2.    Against Mirza Hadi Dowlat Abadi

2.1   Baha’s E.S.W
In his Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, Shoghi Effendi’s translation, PP. 86-87, Baha says: “It behoweth that now to reflect upon the state of Mirza Hadi Dowlat Abadi and Sad-i-Isfahani (Sadru’l-Ulama), who reside in the land of TA (Teheran). No sooner had the former heard that he had been called a BÂBi then he became so perturbed that his poise and dignity forsook him. He ascended the pulpits and spoke with which ill befitted him.”
In ibid, P. 189, Glossary, Mirza Hadi is referred to as follows:
“A noted divine from Isfahan who became a prominent follower of Mirza Yahya [Subh-i-Azal], later identified as his successor.”

2.2   Who Was Mirza Hadi Dowlat Abadi
Mirza Hadi was one of the most influential divines of His time. He was a staunch supporter of Subh-i-Azal. He visited him in Baghdad as well as in Famagusta. He was a personal friend of Subh-i-Azal, whom he regarded as the rightful and legal successor and vicegerent of the Primal Point, and whose case he championed throughout his life.

He was not appointed by Subh-i-Azal to succeed him after his death. He predeceased Subh-i-Azal.

Like other BÂBis of his time, Mirza Hadi had to conceal his religious opinion dictated by prudential motives. Baha’s allegation against him, embellished by Shoghi Effendi, lacks confirmation by Moslem sources. Mirza Hadi knew Baha from the days of Iran and Baghdad, when the latter submitted to Subh-i-Azal’s authority.

2.3   Baha’s Response to The Provision ‘Liquid Semen’
When Baha in Edirne started out his pretensions Mirza Hadi wrote a refutation of Baha’s pretensions and sent a copy of it to him in Acre. This incurred Baha’s wrath, which was aggravated by Mirza Hadi’s remarks to a follower of Baha to the effect that a special provision in the Persian Bayan, Wáhid V, BÂB 15, declared the liquid semen from which He whom god will make manifest is to proceed to be ceremonially clean. This provision presupposes the birth of Him whom god will make manifest from parents of whom would be of the BÂBi Faith. At the time Baha was alive and kicking.

These remarks were duly reported to Baha. The challenge evoked a riposte from Baha, in which he not only denounced Mirza Hadi but also denigrated the Primal Point, his benefactor, but for whom Baha would not have staked out his pretensions. In his riposte Baha states that “the purity of the semen from which Him whom god will make manifest did not hang on the word of his creatures” and that “the station of the Point”, whose return Baha alleged to be, “was established by Him whom god will make manifest”, with whom Baha alleged identity. Tablets of Bahaullah (Ishraqat, Persian Works, Tarazat, Tajaliat), Bombay Edition, PP. 24-28.

یکی از اولیاء علیه بهاء الله که از کاس استقامت نوشیده و ماسوی الله نزدش معدوم بوده در ارض صاد با هادی دولت آبادی ملاقات نموده آن غافل ذکر نمود ماء نطفه را نقطه اولی حکم بطهارتش کرده اند لاجل حرمت نطفه من یظهره الله و در آن ایام جمال قدم بیست و پنج ساله بوده اند و مقصودش از اینکلمه رّد ظهورالله و نفی او و اثبات اوهام خود بوده اوّلا آنکه این کلمه از بیانست میفرماید در آن یوم بیان نفع نمیبخشد و به آن تمسک ننمائید قال و قوله الحق انه لایشار باشارتی و لا بمانزل فی البیان و بانچه ذکر نمود مخالفتش با حضرت نقطه نزد متبصرین واضح و ثابت چه که حضرت میفرماید ایّاک ایّاک ان تحجب بمانزل فی البیان بکمال تصریح مخالفت نموده ..... یا هادی سبب اختلال و اضلال مشو انوار آفتاب حقیقت عالم معافی و بیان را منّور نموده و آیات الهی بمثابه اسطار از سحاب فضل نازل وهاطل جمیع بیان الیوم طائف حول است لو کنتم تفهمون سبحان الله هادی ملتفت نیست که چه میگوید و از بیان حضرت نقطه اولی در باره نطفه چه ادراک کرده ثانیا بگو ای غافل نطفه من یظهره الله روح ماسویه فداه طاهر و مطهر بوده و هست و آن نطفه مبارکه بذکر احدی محتاج نه ..... آیا پاکی و طهارت نطفه من یظهره الله معلق بکلمه عباد او است استغفرالله ...

When challenged by the specific provision in the “purity of semen”, as is laid down in the Bayan, which Baha declares it as the Point’s “Primordial Book” (Ummul-Kitab, i.e. the original scripture, before it is translated by the process of revelation into any human tongue), Baha, the ‘Completion’, reproves the Primal Point, his alleged “harbinger”.

There is however a vein of humour in his Lawh-i Nasir when he declares he is the Primal Point returned. Forgetful of this vein of humour, Baha is found in a paroxysm of anger when his followers dare put him on the same level and footing as the Primal Point:
Risala-i Janab-i Jud [apparently Mirza Jawad of Qazwin, author of Historical Epitome, Materials for the Study of BÂBi Religion by professor Browne, and surnamed Jud by Baha in reply to Hazrat-i Samandar, A.H. 1315; page 54:

« لاسم الله م ه نازل قوله جلّ جلاله " انا انطقنا النبیل قبل علی ( سید علی محمد ) فق صغره لیشهده الناس قدرتی و سلطنتی ثم عظمت و کبریائی ولکن احبائی الجهلاء انتخذوه شریکا لنفس و فسدوا فی البلاد و کانوا من المفسدین" الی قوله تعالی " قل یاقوم انّ ماسوائی قد خلق بقولی انّه و امثاله من الذین انتهم الله من هذا الشجر هم سبحان الرحمة و غمام الفضل و سرج الهدایة و اثلائی بین البریة ان یکون ثابتاً علی امری و انّ ربک ما اتخذ لنفسه شریکاً و لا شبیهاً و لا وزیراً و لا نظیراً و لاضدأ و لا مثال کذلک اشرق نیّر الحکم و قضی لامر من لدی الله العلّی العلیم انتهی. "

The quotation is from a letter addressed by Baha to one Ism-allah [Mahdi] wherein Baha asserts that he was pleased “to endow an-Nabil before Ali [i.e. the Primal Point] with speech to bear witness to my power. My sovereignty and my divine greatness among people.”
It was sheer error on the part of Baha’s “ignorant followers to associate” the Primal Point “with Baha and thereby “enact disorders”. The BÂB “whom I created by a word from me.” Baha’s followers should not give peers to god as “verily your lord [i.e. Baha] has not adopted any companion, or partner, or associate, or peer …. for himself”.

Baha’s ante-manifestation writings are couched in the language of humility, submissiveness and servitude towards the Primal Point and his appointed successor Subh-i Azal with denunciation and condemnation of those who defected from the Point’s cause. The contrast between his ante-manifestation and post-manifestation writings is very striking and interesting.
Nine years after his arrival in Baghdad on expulsion from Iran, Baha, in reply to allegation of his apostasy from the Primal Point and his appointed successor Subh-i Azal, issued flat denials of the allegations and reiterated his allegiance to the Primal Point and Subh-i Azal.

2.4   Baha denounces the Primal Point And His Ancestor
The Primal Point was a Sayyid, a descendant of the Family of the Prophet. In his Kashf-al-Hiyal, Vol. I., 6th impression, P. 26, Abd-al-Husayn Ayati surnamed Awara, a prominent Bahai missionary and Hand of the Cause, who abjured Bahaism and returned to the fold of Islam says: “Four years prior to his death I visited the late Sipah-Salar Muhammad Wali Khan in his home, accompanied by Nasrullah Bazarof, who was out to convert him into Bahaism”. After Nasrullah, had delivered himself of his speech of conversion, our host smiled and said: “My late father related to me: “I was in the house of the grand Vizir Aqa Khan when Mirza Husayn Ali of Nur [i.e. Baha] was brought in under escort on the very day on which an attempt was made on the life of Nasir-al-Din Shah [August 15, 1852]. The Grand Vizir spoke to him in harsh terms: “As a compatriot I was on friendly terms with your father. He was not a bad man. You might have taken his place and attained a post in the Court as a Scribe. But you are such a wretched being as to truckle to Sayyid-i-BÂB; what sort of madness he was obsessed with is unknown; and now you instigate [people] to murder the Shah?”
Mirza [i.e. Baha] answered immediately: ‘I have no belief in Sayyid-i-BÂB; may be in his ancestor too …’ But at once he held his tongue. The Grand Vizir expressed strong disapproval of him saying, ‘don’t be impertinent’, and by a gesture of hand ordered his dismissal and he was taken away. After this dismissal and confinement in prison the Grand Vizir said: “Mirza Husayn Ali made this statement involuntarily. He told the truth when he said that he had no belief in the BÂB’s ancestor too; for religion is not in his line at all; he has no aim other than gaining an advantage.”

« ... خودم بلاواسطه شنیدم مرحوم سپهسالار چهار سال قبل از وفاتش در روزی که نگارنده با سید نصرالله باقراف بمنزلش رفته بودیم و باقراف میل داشت اورا به بهائیت تبلیغ نماید آن مرحوم سخنان وی را شنیده خندان شد و گفت پدرم میگفت در منزل میرزا آقاخان صدر اعظم بودم که میرزا حسینعلی نوری را تحت الحفظ به نزد من آوردند در همان روزی که ناصرالدین شاه را تیر زده بودند چون میرزا را وارد کردند صدر اعظم بر او تغیّر کرده گفت من بر حسب هم وطنی با پدرت دوست بودم و او آدم بدی نبود و ممکن بود شما جای او را گرفته به مقام انشاء و استیعاء درباری نائل شوید ولی تو بقدری بدبخت هستی که به سیّد باب که معلوم نیست چه جنونی بر سر داشته میگروی و حال هم تحریک به قتل شاه میکنی! میرزا فوری جواب داد که من به سیّد باب عقیده ندارم بلکه به جد او هم ....... ولی فوراً زبان خود را حفظ کرد صدر اعظم هم به او تشر زد که فضولی مکن ... و اشاره کرد که او را ببرید و بردند و پس از خروج او از مجلس و دخول در محبس صدر اعظم گفت این کلمه را میرزا حسینعلی از روی بی اختیاری راست گفت که به جد باب هم عقیده ندارد زیرا او ابداً در خط مذهب نیست و جز سوء استفاده هیچ منظوری ندارد. »

---

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

---