.
“The last investigating Commission”, the account concludes, “departed for Istanbul, prepared to report that the charges against Sir Abbas Effendi had been substantiated and to recommend his exile or execution, when the Revolution broke out, the Commission fled for their lives,” the Sultan was deposed, and Sir Abbas Effendi recovered his freedom.
This was the account in the revised edition of Bahaullah and the New Era.

6.4.3. Lady Bloomfield’s Account
In the Chosen Highway of 1970, PP. 140-142, authoress Lady Blomfield (Satara Khanum) contradicting both the “Master” and Bahaullah and the New Era, According to her account, “the Committee of investigation arrived. Enemies of the Master [i.e. Sir Abbas Effendi] at once busied themselves in sending documents full of false accusations”.
Abdul Baha [i.e. Sir Abbas Effendi] wrote to the Committee, informing them that there were many enemies, who were capable of forging and posting a letter in his name, full of untrue statements, the Committee assured him that they would beware of and suppress any such document”.
After the investigation in Acre were completed, the Committee proceeded to Haifa, where they examined the building on Mount Carmel”.
“In the meantime they were waiting the official Firman, confirming the sentence of banishment of the Master to Fizan. But, instead of that Firman, the Committee was recalled to Istanbul in consequence of an attempt to assassinate the Sultan”.
“Arrived there, they presented report to the Sultan. But his government, being too much occupied with the investigation of the conspiracy against the life of the Sultan, did not take up the matter of the “Acre and Haifa accusations”, as they were legally called. At the time the Master wrote to the Sublime Porte at Istanbul, replying to the three accusations, contained in the report of the Committee of Investigation”.
“When the Sultan eventually received the report of that Committee of Investigation, he sentenced the Master to banishment, but before the decree was carried out the ‘Young Turk’ revolution took place, the Sultan was deposed and the religious, with the political prisoners, were set at liberty”.
“This release took place in August 1908”. This was Satara Khanum’s account in the Chosen Highway. The accounts in Bahaullah and the New Era and the Chosen Highway are apparently intended for occidental consumption.

6.4.4. Awara’s Account
Let us now take a sample of the same account apparently intended for occidental consumption. The maker of the sample is Mirza abd-al-Husayn Ayati surnamed Awara, one of “the Hand of the Cause.”.
In his Al-Kawakib-al-Durriyya of 1924, Vol. II PP. 195-198. Composed by him prior to his abjuration of Bahaism and return to the fold of Islam, Ayati says:
Whatever may be the cause, misgivings begun to prey on the mind of Sultan Abd-al-Majid, who intended to become acquainted with the thought, acts and deeds of Sir Abbas Effendi.”
He was terrified and dreaded lest Sir Abbas Effendi “influence in the West as well as in the East, coupled with the influx of Iranian, American and German pilgrims, might rest on anti-autocratic conspiracy, calculated to affect adversely his monarchy.”
Thereafter in 1905 he set up a commission of inspectors and despatched them to Acre, to detect the channel of sedition, to obstruct its course, and to distress the minds of the sect.”
As the inspectors arrived there, “malevolent became exultant ready for mischief.”
“Perils stared this sect in the face from the leaders to the lord.” The affair reached such a pitch that Sir Abbas Effendi had to send away his followers and companions, some to Egypt, and others to Turkistan. He himself stood his ground, and faced his enemies.
Epistles issued by Sir Abbas Effendi at the time counselled and exhorted his followers to meet unfaithfulness with fidelity, to abide by the laws of the country in which they are domiciled, and to eschew politics. Most of these epistles did not escape the notice of Sultan and the powers-that-be. They were perplexed: To believe these words, or, to give credence to the rumours of others. Anyhow, “the affair ended there and there.”
In 1907, Sir Abbas Effendi was once again face to face with danger, towards the end of the year 1906, another commission of special inspection of the Sultan, headed by one Azif, arrived at Acre.
No sooner had they arrived than they posted a posse of secret police around Sir Abbas Effendi’s house.
They called for evidence from complains, and enemies of Sir Abbas Effendi. They drew up records. A large group of men, relation and stranger, formed hands and collaborated, to Sir Abbas Effendi’s detriment.
Noted for his humility, hospitality and generosity, Sir Abbas Effendi did not humble himself before the commission. Nay, he did not pay a courtesy visit to them. He did not entertain them.

Writ reports replete with decisions “to put Sir Abbas Effendi to death and execute him” in their brief-case, the Commission returned to Istanbul. Before their departure the Commissioners held out a promise to the enemies that they were to stage a come back with Sir Abbas Effendi’s “death warrant” in their pockets.
Perturbed and alarmed at the turn of events, companions and relations urged Sir Abbas Effendi to go away for a while facilities for which were available; an Italian cargo boat rode to anchor at Acre, ready to take away Sir Abbas Effendi at a moment’s notice. But Sir Abbas Effendi stood by his ground.

In the meantime friends and foes alike expected Arif to become the governor of Beirut and to turn up at Acre “to crucify Sir Abbas Effendi, or to drown him in the sea, or to banish him.”
But the Fates decreed otherwise: Sultan Abd-al-Hamid “Might have issued,” might have made up his mind to issue a Firman of grievous harm to Sir Abbas Effendi”, when an attempt was made to assassinate him by placing a bomb in his path. The Sultan was now preoccupied with his own troubles. He had no time to attend to Sir Abbas Effendi’s business. The Revolution broke out. The Sultan was deposed, and Sir Abbas Effendi recovered his freedom:

« و بالاخره کار به جائی کشید که آنها با دفاتر مملو از فتاوی قتل و اعدام عبدالبهاء از عکا به آستانه رجوع کردند و دشمنان را وعده دادند که با فرمان قتل افندی مراجعت خواهیم کرد و عارف رئیس تفتیش را چنان گمان بود که رقم حکومت بیرون و قتل عباس افندی را به آن عالی صادر خواهد کرد. بعد از حرکت آنها دوستان در اظطراب افتادند ... و چون مخاطرات نزدیک و حتمی الوقوع شده بعضی از اصحاب و منتسبین اصرار کردند که حضرتش چندی از عکا هجرت فرماید و اسباب آن هم فراهم بود زیرا کشتی ایطالیا که شغلش حمل غله است حاضر بود و بعضی از عمال آن یا بنفسهم ارادتمند بودند و یا از جای دیگر اشاره به آنهاشده بود که حضرتش را شبانه و نهانه به اروپا برند و سه شبانه روز بین عکا و صنعا بر روی دریا متوقف و منتظر جواب ماند و بالاخره عبدالبها قبول نفرمود جواب دادند که ما از اول امر تا کنون فرار نکرده ایم و در هر مقام ثبات قدم آشکار کرده حال هم فرار را از عار میدانیم ... بالجمله دوست و دشمن منتظر که عنقریب عارف والی بیرون شده بالوای عسگری می آیند و عبدالبهاء را مصلوب یا غرق دریا و یا ارسال بفیزان مینمایند. ناگهان نقاش قضا نقشه دیگر به کارگاه کشیده امور را دگر گون کرد یعنی در همان احیان که ممکن است سلطان عبدالحمید فرمان ؟ عبدالبها ؟ (198) را صارد کرده و یامصمم صدور آن بود که امراء و هیئت ژان ترک به نهضت آمدند و اولین قدمی که برداشته شد آن بمبی بود که در جوار جامع پس راه سلطان مدفون شده بود و ظهر جمعه منفجر شد و جمعی را مجروع و هلاک کرده سلطان بی آسیب عقب کشید رشته اش ره شورش و انقلاب کشید و به خلع عبدالحمید و آزادی عبدالبهاء گشت ؟

In his Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. I, to his abjuration of Bahaism and return to the fold of Islam, Mirza Abd al-Husayn-Ayati stated that drafts of al-Kawakib-al-Durriyya, were “reviewed” by Sir Abbas Effendi, who ordered alterations to be made in it, with which I had to comply.” In practice, Sir Abbas Effendi insisted that “there should be no discrepancy between the Kawakib-al-Durriyya and Sir Abbas Effendi’s The Traveller’s Narrative”, to which he blacked out historical stains with subtlety. Sir Abbas insisted that the “Kawakib-al-Durriyya should not be in agreement with Mirza Jani of Kashan’s Nuqta-al-Kaf published by Prof. Browne”. When it was finally decided to have the Kawakib-al-Durriyya printed and published in Egypt “heirs of Sir Abbas Effendi introduced further alterations into it”. “I hereby decree that al-Kawakib-al-Durriyya, of two Volumes, has totally lost its character of authority”, Ayati concludes:

کشف الحیل
جلد اول
تألیف عبدالحسین آیت
چاپ ششم
صفحات 140-139

« بر اثر پیشهناد رئسای مرکزی و محافل بلاد به نگارش کتاب تاریخی مشغول شدم که در ابتدا به نام « ماثر البهائیه » موسومش داشتم و به طبع ژلاتین قناعت کردم بعضی تشویق بر طبع و نشر آن کردند و چون خواستم طبع کنم عباس افندی نسخه آن را طلبید و دستوراتی داد و باجبار بسیاری از آنرا تغییر دادم و آن تاریخ صورت تغییراتی به خود گرفت که بر منفعت خودش تمام میشد و آز آن جمله اصراری داشت که مضامین مقاله سیاح که از قلم خود عباس افندی است و بامهارتی لکه های تاریخی را پوشانیده است اختلاف پیدا نکند و از طرفی با کتاب نقطة الکاف میرزا جانی کاشانی که پرفسور براون به طبع آن پرداخته موافقت ننماید ... (140) و اخیراً که در مصر قرار شد طبع شود باز ورثه عبدالبهاء تصرفاتی در آن به کار بردند و اینک میگویم آن کتاب که بعداً به « کواکب الدریّه » موسوم شده در دو جلد مجلد به کلی از درجه اعتبار ساقط است »

6.4.5. Mirza Jawad of Qazwin’s Account
In his Historical Epitome, 1904, Materials for the study of the BÂBi Religion by Prof. Browne, PP. 91-93, Mirza Jawad of Qazwin says: “After [Sir] Abbas Effendi had attained to supremacy, he made a great display, by reason of the moral and material prestige which he now possessed. So likewise his followers did not observe prudence, wisdom or moderation in affairs, whence arose many troubles and difficulties, so that orders were issued by the Ottoman government to confine him and his brothers in the fortress of Acre. After a while there appeared four investigators to investigate and enquire into the circumstances of certain of the officials and exiles, and they examined his [Abbas Effendi’s] affairs also.
After a while Khalil Pasha the Governor of Beirut appointed an inspector to watch him and ascertain who associated with him of the people of the country and others; and when he chanced on such an one, he used to bring him to the Government-House, where he was frequenting the society of [Sir] Abbas Effendi. He however, ascribed all that had happened to his brother Muhammad Ali Effendi, spreading the report abroad in the country, and thereby filling the hearts of his followers with hatred, enmity and aversion, so that they used to display the extreme and dislike and detestation in regard to Muhammad Ali Effendi and the Holly House, and used to speak unseemly words concerning him.
But when Muhammad Ali Effendi discovered that his brother ascribed these occurrences to him, he communicated with him respectfully by means of some of the officials and inhabitants of the city and some of his followers, and begged him to agree to appoint a time and men to inquire into the truth of these matters, investigate these events, and ascertain their reasons and causes. This happened during the presence of the inspectors, and he requested him to appoint two persons on his behalf that they might go together to the local government and to the Board of Inspectors and formally demand [the production of] a note of complaint, if such were in their possession, on the part of Muhammad Ali against his brother [Sir] Abbas Effendi or an assertion that they were cognizant of some direct complaint on his part.
For all official papers and legal complaints are preserved in the originals as well as in copies by the government in its records. But [Sir] Abbas Effendi would not accept this or agree to it, because he sought by these falsehoods and slanders to give effect to his plans, and if he had appointed such persons and they had gone to the above-mentioned official quarters and made investigations, it would have become plain to all that these accusations were false, and these reports devoid of trust and reality. For it is not hidden that the False loves the darkness and deeds should become apparent.
In short this schism and its results were manifold, but space does not allow more [to be said] than what I have mentioned, as I have contended myself with this summary, having already set forth most of [the facts connected with] it in another treatise”.

---

Please select one of the following:
to return to the main page, or
to view the next section on this topic,
to view the previous section on this topic,
to close this window.

---