View the Persian transcript here.

View the report of the interview in Mirza Aqa Khan's own handwriting: here.

Introduction
The interview is partly in Persian and partly in Arabic drawn up by Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman in his own handwriting giving an account of the visit paid by him to Mirza Husayn Ali commonly known as Bahaullah and of the several interviews he held with him at Acre between the years A.D. 1886 and A.D. 1890.

Salient points in the report are summarised as follows:
Page 1:

1. Cypher 38, in the Abjad notation, represents Azal, i.e. Subh-i-Azal.
2. The author visited the “city of vision”, viz. Acre, at the invitation of Abdul Baha Abbas where he saw “the manifestation of plurality, namely, the combination thunder, lightning, darkness and the thunderbolt.”

The first of “the unbelieving souls and manifestations of infidelity,” whom he met was the Most Mighty Branch Abbas, whom he calls “stealthily withdrawing whisperer,” (‘al-waswas-al-khanas’), an attribute of the devil. Quran, cxiv, 4. Al-waswas is numerically equivalent to the name of Abbas, both words in the Abjad notation a total of 133. After that, he continues, he met the rest of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s followers who were unable to answer the simplest question put to them who invariably referred him to Mirza Husayn-Ali.
The author then gives a vivid description of his first interview with Mirza Husayn-Ali. P. 329 the Hasht-Bihisht and his report.

Page 2
Mirza Husayn-Ali’s versions of :

1. his expulsion from Iran to Baghdad
2. his flight from Baghdad to Suleymaniyya
3. his return to Baghdad
4. Murder of Asadullah Dayyan
5. Marriage of Primal Point’s second wife, Fatima,
6. The BÂBis degeneration of his efforts to reform them
7. his composition of Iqan
8. his annunciation in Edirne
9. his protection of Nasir-al-Din Shah
10. his disclaimer of responsibility for the slaughter of the Bayanis at Acre
11. his denial of plagiarism of the Primal Point’s works
12. his claim to be the wronged-one
13. the complaint to district authority in Edirne
14. his having nipped in the bud several plots hatched by his followers in Acre who proceeded to Cyprus to assassinate Subh-i-Azal.

Mirza Aqa Khan quotes Mirza Husayn-Ali as saying: “On my return to Baghdad [from Suleymaniyya] I found that a dispute had arisen between my brother [i.e. Subh-i Azal] and Mirza Asadullah [Dayyan] “that the former had decreed the putting to death of the latter. Dayyan had laid no claim to the promised office [i.e. to be Whom God Shall Manifest]. He said that the manifestation was apparent. In short he was put to death wrongly.”

Upon his apostasy from the Primal Point, Subh-i Azal denounced Dayyan in his book entitled Mustayqadth and branded him as the ‘Father of Evils’ (Abu-al Shurur) expressing surprise that his followers “sit in their places and do not spear this accursed one with their lancers” and “do not cut the tongue of his bowels with their hands and do not spear him with the lances of their powerful lips.”

و انتم صامتون فی مقاعدکم و لاتمون هذالملعون برماحکم و لا تطعون السنة امعائه من ایدیکم و لاترمونه برماح شفاه قهاریتکم

According to Tanbihun-Naimin, PP 87-90, the authoress takes her nephew Abdul Baha Abbas to severe task for his violent campaign against Subh-i Azal to involve the latter in the murder of Dayyan and quotes a passage from a letter written by Bahaullah, addressed to Aqa Mirza Muhammad Hadi wherin Mirza Husayn-Ali takes full credit for having carried into effect the judgment of god to dispose of Dayyan, from which the authoress comes to the conclusion that either the father or the son is a liar, the former for his admission to have killed Dayyan and the latter for his attempt to contradict and whitewash him.

The attempt on the life of Nasir-al-Din Shah was made on the 28th Shawwal A.H. 1268 = 15th August A.D. 1852.

The Tanbihun-Naimin (PP 5-8) corroborates Mirza Husayn-Ali’s complicity in the attempt. From the outset Mirza Husayn-Ali was obsessed with personality cult. He had an inordinate lust for power; the hankered after world conquest and monarchy. He laboured under the misapprehension that if the Shah were to come to grief, he was destined to step into his shoes and accedes to the throne. With this obsession preying on his mind, he incited and instigated one Karim khan Mafi to assassinate the Shah. He supplied him with funds and arms. At eleventh hour Karim Khan Mafi left Mirza Husayn-Ali in the hunch.
With funds and arms he decamped to Istanbul. Undeterred by his frustration, Mirza Husayn-Ali this time picked on Muhammad Sadiq of Tabriz, an attendant of Janab-i Azim, otherwise known as Mulla Sheikh Ali.

Pretending to him that he had the approval of Subh-i Azal, Mirza Husayn-Ali sent Muhammad Sadiq of Tabriz to the alter, which was a prelude to the dark, dreadful, dire calamity (Fitna-i Dahma-i Saylam) with which the people of Bayan became afflicted. The massacre of the BÂBis started and spread to the length and breadth of Islam. This was the first seed of discord and disaster sown by Mirza Husayn-Ali.
After the event, Mirza Husayn-Ali denied everything and laid the responsibility at others’ door. Mirza Husayn-Ali was cast into prison for life imprisonment.

By a lavish expenditure of funds on the part of the authoress of the Tanbihun-Naimin Mirza Husayn-Ali’s release from imprisonment was bought subject to his future good behaviour and abjuration of undesirable activities and to his expulsion from Iran.

In his coverage of the several interviews, he held with Mirza Husayn-Ali at Acre between the year A.D. 1886 and A.D. 1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht, quotes Mirza Husayn-Ali as saying: “When I was being taken from Tehran to Baghdad under escort I told my brother ]i.e. Subh-i Azal] : Do not come [with me] as I am the guilty one allegedly; No one is molesting you ………………. I protected Nasir-al-Din Shah under my Jubbat [outer robe or gown] for thirty-five years” Mirza Husayn-Ali goes on to say that he “did not run away from Teheran as alleged” but he was escorted from Teheran to Baghdad by “horsemen guards provided by the Imperial Government of Iran and the Russian Embassy”.

Section VI (pp 279-289) of the Materials for the study of the BÂBi religion by Professor Browne contains the fac-simile, text and translation of a Persian state paper, document A.7, according to which “by chance, and through the ill-considered policy of former officials” …… “Mirza Husayn Ali of Nur obtained release from the Anbar prison and permission to take up his residence at Baghdad …….” Sometimes moreover, he hath put his hand to sedition and incitements to murder, as in the case of His Most accomplished Reverence Mulla Aqa of Darband.” …..”besides sundry other assassinations which took place.”

In the Traveller’s Narrative, pp 63-65, Persian text Vol. I, Abdul Baha Abbas says that attempt on the Shah’s life was made by “a youth, Sadiq by name” who, “when the BÂB was residing in Azerbaijan, night and day was busy serving him. …. Bahaullah rode forth with perfect composure and calmness from Afcha, and came to Niyavaran, which was the abode of the Royal Train and the station of the Imperial camp. Immediately on his arrival he was placed under arrest, and a whole regiment guarded him closely.”……….
“So it was established and proven that the assassin had on his own responsibility engaged in this grievous action” ……” and when the truth of the matter became evident the innocence of Bahaullah from this suspicion established in such wise that no doubt remained for anyone; the decision of the court declared his purity and freedom from this charge.” …

“Indeed Bahaullah requested permission to withdraw to the Supreme Shrines [of Karbala and Najaf] and, after some month, by the royal permission and with the leave of the Prime Minister, set out accompanied by one of the king’s messengers for the Shrines.”

In the Chapter on the attempt on the Shah’s life and its consequences, pp. 438-474, in the Dawn-Breakers, author Nabil gives an altogether different version as Aqay-i Kalim (brother of Mirza Husayn-Ali) named Musa; Mirza Husayn-Ali conferred on him title of Kalim (Interlocutor) because he was in communion with “god”, i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali, Nabil states that Mirza Husayn-Ali “in his interview with Azim [Mulla Sheikh Ali] advised him, in the most emphatic terms, to abandon the plan he had conceived.

Bahaullah condemned his designs, and disassociated himself from the act, it was his intention to commit.” ………. Nabil continues on his own authority: “The news of the attempt reached Bahaullah when he was staying in the village of Afcha”. …. “the criminal act was committed …… by two obscure and irresponsible young men, one named Sadiq-i Tabrizi, and the other Fadhlullah-i Qumi.”

On his way “to Niyavaran, the headquarters of the Imperial army,” Baha “arrived at the village of Zankandeh, the seat of the Russian legation, where he was met by Mirza Majid, his brother-in-law, who acted as secretary to the Russian Minister.” He was invited by his brother-in-law “to stay at his home.” ….”the news of his arrival reached the Shah, who “immediately sent one of his trusted officers to the legation, demanding that the Accused [i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali] be delivered into his hands. The Russian Minister refused, and requested Bahaullah to proceed to the home of Mirza Aqa Khan, the grand Vazir” ……. “His request was granted, whereupon the Minister formally communicated to the grand Vazir his desire that the utmost care shall be taken to ensure the safety and protection of the Trust his government was delivering into his keeping, warning him that he would be responsible should he fail to regard his wishes.” ………. “the precaution the Russian Minister had taken, and the warning he had uttered,” proved abortive and Bahaullah was imprisoned. ……….. The Russian Minister intervened through the interpreter …..” When Azim [Mulla Shaykh Ali] was questioned as to whether he regarded Baha as the responsible leader of the group that had made the attempt on the Shah’s life, he answered:” the leader of this community was none other than Sayyid-i BÂB, who was slain in Tabriz, and whose martyrdom induced me to arise and avenge his death. I alone conceived the plan and endeavoured to execute it. The youth who threw the Shah from his horse was none other than Sadiq-i Tabrizi, a servitor in a confectionary shop in Tehran.” ……. “the words of his declaration were taken down by both the Minister’s interpreter and the Grand Vazir representative, who submitted their records to Mirza Aqa Khan. The documents which were placed in his hands were chiefly responsible for Bahaullah’s release from his imprisonment.” …….. “No sooner had Bahaullah recovered his freedom than the decision of the government was handed to him, informing him that within a month of the issuing of this order, he with his family, was expected to leave Teheran”.
“for a place beyond the confines of Persia, the Russian minister, as soon as he learned the action which the government contemplated taking, volunteered to take Bahaullah under his protection, and invited him to go to Russia. He refused the offer and chose indeed to leave for Iraq.” …
“On the ninth of Rabi-al-Thani in the year A.H. 1269 (12th January A.D. 1853) Bahaullah, accompanied by the members of his family, among whom were the Most Great Branch [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas], and Aqay-i Kalim [Mirza Husayn-Ali’s brother Musa], and escorted by a member of the Imperial body-guard and an official representing the Russian legation, set out from Teheran on his journey to Baghdad.”

When a verdict of “not guilty” bids fair to jeopardise the judge’s reputation for loyalty, if not place him in actual peril, acquittals in such a country as the Persia were hard to win. “The decision of the Court” stressed by Abdul Baha Abbas is a misnomer and compares ill with Nabil’s account of the Russian Ambassador’s intervention, in acknowledgement of which, according to footnote 2 in P. 442 of the Dawn-Breakers, Mirza Husayn-Ali, at his leisure at Acre, “revealed” a tablet in honour of the then Czar of Russia in the following terms:
“When I was in chains and fetters in the prison of Ta (Teheran), one of thine ambassadors assisted ME. Therefore hath god decreed unto thee a station which none but Himself can comprehend. Beware lest thou change this lofty station.” (Mirza Husayn-Ali’s tablet of the Czar of Russia).

Whether or not the tablet was ever sent to the Czar or whether or not the Czar retained the “divinely ordained station” is left to Avareh to deal with in the Kashful-Hiyal. See PP. 62-65.

The crime and cruelties which followed the attempted assassination are black enough without going even beyond the Bayani or Bahai chronicles.

In his written reply to several questions put to him by A.L.M. Nicholas, translator of the Arabic and Persian Bayans, touching the schism in the BÂBi religion, Subh-i Azal among other things states: “the cause of the outrage on the lofty person of the Shah was not an order from the Source of Command [i.e. Subh-i-Azal]
سبب بی حرمتی بر وجود شاه حکمی از مصدر امر نبود.
Azim (Mulla Sheikh Ali) decreed the commission of the outrage as a retaliatory act for the execution of the Primal Point by Mirza Taqi Khan, Amir Nizam. His object was retaliation. “The object was not the monarchy or the setting up of a republican regime.”
مقصود به پادشاهی یا آنه جمهوریت شود نبود.

In his Persian manuscript compiled by him in refutation of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s pretensions, Aqa Ali Muhammad, the brother-in-law of the Primal Point, assassinated at Baghdad, states that for about eleven years he was in attendance Mirza Husayn-Ali at Baghdad. He saw him twice or thrice daily. “On many occasions” he “had seen and heard Mirza Husayn-Ali hemming verses and invocations pacing up and down”. “Baha would practice writing to acquire rapidity of utterance. Mirza Husayn-Ali’s exercise-books when used up were destroyed in the Shatt-al-Arab by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan or others.”

The author supports his personal observations with the following quotation from the Risala-i Ithbatiyya in Edirne by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan “in support of Baha’s mission”, and all that which was revealed from the firmament of pa-existence [i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali] to quote the malice of the malicious”
و جمیع آنچه از سمای قدم نازل میشد ناظر بسکون ناری حسیدین و قلیلی مقیلین در شط العرب محو نمودم.
From this quotation, reinforced by his own personal observation, author Aqa Ali Muhammad came to conclusion that Mirza Husayn-Ali’s utterances were not inspired (iktisabi) or obtained by toil and study.

In his refutation of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s pretensions Mirza Ahmad Ruhi of Kerman, P 137 the Tanbihun-Naimin, arrives at the same conclusion as Aqa Ali Muhammad by reason of the fact that Mirza Husayn-Ali for years practised production of verses which were taken down by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan and then washed out by him.
The authoress of the Tanbihun-Naimin PP. 16-18 confirms Mirza Husayn-Ali’s practice of verse-writing [ayat] preparatory to declaration of his mission.

The allegation of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s Epistles before and soon after his “manifestation” contains an historical letter addressed by Mirza Husayn-Ali from Acre to Sayyid Ali Akbar as Sayyid Mahdi and surnamed by Mirza Husayn-Ali as Ism-allah-al-Mahdi wherein he is instructed by Mirza Husayn-Ali to hand over to Janab-i Nabil before Ali [i.e. Mirza Muhammad son of Gulam Ali, of Zarand, surnamed Nabil by Mirza Husayn-Ali, presumably, because (Nabil) is numerically equivalent to Muhammad, both words yielding, in the Abjad notation, a total of 92 ] “all the writings of the Point in the handwriting of the Point’s amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Hussayn for conveyance surprisingly to the Most Holy Seat [Mazarr-i Aqdas, i.e. Acre] where they may be transcribed, although this servant [i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali] does not see in himself the ability to reveal single verse of [writing[ to probe into those writings” [of the Point].
اگر چه این عبد نزول بدیعه در خود مشاهده نمیکند تا چه رسد به توجه در خطوط.

To sum up, extensive questions from various sources are intended to bring out the point at issue in bold relief: A line of distinction has to be drawn between “imparted” or “Immediate knowledge” (Ilm-i Wahhi or Laduni), the knowledge of the prophets and divine manifestations, and “Ecstatic” or “Disclosed Knowledge” (Ilm-i Zawgi or Kashfi), the knowledge of the mystics, saints, and Sufis, and “Acquired” or “Ordinary Knowledge” (Ilm-i Kasbi or Rasmi), the knowledge of divines, doctors and scholars.

Conditions, qualifications and attributes of the Promised One of the Bayan, i.e. “He Whom God Shall Manifest” or “He Who Shall Appear” are summarised in PP. 27-31 in Professor Browne’s Persian Introduction to the Nuqtatul-Kaf, according to which production of verses [ayat] or inspired words, i.e. eloquence of diction, rapidity of utterance, and knowledge unacquired by toil and study, was part of the proof of a divine mission. To this proof alone did the Primal Point appealed; In addition to the other proofs, of “Him Whom God Shall Manifest” this proof was to be expected or required. Brushing aside all other conditions, to this proof alone did Mirza Husayn-Ali appeal in that portion of the Sura-i Haykal addressed to the People of Bayan who desired him.

That Mirza Husayn-Ali trained himself in the art of producing verses and that his knowledge was therefore obtained by toil and study was an open secret to leading BÂBis who denied him on this point also, and of whom he disposed by foul play to force his way through Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, from the outset, was privy to Mirza Husayn-Ali’s practise of production of verses to declaration of his mission. He admits this fact in unmistakable terms in his Risala-i Ithbatiyya. By the effluxion of time, the prevailing impression among Mirza Husayn-Ali’s followers that Mirza Husayn-Ali was couched by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan in the production of verses or that Mirza Husayn-Ali’s writings were drafted by Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan gained momentum. This fact is to be read between the lines in the quotations from the Kitab-i Subhi.

Alive to this unpalatable impression fraught with untoward consequences which stalked him, Mirza Husayn-Ali, as his “occultation” approached, realised that any exposure from an insider in the person of Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan would be far more disastrous to Mirza Husayn-Ali’s cause which he so laboriously worked to build up than in the case of the Nuqtatul-Kaf.

This consideration accounts for Mirza Husayn-Ali’s desperate efforts, in forlorn hope, to extract a confession from Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, failing which he denounced Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, “the Servant of God”, the Servant of the Presence, the One who stood before the throne in a laudable station and the pilgrim after truth, leaving to his own son Abdul Baha Abbas to extract a confession, which he did.

Yet, in his coverage of the several interviews he held with Mirza Husayn-Ali at Acre between the years A.D. 1886 and AD. 1890, Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, one of the co-authors of the Hasht-Bihisht, quotes Mirza Husayn-Ali as saying : “I have been accused of having plagiarised the Point’s verses [i.e. inspired words] whereby God’s life had he been alive, he would have seized the pen and taken down all the verses in the language of [divine] might” [i.e. by Mirza Husayn-Ali]. See also ‘Aqdas a rehash of Bayan’.

Bearing in mind that Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman had several interview with Mirza Husayn-Ali at Acre a unique account is given in page 314 of the Hasht Bihisht of the manner in which Mirza Husayn-Ali revealed his verses: Mirza Husayn-Ali would pace up and down “lowing” something which the scald-headed hew would “scribe in an illegible hand” on a piece of paper with help of the Supreme Pen”.

“Neither Baha’s utterance was available nor the scald-headed hew’s scribblings were comprehensible”. In the words of the scald-headed hew who moved the Supreme Pen; It was the Supreme Pen which automated and write down Baha’s verses”. The force or impart of the Supreme Pen was such as to wrench the arm of the scald-headed hew off his shoulder. The revealed “rigmarole” would then be passed on to Abdul Baha Abbas to indite a reply on the merits of each case.

Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman quotes Mirza Husayn-Ali as saying and also the wife of His Holiness the Point was made a bride:
و زن حضرت نقطه هم عروس کردند.

Reference is made in paragraph 9 of the Introduction to the Tanbihun Naimin to an anonymous BÂBi treatise in refutation of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s pretensions. The treatise reproduces in full copy of a letter by the Primal Point’s second wife, i.e. Fatima daughter of Mulla Hasan, preacher of Isfahan, wherein she gives an account of her movements and activities consequent upon the Primal Point’s martyrdom.

In the letter she says: Every day Imam-Juma’ (i.e. the leading Imam) of Isfahan would send a suitor who proposed marriage to me. My house was raided and many writings were carried away. After two years Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) and my brother Aqa Ali Muhammad came to Isphahan. In the mention a letter was received from the eldest sister [i.e. ‘Izziyya Khanum, authoress of the Tanbih-al-Naimin] of His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i-Azal, for which title (document no 1 in page 10 of the Collection entitled) ‘The Epistles of the Point and his amanuensis Aqa Sayyid Husayn’] advising me to go and see Subh-i Azal if I wanted to put an end to my troubles.

Accompanied by my brother Aqa Ali Muhammad, Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) and other members of the family we set out for Iraq. On arrival In Kazamayn, Mirza Musa [surnamed the Interlocutor] brother of Subh-i Azal came to receive us, Mirza Musa and Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) went to see Subh-i Azal. At the time my eldest brother (Mulla Rajab Ali Qahir) was at Najaf. My brother Aqa Ali Muhammad had written to him we were all at Kazamayn, including all the members of his family. My eldest brother replied back to say that we were to proceed to Karbala. Consequently all the members of the family left for Karbala.

Before proceeding to Karbala, accompanied by my brother (Aqa Ali Muhammad) and Haji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan), I went to pay a visit to Subh-i Azal and to take permission from him for our departure to Karbala as instructed by my eldest brother. “His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i Azal] showed me the Will and Testament of His Holiness the Point, penned in his own handwriting wherein I was explicitly addressed by the same title which was given to me by him [i.e. the Point] is Isphahan, and to which no one else was privy, directed me therein to obey his, viz. His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i Azal’s] orders.”
I replied that I was ready to do his bidding.

“His Holiness the Fruit [i.e. Subh-i Azal] committed me to the care of Hajji Sayyid Muhammad (of Isfahan) united in matrimony. “…. “At the time Mirza Husayn Ali was also a suitor and had asked to marry me. All the hardship from which I and Aqay-i Haji Sayyid Muhammad [of Isfahan] suffered originated from the enmity [of Mirza Husayn-Ali for having been thrown over] of that time. It was for this reason that my brothers were murdered [by Bahais].”

……” At Acre, it was Abbas Effendi [i.e. Abdul Baha Abbas] who Aqay-i Haji Sayyid Muhammad [of Isfahan] with his own hands.”

In his treatise composed by him in refutation of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s pretensions, Aqa Ali Muhammad, to which reference is made in paragraph 1 of the Introduction to the Tanbih-al-Naimin, the Primal Point’s brother-in-law, murdered by Bahais, replies to criticisms levelled by Bahais against Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isfahan, whom he designates as “the most great Bayani Martyr”, for having “taken to wife” the Primal Point’s widow [i.e. Fatima daughter of Mulla Hassan, preacher of Isfahan] entrusted to his care by Subh-i Azal and holds that “Haji Sayyid Muhammad of Isphahan had rendered the utmost service to her, had not failed one moment in paying due respect to her, and had accepted the grant of his master merely to please god.”
استخراج از مقدمه تنبیه النائمین صفحه 3 4 – نامه هائی است که آقا سید محمد اصفهانی ملقب به اباوحید که از افاضل بابیه و یکی از چهار نفری ازلی بوده که از طرف دولت عصمانی همراه میرزا حسینعلی به عکا تبعید شده بوده در در دعوی مزبور وشرح رفتار و کردار میرزا حسینعلی و پیروانش به اشخاص نوشته و میرزا مصطفی کاتب معروف بابی آنها را جمع آوری و به صورت یک مجلد در آورده است این نامه ها حاوی مطالب مهم تاریخی است و نویسنده آنها نیز بدست بهائیان در عکا به قتل رسیده است.

With her brothers and Hajji Sayyid Muhammad of Isphahan murdered at the hands of Bahais, it does not stand to reason she was “to be escorted to the Holy Land” as alleged in Shoghi Effendi’s cable(see the appendix at the end of this page).

In his preface to the Persian Bayan, Vol II, page 10, A.L.M. Nicholas refers to the Primal Point’s second wife, whose name he misquotes, and writes as follows: « On discute beaucoup sur son compte. J’ai entendu affirmer et, nier avec la plus grande énergie que Soubh-i-Ezel l’avait épousé après la mort du Bâb. Elle était encore vivante à Esfahan le 11 Juin 1905. »

Translation:
“The wife he (i.e. Bab) married in Isfahan and was called Qanete. She was the daughter of Hadji Muhammad Sadeq. An account that is much discussed and I do not intend to confirm or reject and with no greater enthusiasm is that Subh-i Azal married her after the death of Bab. She was still alive in Isfahan on June 11, 1905.”

On the face of it, Mirza Husayn-Ali might be excused for his ignorance of the Bayan’s law since in his epistle addressed to the son of the wolf written towards the end of his life, translated into English by Juli Chamler, he states as follows: PP. 127-128 “God is witness, and knows that I have not read the Bayan, nor seen its propositions; but it is indubitably clear that the Primal Point has made of it primodorial Book …..” I have always lived in turmoil, and have not had the tranquillity necessary to study the Books of His Supreme Highness [i.e. the Primal Point], or other books.” Page 129 “yet truly I have been so preoccupied by my relations with the whole world that I have never read these books, nor, with my own eyes, contemplated the works of the Point.”

Commenting on Mirza Husayn-Ali’s admission in the epistle to the son of the wolf, A.L.M. Nicholas in his tract entitled Qui est le successeur de BÂB, page 8, Footnote (I) puts down Mirza Husayn-Ali’s admission to “ignorance regrettable”.

Mirza Husayn-Ali’s followers might be excused for their utter ignorance of the Bayan’s laws to which they were forbidden to have access under pains and penalties for fear of exposure of Mirza Husayn-Ali and Abdul Baha Abbas.

In the view of the Primal Point, He himself was a manifestation of the Primal Will. He ushered in a new dispensation and brought a new law which superseded Muhammad’s dispensation and which abrogated the Quran. Mirza Husayn-Ali himself claims to be supplementary and complementary to the Primal Point with a specific mission to complete the mission of the Primal Point as expressed in clear cut terms by the “Supreme Pen”, which apparently denotes Mirza Husayn-Ali himself, as the instrument whereby god’s pleasure is made known to men, in Mirza Husayn-Ali’s own quoted from page 20 in the Will and Testament of Mirza Husayn-Ali’s son Muhammad Ali which run as follows:
“the precursor [i.e. the Primal Point] came and revealed the word; the Completer [Mutamim, i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali] came and completed it [i.e. the word]; what for is another manifestation.”
مبشر امد خبر داد متمم آمد تمام فرمود دیگر ظهور از برای که و از برای جه؟

In the circumstances, Mirza Husayn-Ali’s plea and ignorance of the Bayan’s law of which he claims, to be the “Completer” is hardly tenable, how is then his complaint about the re-marriage of the Primal Point’s wife refrain of which was taken up by Abdul Baha Abbas, to be accounted for.”

The answer thereto is not far to seek:
Spurned by the Primal Point’s wife frustrated in his attempt to marry her and thereby consolidate his position preparatory to declaration of his mission. Smarting under the pain of the frustration, possessed of the Primal Point’s writings, opponents of his pretensions disposed of by foul play, safe and secure in his sanctuary at Acre, Mirza Husayn-Ali as an after-thought, revered the true circumstances of the marriage of the Primal Point’s wife, became obstreperous and vociferous in his outcry about the re-marriage of the Primal Point’s wife and invoked the Quran, Sura xxxiii, the Confedrates, verse 53 which says: “and yet most enter the apostle of god, nor marry his wives after him for ever” wherewith to belabour Subh-i Azal, heedless of the fact that his verse superseded by Unity X, Chapter 10 which reads :
Le résume de la dixième porte : Après la mort d'une femme, il ne faut Pas que les hommes patientent plus de go jours, et les femmes ne doivent pas patienter après la mort de leur mari plus de 95 jours. Ceci est la limite qui a été fixée dans le livre de Dieu.

(translation by A.L.M. Nicholas) in the Arabic Bayan of the Point’s law which Mirza Husayn-Ali claims to be the “Completer”.

In his Lama’at (“Rays” “Splendours") Subh-i Azal confirms the marriage of th ePrimal Ponit’s widow. The relevant passage reads as follows:
Lama’at-al-Ula:
و انا النقطه فی البیان تزوج امرئه مومنه ؟ و ترکها فی حالها و سافر لله الی الصاد (اصفهان) و اجلب الی الطاء (تهران) و احبس فی جبل الباسط (چهریق) و بعد ذلک فی جبل الشدید (ماکو) الی ان قتلوه بظلم و اتبعوا سبیلا فرطا و فی الصاد حضرت ؟ النقطه من نفسی ؟ و ماهی مکان حریم و کل امرها الی ثمره امره (صبح ازل) فلما تبین انها غیر صابره فی الامر ؟ واحدا من الاصدقآء (حاجی سید محمد اصفهانی) بما اجراه ذلک العبد و کان ؟ ؟ فقد ظهر بعضی عباد سمعوا من لسان الظلام (بهاء) بان الثمره ؟ کذا و کذا و وهب امرئه العدل بمن کذب نفسی الظلمه و کان الله عبدا ؟ قاتلی الله باحکم ؟ ان اعرض من النقطه و سمی نفسی شرکه الها و ؟ لربه ابی الله ان یصدقه فی الفعل و العمل انه کان مسرفا فی الله و افتری علیه کذبا ما اراد الوجه (صبح ازل) ان یکفره و لکن تبین له شرکه بالله و کفره فی الدّین و قد ؟ ؟ و اتبع سبیل عوجاء ؟ مما اجلب متاعا و اوتی ما ؟ ؟ و رای الناس فی ؟ و سفاهه و ابتهاء عن العمل اذا وسوس فی قلوبهم و تخذ مکان نفسی ؟ اقرعا ( میرزا آقا جان کاشانی خادم بهاء) فقد اتبع افکه و کذبه و افترآئه علی الله و ؟ فی الارض و اطلع فروعا و جعل نفسه للشیطان معرضا وقد شارکهم فی کل شی و شارک الظلم فی اتباعه و وسوس ؟ فی نفوس الناس الی ان مابقی مع الوجه احدا و ؟ فی انفراد و اصبح فی وحده و سبع الله بما استکاه و قدس و حمدالله و کان عبدا ؟ ما اراد من قبل ان یضاء مع بلعام ؟ ما صبر فی الله و نادی بالافک و ؟ الوجه مفادها و اتبع ما القاه الا ؟ فی الدین و الطاء افکا مؤتفکا ذلک قبل الذین امرضوا من نفسی و احتجبوا بما اقلوا عن العمل و ؟ و اشرکا و صاروا مبتدا.

Mirza Aqa Khan quotes Mirza Husayn-Ali as saying (with reference to the existing state of affairs amongst the BÂBis at Baghdad on his return from his voluntary exile in Suleymaniyya and with reference to the rift between him and Subh-i Azal at Edirne): “The BÂBis had degenerated to such extent that they laid claim to god-hood [i.e. to be ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’]. Any consideration for retributive ordinances of the divine law had ceased to exist; There was no sense of security for one’s son, wife or daughter. Robbery, and appropriation of one’s property were reckoned good works. I experienced considerable trouble in making them amenable to the law ….. in Edirne, a number of mischief-makers erected a rift [between me and Subh-i Azal]. My brother [i.e. Subh-i Azal] took them at their word out of naiveté.”
“I replied that the religion of the Bayan was threatened with total extinction and destruction. I had an inward converse [munajat] with God and suddenly, the Promised Manifestation became apparent and the lights of ‘He Who Shall Appear” became manifest.”

“I uttered the word, which all avoided indulging the Overseers (nuqaba) and the Helpers (nujaba).” [according to Al-Jorjani in his definition (Fluegel, p. 266) “Nujaba are those who have discovered the Inward Name so that they look into the hearts of men and discern secret thoughts, because for them veils are withdrawn from the face of mysteries. And they are of these kinds: Superior souls, which are embodiment of [divine] commands; Inferior Souls, which are mundane; and Intermediate souls, which are human essences. And in end, one of them God (Exalted is He) hath a trust deposited which comprises mysterious divine and mundane. And they are [in number] three hundred.”

Concerning the Nujaba he says (P. 259): “They are forty in number, and engaged in bearing the burdens of creatures, generally such accidents as human strength cannot cope with. And this [they do] by reason of their abundant natured pity and mercy, neither do they desist [therefrom] save for the sake of another, for no increase of advancement is [posible] to them save by this channel.” The Traveller’s Narrative, Vol. II, p. 303, English Translation.

[“the overseers and Helpers constitute two grades of a spiritual hierarchy whereof the members are called generically “men of the Unseen World” (جهان غیب), and at the head of which is the ‘pole’ (قطب), Professor Browne in same page]

“The word is this: “He [i.e. God] is apparent in my raiment. He is the Hidden and the Visible, the speaking through Me, although for sometime in Baghdad, in Istanbul and in the early period Edirne the manifestation of ‘He Who Shall Appear’, like the sun from under the clouds, was sometimes apparent and sometimes hidden. But in Edirne all of a sudden, it became apparent and manifest as clear as the sun at noon-day without veil and mask; and verses became resplendent [i.e. were revealed by Mirza Husayn-Ali]. Then I sent the verses and the evidences of the ‘manifestation’ to my brother [i.e. Subh-i Azal] by hand of the Interlocutor [Kalim, to wit, Mirza Husayn-Ali’s brother Musa surnamed as such because he spoke with God, Mirza Husayn-Ali] and the Servant of the Presence [i.e. Mirza Aqa Jan of Kashan, Mirza Husayn-Ali’s amanuensis].
Instead of giving thanks, and believing, he turned aside [from the manifestation, i.e. Mirza Husayn-Ali]. Whereas, according to the express provision of the Bayan, no one else but ‘He Who Shall Appear’ may advance this claim; and the mere appearance of ‘Him Whom God Shall Manifest’, no one may ask why and wherefore; and out of regard for his illustrious name, one may not deny him, if one does not believe in Him. Had I been false, how is that I have advanced the claim for several years and have held my own, proclaiming this great call before notables. In the event of falseness, it behoved God to declare me false and crush me. Whereas day by day, my cause is gaining strength and is on the ascent. New creation has been created under the shadow of my word.”

The Persian text of the words uttered by Mirza Husayn-Ali reads as follows:
« هو در قمیص انا ظاهر است و هو المکنون بانا المشهود ناطق »
With the allowance for the fact that reporter was none other than Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman, a Bayani and son-in-law of Subh-i Azal, with the allowance for Mirza Aqa Khan’s denunciations filled with quotations from the Quran which are interpreted in a sense far from flattering to Mirza Husayn-Ali and his followers, and with due allowance for Mirza Aqa Khan’s personal impression of Mirza Husayn-Ali (towards the end of this material), Mirza Aqa Khan’s report of his several interviews with Mirza Husayn-Ali on the schism between Mirza Husayn-Ali and Subh-i Azal, is feint. Mirza Husayn-Ali does make mention of “the first intimations of his divine mission” alleged “to have been hinted by him in his odes whilst imprisoned in Tehran in A.H. 1268 (A.D. 1851-2)”; He does not split hairs about the word “Hin”; He makes no mention of his “first manifestation on arrival at Baghdad from Teheran”; He makes no mention of his “second manifestation in the garden of Ridvan”. All these things of which no mention is made by Mirza Husayn-Ali are an afterthought to link up Mirza Husayn-Ali’s claim with the Point’s mission and to eliminate Subh-i Azal as far as possible. Mirza Husayn-Ali states that the Religion of the Bayan was about to peril and this led him to address a silent and fervent person to God in Edirne. He found the deity inhibiting Mirza Husayn-Ali’s corporeal body; overnight, Mirza Husayn-Ali became “He Whom God Shall Manifest” of the Bayan and began to reveal verses; When he applied himself to Subh-i Azal, which appellation undermines Mirza Husayn-Ali’s own claim and maintains Subh-i Azal’s claim to be the Point’s appointed successor, calling upon him to acknowledge his authority which Subh-i Azal rejected. Mirza Husayn-Ali admits that there were other pretenders to the office of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest” who preceded him in their claims. Mirza Husayn-Ali argues that Subh-i Azal should not have denied him even if he did not believe in him ‘out of regard for the name of ‘He Whom God Shall Manifest’ on the authority of Bayan. If this argument of Mirza Husayn-Ali were to hold good, then the pretenders who preceded Mirza Husayn-Ali would have had a prior claim.

Just as Subh-i Azal denounced other pretenders, he had to denounce Mirza Husayn-Ali for his bogus claim. The relevant passage in the Bayan, to which Mirza Husayn-Ali refers, reads as follows: The Persian Bayan, Nichola’s translation:
« On est, en effet, enfermé dans ce dilemme: ou cette personne est celui que Dieu doit manifester, et il est, en v6rité, impossible qu’autre que lui fasse sortir de sa nature même des versets, et, dès lors, pourquoi aller accuser la vérité de mensonge? surtout quand nuit et jour on a prié dans l’attente de sa manifestation et qu’on a agi pour elle? ou bien, quoique cela soit impossible, il s’agit de quelqu’un qui, mensongèrement, prétend être Celui que Dieu doit manifester. Qu’on laisse à Dieu le soin de le juger. Ce n’est pas à la créature qu’une telle sentence appartient à cause du respect du|. au nom dont cette personne s’est investi. »

In his own words, Mirza Husayn-Ali regarded the Point as the ‘very self of god’ and Subh-i Azal as the (‘Vessel of God’s authority’ ).

“There may be no two Points at One time”.( The Nuqtatul-Kaf 1, 2).
Subh-i Azal “had full powers to interpret the Point’s Law” in his (absolute discretion). Hence the denunciation for the bogus claim advanced by Mirza Husayn-Ali, who like the other pretenders who preceded him in their claims, claimed the signs of his god-hood, to wit, verses spontaneously uttered [ayat-i Fitra], flew from his lips.

Mirza Aqa Khan of Kerman was admitted to Mirza Husayn-Ali’s audience-chamber. “When I was come there, and behold upon that Arch-idol, that Greatest Talisman, that personified Revolt, that rebellious Lucifer, that envious Iblis, I saw a form on a throne and heard the lowing of the calf’ [in allusion to the Golden Calf, to the worship of which Samiri seduced the Children of Israel]. Then did I see how the light of the Most Great Name had shone on Ahriman the accursed, and how the finger of the demon wore the ring” [in allusion to the theft of Solomon’s magic ring by one of the demons, who, by its aid, exercised for some times the supreme power]. For they had written the name of Baha-al-Abha in divers writings and called it ‘the Most Great Name.’ thereat these came to my mind this verse of [Persian Poet Hafiz] the Tongue of the Unseen:

Efficient is the name Divine; be of good cheer, O heart!
The div becomes not Solomon by guile and cunning’s ant.

Professor Browne’s translation.