Bahaism and Its Claims

By
SAMUEL G. WILSON, M.A., D.D.

Bahaism and Its Claims.

A Study of the Religions Promulgated by Baha Ullah and Abdul Baha. 8vo, cloth, net $1.50.

Bahaism is a revolt from the fold of Islam which in recent years has been bidding vigorously for the support of Occidental minds. Many of its principles are culled from the Christian religion which it insidiously seeks to supplant. What this Oriental cult is, what it stands for, and what it aims at, is told in a volume which forms a notable addition to the History of Comparative Religions.

Persian Life and Customs.

With Incidents of Residence and Travel in the Land of the Lion and the Sun. With a map and other illustrations, and an index. 8vo, cloth, net, $1.25.

"Not only a valuable contribution to the missionary literature of modern times, but is, in addition, a volume rich in the facts it contains in regard to that historic country. The American people generally should read this book, and thereby acquire much needed information about the Persians."—Religious Telescope.

Bahaism and Its Claims

A Study of the Religion Promulgated
by Baha Ullah and Abdul Baha

By

SAMUEL GRAHAM WILSON, D. D.

Thirty-two Years Resident in Persia
Author of "Persian Life and Customs," etc.

New York Chicago Toronto

Fleming H. Revell Company

London and Edinburgh

Copyright, 1915, by

FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY

New York: 158 Fifth Avenue
Chicago: 125 North Wabash Ave.
Toronto: 25 Richmond Street, W.
London: 21 Paternoster Square
Edinburgh: 100 Princes Street

To my Wife

whose love and appreciation
are a constant inspiration
in our far-away home

Contents

Introduction

AMONG movements in the Mohammedan world in modern times Babi-Bahaism is one of the most interesting. It is a definite revolt from Islam within its own fold. It has won its way in Persia amid considerable persecution to a position as a separate religion. It has added another to the permanent sects of the Near East. There Christian missions, inspired to long-postponed effort to convert Mohammedanism, have come face to face with Bahaism as a new and aggressive force. It has laid out a program as a universal religion, has crossed the seas and aspires to convert Christendom. Interest in it has been increased by this propaganda in the West and by the visits to Europe for this purpose of its present head, Abdul Baha Abbas, in 1911 and 1912.

Besides those who are interested in Bahaism as students of history and comparative religions, there are several classes who have shown marked favour to Bahaism.

(1) One class are simply bent on seeking some novelty. They are well described by the Egyptian Gazette, of Alexandria, in speaking of the reception of Abdul Baha in London: "About the London meetings there was a certain air of gush and self-advertisement on the part of Baha's friends, which was quite patent to all who are familiar with that kind of religion which will listen to anything so long as it is unorthodox, new, and sensational."[1]

(2) Another class are believers in the truth of all great religions, and, with a vague pantheistic notion, recognize all great men as God-inspired. They are willing to put Baha Ullah and Abdul Baha on the list of true religious leaders. Such is Rev. R.J. Campbell, who, in receiving Abdul Baha in London, spoke of the "diverse religious faiths that are all aspects of the one religion," and of the services as "a wonderful manifestation of the Spirit of God." He said to the congregation: "We as followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is to us and always will be the Light of the World, give greeting to Abdul Baha."

Mr. Campbell gives opportunity to the Bahai propaganda in the Christian Commonwealth, and has enlisted Abdul Baha as a contributor.

(3) Another class look on Bahaism as an ethical system, and Baha and Abdul Baha as world teachers. Their relation to Christ has been only that of a disciple to a teacher of morals. They recognize in Baha a new schoolmaster. Being Bahais to them consists in admiration of certain principles on which Abdul Baha is in the habit of dilating. But these are not Bahaism any more than Romans xii.-xv. are Pauline Christianity. Paul's gospel is Romans i.-viii. In its moral precepts and social principles, Bahaism is a borrower from Christ's teaching, and sometimes from Mohammed. However, Bahaism is a religion, not a system of morals.

(4) Some adherents regard Bahaism as Christianity continued or renewed by the Second Coming of Christ, whom they recognize in Abdul Baha. Most American Bahais are of this class, with faith in Baha Ullah as God the Father.

How can I classify the late Prof. T. K. Cheyne of Oxford? This widely known critic in his last work (1914), "The Reconciliation of Races and Religions," bewilders me by his credulity. It is only charitable to excuse it as the product of his dotage. How otherwise could an Oxford scholar take pride in adopting the "new name" and titles given to him by Abdul Baha, sign his preface "Ruhani," Spiritual, and have pleasure in being called the "divine philosopher," "priest of the Prince of Peace (Baha)," and being compared to St. Paul as a herald of the Kingdom, and write himself a "member of the Bahai community." At the same time Doctor Cheyne wrote himself down as a "member of the Nava Vidhan, Lahore" (Brahma-Samaj).

At present there are Bahai congregations in sixteen of the United States, in Canada, Hawaii, South Africa, England, Germany and Russia, as well as in India and Burmah. The future of its propaganda in Christendom lacks promise. Yet its measure of success makes it desirable to examine its claims and the facts regarding them.

Fortunately besides the older Babi books, there is an abundance of Bahai literature. There are (1) Treatises of Baha Ullah, (2) Tablets (Letters) and Addresses of Abdul Baha, (3) Persian Narratives, (4) Evidential books and tracts by its propagators, (5) Narratives of pilgrimages to Acca. From an independent point of view, little has been written. Nearly all of the many articles which have appeared in periodical literature have been from the pens of Bahais, though often not so ostensibly. Prof. E. G. Browne of Cambridge University, England, has translated and edited important Babi-Bahai works. His Introductions, Notes and Appendices to these books are storehouses of erudition and enable the reader to correct the biased information of the text. They pertain for the most part to the Babi period. So do the able contributions of Mr. A. L. M. Nicolas, the Consul of France, with whom, as my neighbour at Tabriz, I have had the pleasure of valuable conversations on this subject on which he is such an authority. I have had as sources of information also a manuscript "Life of Baha Ullah" by Mohammed Javad Kasvini, the "Kitab-ul-Akdas," Most Holy Book, translated by Dr. I. G. Kheiralla, in manuscript, and various unpublished letters and documents. Besides all this, I have been in personal contact with Bahais in Persia for a generation. My language teachers were Bahais, one of them a convert to Christianity. I have found their journal, the Star of the West, a prolific source of information. I may claim not to be of the class referred to by Abdul Baha when he says, "Baha Ullah will be assailed by those who are not informed of his principles."

After sketching, in brief, the history of Bahaism I will examine its religious, moral, political and social doctrine and life. In doing this I shall quote for the most part from the words of the "Revelation" and its adherents, in order to insure fairness and justice. In the course of the investigation, the history and character of the founders will be considered. Finally I shall describe its propaganda in the Occident.

Bahais declare that Babism is abrogated and superseded. In reality it is dead and I do not treat of it, except as it throws light on the history or doctrines of Bahaism. To all intents and purposes, the Bab is as much an obsolete prophet as Mani or Babak.

I am to deal with Bahaism in its latest phases. The term Babi is not appropriate to the religion of Baha nor to his followers. Of the "revelation," it may be said as Jacob said of his wages, they "have changed them ten times." The Bab altered his declarations regarding himself and his statements of doctrine. Subh-i-Azal made further changes. Baha's standpoint in the "Ikan," at Bagdad, differs greatly from that in the "Kitab-ul-Akdas," at Acca. Abbas gave the kaleidoscope another whirl and added his interpretations and emendations. Besides all these, it has been given a Western aspect for Christians. The Rev. H. H. Jessup, D. D., compares it very aptly to the town clock in Beirut, which has two kinds of dial plates. The face turned towards the Moslem quarter has the hands set to tell the hour according to Oriental reckoning; the face towards the Christian quarter, according to the European day. It is the face towards the Christians that I shall look at specially in the present investigation. However historical facts are the same and the main doctrines taught in the West have no essential difference from those of Persian Bahaism.

Acknowledgment and thanks are hereby tendered to The Bibliotheca Sacra, The Bible Magazine, The East and the West, The Church Missionary Review, The Missionary Review of the World, The Moslem World, The Union Seminary Review, and The Princeton Theological Review for the use of materials which I have previously published in their pages.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Nov. 16, 1911, quoted in Star of the West, Dec. 11, 1911.

I

Historical Sketch

Does it often happen that the earliest records of a religious movement ... pass, within a short time after their completion, into the hands of strangers who, while interested in their preservation, have no desire to alter them for better or worse. So far as my knowledge goes, it has never happened save in the case of the Babi religion.—"The New History of the Bab," p. xi, by E. G. Browne.

Persia is, and always has been, a very hotbed of systems from the time of Manes and Mazdak in the old Sassanian days, down to the present age, which has brought into being the Babis and the Sheikhis.—"A Year Among the Persians," p. 122.

Outside of a certain mixture of Occidental science and philanthropy, introduced largely for foreign consumption and in order to give an up-to-date stamp or colouring to the movement, there is scarcely anything that distinguishes Babism from its predecessors. The materials are inextricably interwoven with the whole course of Persian history in all its departments, political, religious, social, and philosophical. Time has pronounced its verdict again and again in the most unmistakable manner. So deep a hold have the ideas, which lie at the foundation of Babism and similar sects, taken of the minds and hearts of the people, that it may be said that as every American is a possible president, so every Persian is a possible murshid. For every sect that makes its appearance on the page of history, there are hundreds of embryo sects, of whose existence no one knows outside of a very limited circle.—P. Z. Easton, quoted in Speer's "Missions and Modern History," Vol. I, p. 121.

For the Bahais, the Bab became a sort of John the Baptist, sent to announce to the world the coming of Mirza Husain Ali, Baha Ullah, and perhaps of Abbas Effendi—a pitiable result of martyrdom. This thesis is essentially false. Reading of the book (the "Bayan") will convince every one of this.—A. L. M. Nicolas, "Béyan Persan," Vol. I, p. 11.

THE soil of the East has been fertile of religions. Montanus, Manes, Mazdak, Babak, Mukanna—familiarized in Lalla Rookh as the Veiled prophet of Khorasan,—Hasan Sabah chief of the Assassins, Hakim the cruel God of the Druses, each of these propagated his doctrines, exerted a wide influence, and left his mark on the people of the Orient. Saad-i-Doulah the Jew, Argoon Khan the Mongol, Ala-i-Din al Khalig, king of Delhi, and many others attempted to found new religions. In our own day the Mahdi of the Sudan, Ahmad Quadiani of India and Sheikh Ali Nur-i-Din of Tunis entered the lists. In the West, too, in America a land unbridled by traditions, Mormonism, Dowieism and Christian Science have flourished. To all these must be added Babism and Bahaism.

As an introduction to a discussion of Bahaism and its claims, I will sketch briefly and simply its origin and history. Bahaism is derived from Babism. Babism has its roots in Shiahism, a soil impregnated with the doctrines of the Imamate and Mahdiism. The atmosphere is filled with millennial hopes and dreamy mysticism, with Sufi philosophies and allegorical fancies of its poets. This soil has been fruitful of many sects. The Shiahism of Persia is called the "Religion of the Twelve" because its fundamental doctrine is that the twelve Imams, the lineal descendants of Ali and Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed, were the rightful Caliphs of Islam, in succession to Mohammed. In the tenth century (329 A. H. or 940 A. D.) the Twelfth Imam disappeared into a well, and still lives in Jabulka or Jabulsa whence he is expected to reappear as the Mahdi or Kaim. After his concealment, four persons in succession were channels of communication between him and the faithful. The title given to these was Bab or the Gate.

Among the sects which sprang up among the Shiahs or were related to them were the Ismielis, Carmathians, Druses, Hurufis, Ali-Allahis or Nusairiyeh, Assassins, Batinis and many others. A group of these were called Ghulat, because they rendered excessive honour to the Imams, believing them to be incarnations of the attributes or essence of God. Those holding this view anticipated that the Imam Mahdi would be a divine Manifestation.[2] At the beginning of the nineteenth century, a sect arose in Persia, called Sheikhis. It received its name from its founder, Sheikh Ahmad of Ahsa, 1752-1827. He taught that there was always in the world a "perfect

Shiah," who held communication with the absent Imam and revealed his will. Sheikh Ahmad was that "perfect one." He was favoured by the Kajar Shahs and had a considerable following. His successor, Haji Kazim of Resht, near the time of his death, announced to his disciples at Kerbela that the Manifestation was at hand. One of his disciples was Mirza Ali Mohammed of Shiraz. When twenty-four years of age in 1844, he laid claim to be the "promised one." He took the title of "Bab," the Gate or Door of communication of the knowledge of God. His followers were called Babis. He soon advanced his station and claimed to be the Kaim or Mahdi. Still advancing he took the title of Nukta or Point of Divine Unity and announced his "Revelation" or "Bayan" as the abrogation of Islam and the Koran. From Shiraz he went to Mecca and proclaimed his manifestation. On his return he was imprisoned. Many of the Sheikhis became his zealous followers and by their active propaganda caused great agitation throughout Persia. The Bab was transferred to the extreme northwest of Persia and confined in prison at Maku and Chirik. His sectaries, oppressed and persecuted, rose in arms against Mohammed Shah, anticipating victory through divine interposition. The Bab was executed at Tabriz in 1850. The insurrections were put down and many of the brave captives were treacherously slaughtered. A few Babis, seeking revenge, attempted to assassinate the new Shah, Nasr-ud-Din. This led to cruel reprisals. Four score Babis were executed at Teheran. Others fled into exile, especially to Bagdad. Among these was Mirza Yahya whom the Bab had appointed his successor. His title was Subh-i-Azal, the Dawn of the Eternal, or His Holiness the Eternal.

A special point of the Bab's teaching was the announcement of the coming of "Him whom God should manifest." After his death a number of the Babis claimed to be the promised incarnation. There was a "chaos of divine manifestations," including Hazret Zahib, Janab-i-Azim, Nabil and others. Among these claimants was Mirza Husain Ali, a son of Mirza Abbas, surnamed Buzurk, and his concubine. The father was steward or "vizier" of the household of Imam Werdi Mirza, Governor of Teheran. He was half brother to Mirza Yahya and thirteen years his senior. His title was Baha Ullah, the splendour or glory of God. For many years Baha acted in Bagdad (1852-67) as factotum for Azal, and acknowledged him as supreme. Then he announced that he himself was "He whom God should manifest," and took active measures to supplant Azal. About this time the Turkish Government transferred them to Adrianople. Here developed bitter jealousies, quarrels and foul play. The Sultan intervened and sent Subh-i-Azal to Famagusta, Cyprus, and Baha Ullah to Acca[3] (Acre), Syria, August 1868. Both were granted pensions and kept under police surveillance as parties dangerous to religion and the

state. Azal continued to be the head of the Babis, called henceforth also Azalis. Baha attracted most of the Babis to himself, and they became known as Bahais. Baha relegated the Bab to the position of a forerunner, and declared the "Bayan" and other books of the Bab to be superseded by his own "Revelations." He changed in a measure the doctrines and laws of Babism, liberalizing its provisions. He put himself forward as the Lord of a new dispensation, the founder of a new religion.

During the next quarter of a century Bahaism made little stir in Persia. Its advancement was by no means as rapid as during the earlier years of the Bab. The zeal and devotion of the followers sensibly slackened. Tagiya (dissimulation regarding one's religion) was allowed and practiced. The fierce warriors turned to professing the doctrines of expediency, condemning as unwise zealots the fighting Babis of the previous generation. During these years they escaped bloody persecutions except in rare instances. They tried to make their peace with the Shah, constantly emphasizing their loyalty, expurgating their books to suppress condemnation of the dynasty, and inducing the Sadr-Azam, the Prime Minister of Nasr-i-Din Shah, to tolerate and befriend them.

In Acca, too, Baha soon acquired considerable freedom, built a palace, called Bahja, in a delightful garden and freely received the pilgrims. He sent out many tablets, composed his Books of Revelation and had them published in Bombay. He died at Acca in May, 1892, in his seventy-fifth year. His temple tomb is near the Bahja.

Baha's haram consisted of two wives and a concubine. After his death, the sons of the different wives quarrelled regarding the succession. Abbas Effendi, the only son of the oldest wife, proclaimed himself the successor, the Interpreter, the Centre of the Covenant, the Source of Authority. Mohammed Ali and his brothers strenuously opposed Abbas and intense animosity was engendered which divided the followers in Acca and Persia. Abbas drew the greater number with him. He assumed the title of Abdul Baha (Servant of Baha). He has the ambition to make the faith a world religion and has inaugurated a propaganda in the West. After the proclamation of constitutional liberty in Turkey, he resided in Egypt. Later he made several journeys to Europe and one to North America. His visit to the Occident brought him into the lime-light. He was given good opportunity to present his cause.

The addresses of this "Infallible Interpreter" of the cult did not reveal clearly the real doctrines and aim of the movement. Abdul Baha confined himself mainly to the utterance of popular platitudes such as are stock-in-trade for a multitude of social and religious reformers, and most of which are original and accepted principles and precepts of Christianity. The real claims of Bahaism are set forth in the Books and Tablets (Epistles) of Baha Ullah and Abdul Baha, and in a considerable literature by Persian and American Bahais.

Abdul Baha is an intelligent, well informed man, of fair sagacity. He was educated at home after the custom of Persia. He says of himself, "I have studied Arabic profoundly and know the Arabic better than the Arabians themselves. I have studied the Persian and Turkish in my native land, besides other languages of the East. But when I visit the West I need an interpreter."[4] He said to Doctor Jessup, "Yes, I know your Beirut Press and your books." His references to ancient and modern philosophers, to historical events and to European writers, quoting from the same, show some familiarity with literature.[5] He repudiates the claims of some of his disciples that he has no literary culture, as that of Abul Fazl[6] or of M. A. Lucas who says:[7] "He has had no access to books, yet his knowledge is unbounded." On this point Professor Cheyne remarks:[8] "His public addresses prove that through this and that channel he has imbibed something of humanistic and even scientific culture. He must have had some one to guide him in the tracks of modern inquiry. I venture to hope that his expounding may not, in the future, extend to philosophic, philological, scientific, and exegetical details. Abdul Baha may fall into error on secular problems, among which it is obvious to include Biblical and Koranic exegesis." "I am bound to say that Baha Ullah has made mistakes and the almost equally venerated Abdul Baha has made many slips."[9]

A word should be said about the number of Bahais. I have many data on this point, but can here give only a summary. Regarding their numbers, the Bahais have indulged in gross exaggeration. "Millions" is the usual figure used by American Bahais. Thus Phelps[10] speaks of "the millions of Bahais in Persia." MacNutt, in "Unity through Love," declares that "His followers number millions from all the religious systems of the world." Kheiralla[11] says: "Abdul Karim, 1896, assured me that the believers in Baha were fifty millions. I wrote to Syria to ask. Sayid Mohammed, secretary of Abbas Effendi, said that the number was fifty-five million souls." Kheiralla afterwards denounces it as a gross deceit. As to Persia, they place the proportion at one-third or one-half. Dreyfus writes,[12] "Probably half the population of Persia is Bahai." Some judicious non-Bahai writers allow them half a million or less in Persia on a basis of ten millions of population. American missionaries, as Jordan at Teheran, Frame at Resht and Shedd at Urumia, calculate that the number in Persia does not exceed 100,000 to 200,000. After careful inquiry I agree with this estimate.

As to other races and countries, let us see. Abul Fazl claims[13] that "Jews, Zoroastrians, and Nusaireyah by thousands" are Bahais. M. Haidar Ali[14] says: "The majority of Zoroastrians are recognized as Bahais in all sincerity." On the contrary Professor Browne writes:[15] "I had been informed that Zoroastrians were accepting Bahaism. However after much intercourse with the Zoroastrians of Yezd and Kerman for the space of three and a half months, I came to the conclusion that few, if any, had adopted the Bahai creed." In India the proportion of Parsee-Bahais is very small.

As to Jews:—Remey says: "In Hamadan there is a large Israelitish following of Baha." A census made by a European Jew showed exactly 59 parents and with their children 194 persons out of a population of 6,000 Jews. As to the United States, I give some particulars in the closing chapter. The census of 1906 reported 1,280 Bahais, which may have increased to two or three thousand. In the Turkish empire they are few, for Sunni Moslems are utterly indifferent to Bahaism. The Egyptian Gazette says of Egypt where Abdul Baha resided for two years, "The new religion has made little perceptible progress; Islam remained indifferent, and the Christian community was ignorant of his presence." Of Syria, Mr. Phelps wrote:[16] "All the Bahais in Acca are Persians. No other nationalities are among them." The inference is plain that no native of Acca had become Bahai through forty years of contact with Baha and his seventy followers. Bahais outside of Persia are probably all told not more than 15,000 and one-third of these are Persians in Russia. Abdul Baha gave the impression that many of the Christians of Persia are converts to Baha. Dr. J. H. Shedd wrote, 1894, "I have heard of no case of a Christian conversion to Bahaism." Dr. G. W. Holmes wrote, 1903, "I do not know of a single Christian in Persia, who has been converted to Bahaism. Some Bahais who made a profession of Christianity turned back to Baha." Rev. J. W. Hawkes declares that in his observation none of the members of the Syrian (Nestorian) or Armenian churches in Persia have become Bahais.[17] I have known of one Armenian family in Resht and two men in Maraga, one of whom was a notorious ne'er-do-well, who kept up his opium using as before.

FOOTNOTES:

[2] Prof. E. G. Browne says ("A Literary History of Persia," p. 311), "The resemblance between these numerous sects, whose history can be traced through the last eleven centuries and a half, is most remarkable and extends even to the minute details of terminology." "The doctrines appear to be endemic in Persia, and in our own days appeared again in the Babi movement."

[3] At that very time the chief of the Vashratis, who held that Sheikh Ali Nur-i-Din, of Tunis, was a Manifestation of Mohammed, and his essence divine, was in exile in Acca. He was in friendly relations with Baha.

[4] Star of the West, April 9, 1913, p. 35.

[5] Phelps' "Life of Abbas Effendi," p. 227.

[6] "Bahai Proofs," pp. 94, 109.

[7] "My Visit to Acca."

[8] "The Reconciliation of Races and Religions," pp. 155, 159.

[9] "The Reconciliation of Races and Religions," p. 181.

[10] "Life of Abbas Effendi," p. 100.

[11] "Three Questions," p. 22.

[12] Page 42.

[13] Page 64.

[14] "Martyrdoms in 1903."

[15] Jour. Roy. As. Soc., p. 501, 1889.

[16] Page 109.

[17] R. E. Speer's "Missions and Modern Hist.," pp. 157, 181.

II

The General Claims of Bahaism

The conception on which Bahaism bases its claim is false. Truth does not grow old, nor is it possible to change the religion with the growth of the race. A universal religion must present truth in a form that will reach men in every stage of civilization, for the reason that in every period of the world since the dawn of history there have been simultaneously men in every stage of intellectual development.—W. A. Shedd in "Miss. Review of the World."

It (Bahaism) has not enough assurance of personal immortality to satisfy such Western minds as are repelled by the barren and jejune ethical systems of agnostics, positivists, and humanitarians who would give us rules to regulate a life which they have rendered meaningless.—Professor Browne in Phelps' "Life of Abbas Effendi," p. xviii.

The essence of being a Bahai is a boundless devotion to the person of the Manifestation and a profound belief that he is divine and of a different order from all other beings.—Professor Browne, Art. "Bab" in Ency. of Religion and Ethics.

THE claims of Bahaism are many and varied. They cover a wide range. I will first consider its general claims and of these the most significant.

I. First of all, Bahais claim that a new religion is needed. All the great religions, they say, were true in their day; not only Moses, Christ, and Mohammed, but Zoroaster, Confucius, and Buddha were Divine Manifestations, and revealed God's truth. But now the old religions are dead. Abdul Baha[18] says: "The Spirit has passed away from the bodies of the old religions. While the forms of their doctrines remain, the Spirit has fled." "The principles of the religion[19] of Christ have been forgotten. It is then clear and evident that in the passage of time religions become entirely changed. Therefore they are renewed." "There is to-day[20] nothing more than traditions to feed upon.... The world of humanity is in the dark." One chapter in Thornton Chase's "The Bahai Revelation" is headed "The Bahai Revelation is needed." This he argues, stating (1) that Christianity is condemned because after 1900 years it has not been accepted by all people; (2) because it refuses to reject miracles and the blood atonement and will not confine itself to the "principles of Jesus," as the Brahma Samaj; (3) because it tends to separate peoples, holding itself to be the only religion authorized by God; (4) because people are dwelling in bondage and are no longer satisfied. Tares are many and Baha Ullah must come and uproot them.[21]

"The old order of things is passing away," says Sprague;[22] "people are being tossed about with every wind of doctrine." "True religion is forgotten," says Phelps,[23] "or has become a hollow name; faith has waned, men are wandering in the dark." This decay, they teach, is inevitable and in accord with divine arrangement. They deny the belief of Christians that Christianity is the permanent religion of humanity; and that of Moslems, that Mohammed was the "seal of the prophets," and hold that Christianity was succeeded by Islam, Islam by Babism, and Babism by Bahaism. Abdul Baha says: "Time changes all things. Transmutation and change are requirements of life. All religions of God are subject to the same law. They are founded in order to blossom out and develop and fulfill their mission. They reach their zenith and then decline and come to an end." "A new cycle must begin, for the world needs a new luminary."

It is not necessary to refute the fundamental fallacy of this first claim, for it is patent that Christianity is alive and growing. Its manifold spiritual activities, its varied and progressive efforts for righteousness and peace among men, for social and moral reforms, its zeal for Missions and their marvellous success, show that Christianity is neither stagnant nor dead. It has a forward triumphant movement. The Church renews its strength from its divine Head; He, alive forevermore, is its Light and its Life.

II. Bahaism claims to be the divine Revelation in this new cycle—a new Dispensation or Covenant. It disclaims being a new religion, affirming rather that it is a renewal of religion or religion renewed. One writes: "The Revelation is not a new religion, but the very essence of God's word as taught by Christ (and Moses and Mohammed), but not perceived by Christians at large" (nor by Jews nor Mohammedans). Baha Ullah[24] says: "Of the utterances of the prophets of the past we have taken the essence, and in the garment of brevity clothed it." Abdul Baha says: "The same basis, which was laid by Christ and later on forgotten, has been renewed by Baha Ullah." "All that is true in all religions will stand; by the new Dispensation, new spirit is infused into these teachings."[25] Phelps[26] says: "The body of doctrine which Bahaism teaches is not put forward in any sense or particular as new, but as a unification and synthesis of all other religions." Of its system of morals the same is true. It is a restatement in unsystematic form of common ethics. It reiterates the second table of the Mosaic Law, and the New Testament principles of brotherly love and unity. Yet in some of his addresses Abdul Baha names certain principles as new in the Bahai faith, such as universal peace, the unity of humanity, arbitration, compulsory education of both sexes, the harmony of science and religion, the evil of prejudice and fanaticism, need of investigating the truth, etc. Not one of these is new; not one owes its position in the world of thought or activity to the Bahai propaganda.

But whether Bahaism claims to be new in its principles or disclaims it, in fact it is a new religion. The disavowals are, no doubt, made for the sake of obtaining easier access to the followers of the old religions, and are only a temporary expediency. In this they are simply following the example of Mohammed, who proclaimed his message to the people of Arabia as the religion of Abraham, and as the same as that of the Law and the Gospels. But it is evident that Bahaism is inconsistent with Christianity, as indeed with Islam. Bahais' claims, if admitted, would lead to the superseding of Christianity. This will appear when I state its doctrines. The present attitude of Bahais in maintaining connection with Christian Churches and at the same time worshipping Baha and propagating Bahaism is one of intellectual stultification or of moral blindness.

In the same way, in Moslem lands, Bahais conform to the externals of Islam. In the case of the latter the cause of this is often moral obliquity or fear; with deceived Christian brethren it is probably ignorance; by the Bahai propagandist it is allowed from astute policy. It is an intellectual impossibility for one to accept the teachings of Baha Ullah and to be his disciple and at the same time to be an intelligent disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ. The one excludes the other. Bahaism is a distinct religion. It is not even a sect of Islam. It abrogates and annuls it. Professor Browne says: "As Christianity is a different religion from Judaism, and as Islam is distinct from Christianity, so Bahaism is a separate religion, distinct from Christianity or Islam." It even superseded and abrogated Babism. The Bab has been relegated to the background, and put into the position of a John the Baptist. His book, the "Bayan," is long ago neglected to such an extent that Professor Browne had difficulty in obtaining a copy in Persia. Remey[27] says: "Babism fulfilled its purpose, and when this was accomplished in the appearance of Baha Ullah, it, as such, ceased to exist." Mirza Abul Fazl[28] says: Babism "is not the same religion or creed as Bahaism."

A statement of the fundamental doctrines of Bahaism will suffice to show that it is a distinct religion.

(1) The fundamental assertion of Bahaism is that Baha Ullah is the Manifestation or Incarnation of God the Father. Baha Ullah says of himself in his letter to the Pope: "O Pope! This is indeed the Father of whom Isaiah gave you tidings and the Comforter whom Christ promised." Abdul Baha affirms: "The Father, foretold by Christ, has come amongst us." "The Father of Christ is come among you."[29] "The manifested God Himself has come."[30] He is called the "Lord of Hosts," "the Lord God Almighty," "Creator of whomsoever is in the world," also "the Ruler." Abdul Baha cabled back to America after his voyage: "Thanks to Baha Ullah, we arrived safely at Liverpool."[31] Instead of beginning a book, as the Moslems do, "In the name of God," the Bahais begin, "In the Name of our Lord El Baha."

The Persian Bahais accept this teaching. One of them in Tabriz declared to me: "Baha is very God of very God." M. Abdul Karim delivered the doctrine in this form to the disciples in America[32] and said: "Upon the Day, when God Almighty, in the form of man known as Baha Ullah declared Himself and said, 'I am God and there is no God but Me,' the old heavens and old earth passed away, all things became new." So it continues to be preached.

Mr. Remey[33] says in the Bahai monthly (the capitals are his): "This one is The Father Himself, The Manifested God Himself Bahaullah."

(2) The Revelation of Baha is contained in his Books and Tablets (Epistles). Some of these are the "Ikan," the "Surat ul-Haykal," the "Hidden Words," the "Seven Valleys," and the "Kitab-ul-Akdas." Remey[34] pronounces them "The latest and greatest of God's revelations to the world." "They contain knowledge which was sealed and closed up by the prophets of bygone cycles, so that the minds of the wisest of men were unable to comprehend it." Thornton Chase, exceeding the others in his extravagant language, declares that "were all the books of former days lost and forgotten, the whole of true religious teaching could be found in the 'Bahai Revelation.'"

The "Kitab-ul-Akdas," "The Most Holy Book," is called by M. Abul Fazl the "greatest" and "most important." It consists of 146 pages of manuscript, about 10,000 words. It was written at Acca in Persian and Arabic. It has been translated into Russian, and a synopsis of it is given by Professor Browne,[35] of Cambridge University, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1892, of which I make use. The "Kitab-ul-Akdas" warns the learned against criticizing it, and in imitation of Mohammed challenges them to produce the like of it. It is similar in its teachings to the "Bayan" of the Bab, though less fantastic and mystical. Its contents are confused and unsystematic. It has laws—ceremonial, moral, civil, criminal—mingled with rhapsodies, exhortations, addresses, and various digressions. After an introduction and some laws, follow addresses to the Emperor of Germany and to the Sultan of Turkey, to the cities of Teheran and Kirman, and to the province of Khorasan. After more laws there is a digression about revelation; then more laws and a digression about the Bab; again sundry laws, followed by a denunciation of Subh-i-Azal, and this by various civil laws, ending with a command to select a universal language.

The book is a medley, and bears internal evidence of the truth of the tradition that it was written piecemeal in answer to various questions from believers. The fragments were jumbled together without order. The learned are reminded by Baha that he never studied the sciences, and there is too abundant evidence in the book itself to confirm the statement. It ranks far below Deuteronomy as a system of laws or a literary composition.

The opening words of the Book of Akdas state the conditions of entrance into the religion of Baha: (1) "Verily the first thing which God hath ordained unto His servants is the knowledge of the Dawning-Place of the Revelation [i. e., of Baha]. Whosoever hath attained thereunto hath attained unto all good; and he who is deprived thereof is indeed of the people of error—even though he bringeth all good actions." (2) "It behoveth every one to follow that whereunto he is commanded. These two things are inseparable." Acceptance of Baha as the Manifestation of God and following Him in obedience are the two conditions of discipleship. (3) A third condition has been added since the death of Baha—namely, adherence to Abdul Baha Abbas as supreme Head, "the centre of the covenant." This assumption of authority by Abbas caused a bitter and angry schism at Acca.

Remey[36] says: "He [Baha] has pointed to the one who should be looked upon as authority by all, and has closed the doors to outside interpretation. Therefore obedience and submission must be shown completely to him." Mirza Asad Ullah[37] says: "Whosoever turns away from Abdul Baha is one of the companions of the left hand [38] the preacher of brotherly love and unity. In this way they fulfill their boast of consorting with all men in "harmony and fragrance."

The minority seem to have the best of the argument,[39] but Abbas has established himself as Supreme Pontiff. His most honoured agents call him by titles which imply his divinity. American pilgrims worship him as "Christ, the Master."[40] Sprague[41] declares him to be "the third of the great Trinity of Revelators." M. Abul Karim[42] writes: "God appeared in the Bab as the Holy Ghost, in Baha as the Father, in Abbas as His Son." Mrs. Grundy[43] says: "Within Abdul Baha is the inexhaustible fountain of knowledge." Remey[44] says: "Through Abdul Baha and through him only can believers receive the spiritual power and sustenance necessary for their growth." Among Abbas's titles are the "Greatest Branch of God," the "Mystery of God."[45]

These are a few of the salient points of the "new revelation."

III. Another claim of Bahaism is that of superiority to former religions.

(a) Its founder is declared to be superior in his personality, in his divine knowledge, in his power of revealing. In what has already been quoted, this is evident. The great cycle which began in Adam is said to have reached its culmination in Baha Ullah. "The Manifestations are ended by the appearance of this, which is the greatest of all Manifestations," which "manifests itself only once in 500,000 years." "He is exalted above all those who are upon earth and in the heaven." Abdul Baha[46] says: "Consider the time of Jesus. This is greater than that for as much as it is the calling of the Lord of Hosts." "All the great prophets were perfect mirrors of God—manifestations of the 'Primal Will' of God—and sinless, but in Baha[47] in some sense the Divine Essence is manifested." Phelps[48] says: "He is greater than his predecessors." "Baha," says Kheiralla,[49] "is the Everlasting Father, who spoke in Abraham, Moses, and Jesus Christ, who were His ministers, and at these latter days He came Himself in the flesh to judge the quick and the dead." Abbas said to Mrs. Grundy: "Baha is the consummation of all degrees. He is the Revelation of all truth and light." "Christ is the vine, Baha is the husbandman—the Lord of the vineyard." A poem says of Baha:

By His life-fostering lip live a hundred such as Jesus;
By the Sinai of His aspect sit a thousand such as Moses;
Thou, on the night of ascent, didst entertain the prophet as Thy guest.

Refrain:—

The Temple of God's glory is none other than Baha;
If one seeks God, let him seek Him in Baha.
Thou art the King of the Realm of the everlasting,
Thou art the Manifestation of the essence of the Lord of Glory,
The Creator of Creation.

Such are some of the "great swelling words" with which his followers exalt Baha. Yet when we examine his life we find nothing to justify such extravagance. He was simply a man of like passions as others. It may seem invidious to refer to scandalous stories of Baha's youth in Teheran. But does not truth demand that it be stated that his reputation in Persia is sullied by definite accusations of vice and immorality? I have heard such narratives with statements of the time, place, and associates who were partakers of his guilt. His family in riper years exhibits no higher example than a bigamous household. According to the narrative of Abdul Baha in the "Traveller's Narrative,"[50] he planned in duplicity to reach the headship of the Babis; for while purposing all the while to set forth a claim for himself, he put forward his half-brother, Subh-i-Azal, as the successor of the Bab—to protect himself and to insure his own safety during times of danger. He outwardly supported Azal for many years, while secretly planning to supplant him. While acting as Azal's trusted minister, he was drawing the people to himself. We pass over the attempts of these brothers to poison each other. Each accuses[51] the other, and, as the Persians say, "God knows" whether both speak the truth. We pass over, at present, the definite accusations against the Bahais of assassinating the Azalis.[52] In the notorious case where Azalis were foully murdered[53] by Bahais at Acca, and the latter were brought to trial before the Turkish authorities, they were defended and kept in favour by Baha. He had near Subh-i-Azal a spy named Maskin Kalam,[54] who by guile and deceit kept away any who wished to visit Azal. He received this disciple to his intimate circle after years of such active deception. Azal, who is called by Bahais "the point of Satan," and is likened to Cain and Judas, has a character gentler, more lovable, and more sincere than Baha as the two are depicted in the writings of Professor Browne; albeit, Baha is abler, more astute, more a leader of men. Professor Browne, in his interviews at Famagusta and at Acca, did obeisance to each of them. His bow to Azal may have been one of respect for his character or disposition; his bow to Baha must rather have been out of regard for his influence and leadership. But after all we need not wonder so much at the delusion of the Bahais in exalting Baha, for we are familiar with Dowie and Zion City, and with Joseph Smith and the Mormons. And we are surely led to expect the appearance of such a deceiver who "as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." Bahais certainly, in the words of the Apostle,[55] "have strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."

(b) The Bahais claim superiority for the books and writings of Baha Ullah.

(1) As to the rapidity of their composition, their style, and their quantity. One of the proofs of the Bab was the rapidity with which he composed verses,[56] "with amazing rapidity, without any reflection." Sayid Yahya of Darab, one of his first converts,[57] was gained by such a "sign," implying, as was supposed, divine inspiration. He propounded certain questions. The messenger brought the answer, of which he says: "I beheld a marvel a hundred thousandfold beyond what I sought for. Over two thousand verses and illustrations of eloquence and beauty of style revealed and written down during five or six hours." So also in Ispahan, in answer to the Imam-Juma[58]: "The Bab began to write, and in three hours wrote 1,000 verses. Then the Imam-Juma was convinced that such power was from God, being beyond the capacity of man." In his trial at Tabriz[59] the Bab cited as a proof of his divine mission: "I can write in one day 2,000 verses. Who else can do this?"

In like manner the claim was made for Baha Ullah that he could compose with miraculous rapidity. "The maximum speed of Baha's revelation is said to be 1,500 verses in one hour." These were "written without premeditation or reflection,"[60] and often dictated to his amanuensis. To Baha is attributed the marvellous feat of composing and writing the "Ikan" in a single night. This book in its English translation consists of 184 printed pages. The translator, Mirza Ali Kuli Khan, Persian Chargé des Affaires at Washington, a zealous Bahai, says in his preface:[61] "According to the prevailing opinion of Bahais, the 'Ikan' was written in one night by the supreme pen." He argues (faint-heartedly apparently) for the truth of the statement, and cites Abul Fazl as corroborating the tradition. It is altogether probable that Baha prepared the "Ikan" during his retirement for two years to Kurdistan, in the region of Suleimaniyeh. It is curious to note how the Bahais have outdone Mohammed. He made his verses (ayat = signs), and their eloquence and beauty the signs of his mission. But Babis and Bahais add rapidity of composition as an additional sign or miracle.

The quantity of the writings is also emphasized as proving their divine source and power. It was a matter of boasting that the Bab's writings were from 100,000 to 500,000 verses, and he was executed at twenty-five years of age. Of Baha's Abdul Baha says: "The Books of his Holiness number more than 100; each one sufficient for mankind." Abul Fazl[62] writes: "His Holy Tablets exceed in quantity the Heavenly Books and Divine Writings possessed by all the different nations of the earth." The number of these tablets is stated to be over 1,000. By way of contrast, Christ's teachings are said by Abdul Baha to consist of only a dozen pages scattered in the Gospels.

When they speak of the style, the eloquence, the enlightening power of Baha's writings, it is with similar superlative adjectives of high-flown Persian rhetoric.

It is hardly necessary to call attention to the fact that this so-called proof is simply a matter of assertion and opinion. As to rapidity, we could wish Baha had taken more time and made such books as the "Kitab-ul-Akdas" more systematic, for, as we have pointed out, it is sadly lacking in plan. The veriest tyro could improve on it by rewriting.

If quantity were an argument, the product of Baha's pen has been exceeded by many Christian and Moslem divines. Besides, what advantage is it for a religion to be set forth in 100 volumes? Will God be heard for His much speaking any more than man would be? The story of redemption and God's revelation through 4,000 years makes but one goodly volume.

As to style, the Persians would scorn to have the beauty of their great poets or of such writings as the "Masnavi" put into comparison with the "Ikan" or "Akdas." The Bab's writings were not even grammatical. Baha's are more intelligible than the Bab's, but lack his originality and depth. Baha's style is rhetorical, verbose, prolix, but with a certain strength. But Mirza Abul Fazl holds a more forceful and sagacious pen. In some things Baha's writings remind one of the Church Fathers in contrast to the Gospel narratives. The quantity of his writings, his system of quotations from former Holy Books, his allegorical interpretations, recall Irenæus or Origen.

As to "verses" in general, and their rhetorical quality as a proof of divine inspiration and revelation, it would be well for Bahais to remember that the Bab recognized divine quality in the verses of Subh-i-Azal, which the Bahais reject with disdain. When the "verses" of Azal came to the Bab, he "rejoiced exceedingly,"[63] nominated him as his successor, and left to him the completion of the "Bayan." Was he mistaken in so important a matter? However that may be, the Bahais contradict him and pronounce the "verses" of Azal good for nothing. M. Ahmad Zohrab,[64] the interpreter of Abdul Baha, avers that "the writings of Azal are most childish. They are jumbled, confused, meaningless composition." Another Bahai, Nabil the poet, at one time wrote "revealed verses," and Azal approved of them and sealed their inspiration. Afterwards Nabil repudiated his own "divinity." Evidently, then, the "proof from verses" is a very uncertain and unreliable one.

(2) They claim superiority for the contents of the Revelation. In describing the substance and variety of it, their "great swelling words" know no bounds. Abdul Baha says: "They are universal, covering every subject. He has revealed scientific explanations ranging throughout all the realms of human inquiry—astronomy, biology, medicine, etc. He wrote lengthy tablets upon civilization, sociology, and government." "One book of the Blessed Perfection is more comprehensive than fifty volumes of the world's greatest wisdom." Empty boasting!

Professor Browne[65] says: "The countless tablets are for the most part rhapsodies interspersed with ethical maxims." Let us give a few of Baha's "revelations" on morals, philosophy, and science. His ethics permit bigamy and tagiya, dissimulation regarding one's faith; his Law punishes habitual theft by branding, and arson by burning, and compounds adultery with a small fine; his philosophy affirms the eternity of matter and the emanation theory of divine Manifestations; his science decides the purity of water by three points—"colour, taste, and smell"—but knows nothing of analysis, and affirms that "the food of the future will be fruits and grains"; it abolished the weeks and months and substitutes nineteen months of nineteen days each, and a system of nineteen units for the decimal or metric system; it creates a new alphabet to bother childhood; its ritual for prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage somewhat resembles the Moslem, with times and places changed. These are samples of its new and superior (?) laws and precepts, which are mingled with a mass of ordinary moral teaching. There is far too much of it for a religious system, but it is entirely inadequate as a judicial and criminal code. Abul Fazl[66] grossly exaggerates when he writes that "Baha has enacted laws and regulations concerning every point or subject."

As a system Bahaism is not superlative. "It is," says Professor Browne,[67] "at most a new synthesis of old ideas; ideas with which the Eastern mind has for centuries been familiar, and which have ere now been more clearly and more logically systematized by older schools of thought, though perhaps they were without a certain tincture of modern Western terminology which is perceptible in Bahaism." "Of the doctrines of the Bab"—and the same is true of Bahaism—"taken separately, there was hardly one of which he could claim to be the author, and not many which did not remount to a remote antiquity."[68] "The theories of symbolism,[69] incarnation, and other doctrines differ in no essential particular from those held by the Ismielis." If desirable, the doctrines and laws could be traced severally, as has been done by Doctor Tisdall in his "Yanab-ul-Islam" regarding the Koran, and the source of each shown. Borrowing so much from the Shiah sects, its fundamental basis in philosophic thought is inferior even to Islam. But because it borrows so much from the enlightened principles and practices of advanced Christian peoples, its moral system is an advance on Islam. Christianity may boldly assert its unique superiority to this "half-cooked" system, to use a Persian idiom. Professor Browne[70] vetoes its claim to superiority, saying: "I do not admit that the Bahai or any other religion can supply a rule of life higher than that which Christ has given us." Discussing with the Bahais in Shiraz,[71] he said: "The religion of Mohammed was certainly not a higher development of the religion of Christ. It is impossible for any one who has understood the teachings of Christ to prefer the teachings of Mohammed. As you say each Manifestation must be fuller, completer, and more perfect than the last, you must prove that the doctrines taught by Baha are superior to those of Christ—a thing that I confess seems to be almost impossible, for I cannot imagine a doctrine purer and more elevated than that of Christ."

IV. Bahaism claims to be the Universal Religion. Dreyfus called his book on Bahaism "The Universal Religion." Remey[72] says: "The Universal Religion is what the Bahai movement offers to the world." Phelps[73] says: "It is divinely inspired world-religion in its first youth. Baha Ullah is a world-teacher in a broader sense than they"—i. e., the founders of other religions. This claim is not only that it is intended "for all people, under all conditions," and is adapted to all, but that it is so all-inclusive and latitudinarian that it can[74] "unite all those now following many systems into one universal faith," and that "each religious sect[75] will hear in the words of Baha its own oft-repeated message, which has been dulled and distorted."

The latter phase of this claim we may dismiss in a word. It is simply a gloss. It is an imagination of enthusiastic Bahais. Neither Christians, Moslems, nor others will be thus included, except some few before they understand Bahaism. The only inclusion it offers is by accepting the divine character and mission of Baha and Abbas;[76] in other words, by becoming Bahais. When they address the Hindu, saying, "We are one with you," "We teach the original Hinduism of your fathers," it is simply to add: "Baha is the fulfillment of your books, follow him." When they allow the Jewish Bahai of Hamadan still to consort with the Jews as a Jew, and to be baptized and pass as a Christian at the same time, it is an inclusiveness which is unjustifiable and deceitful. It is teaching tagiya or religious dissimulation to other races after the manner of the Persian Shiahs. It is, at most, merely a temporary subterfuge.

Let such double-faced Bahais read Remey's article in the Star of the West,[77] entitled "Let the New follow the New," and they will see how untenable is their position. He says: "The Bahai Cause is not merely one of many phases of universal truth (as some say), but is the only living truth to-day; the only source of divine knowledge to mankind. The revelation of Jesus was for His own dispensation—that of 'the Son.' Now it is no longer the point of guidance to the world. We are in total darkness if we are refusing the revelation of the present dispensation. Bahais must be severed from all and everything that is past—things both good and bad—everything. Now all is changed. All the teachings of the past are past. Abdul Baha is now supplying all the world." We read this, with amazement at such pretensions, such groundless assumptions, yet are pleased with the ring of sincerity. We, too, say, "Let a Bahai stand for Bahaism." Even so, let a Christian stand for Christianity, and not stultify his intellect by professing to hold to both religions. But such teachings as Remey's absolutely negative the claim of Bahaism to be able to include the professors of all religions. In conclusion, Bahaism aims at being universal just as every other "ism," even as Mormonism, by persuading the world to forsake its old faiths and adopt its new dogmas. Baha[78] states in a tablet: "Blessed is the brave one, who, with a firm step, walks out of the corridors of intimacy [the old religious restrictions] and takes a place in the ranks."

Is Bahaism fitted to be a universal religion? It has copied much from Christianity and Islam; it would not be strange if it has caught something of the same impetus towards universality. This is specially to be looked for in Bahaism, since it is historically a revision of Babism—revised with an aim to broadening it. Babism was notoriously unfitted to be universal. Dreyfus[79] confesses: "Looking at the Bab's work, we cannot fail to notice in it a certain sectarian particularism which would have confined to Shiah Islam its benefits." Similarly Professor Browne pronounced it[80] "utterly unfitted for the bulk of mankind," and refers to[81] "the useless, impractical, and irksome regulations and restrictions" which Baha abolished in order to make it more capable of becoming what he intended it to be—"a universal system suitable to all mankind." The question arises, Where was the Bab's power of supernatural revelation if he promulgated a system and regulations of such inferiority and destined to be superseded in less than a score of years? Among these regulations[82] were the prohibition of the learning of foreign languages, logic, philosophy, and jurisprudence, discouraging foreign travel, enjoining the expulsion of all unbelievers from the five chief provinces of Persia, together with the confiscation of their property, the destruction of all books more than 202 years old, etc.

Baha, like a tailor trying to change a misfitting garment, ripped up the seams, cut a piece out here and there, added some patches imported from Christian civilization, until he had a coat of many colours, which he advertised as the latest style of religion, fitted to humanity in general. But he should have heeded the precept not to put new cloth on an old garment. No wonder they have never yet published the "Kitab-ul-Akdas" in English. It would tax their ingenuity to adapt all its regulations and laws to the world-life.

Again I return to the question, "Is Bahaism specially adapted to be universal?" By no means. It is unfitted in the most essential particular. It is a religion of laws, not of principles. Mirza Abul Fazl, in "The Brilliant Proof,"[83] emphasizes the fact that Bahaism enjoins, commands, has imperative ordinances, laws, and enactments. But the Gospels enunciate principles. These principles of the New Testament are conscience-educating and life-directing. They are applicable to all conditions the world over, and to every stage of human development. Christianity implants in the heart great ruling motives. Its laws and regulations are few. Hence it does not find itself butting against a wall of unforeseen circumstances. Bahaism, on the contrary, is full of the "beggarly elements." It has regulations, as we have noticed, in regard to personal habits, hygiene, sociology, languages, the calendar, civil government, penology, etc. It is like an omnibus with its top overloaded with all sorts of baggage, which will delay and finally wreck the vehicle. It has made itself a "judge and divider of inheritances."[84] It gives directions as to the barber and the undertaker; how you must bathe and wash your face, and what prayers you shall say during each process. It directs as to the use of knives and forks, of chairs, of perfumes. It graciously permits one to shave his beard, but "the hair must not be allowed to grow below the level of the ear." It tells us that "the nails are to be cut at least once a week," that "every one should wash his feet daily in summer, and at least every three days in winter." And alas! for antique furniture and old Persian rugs! For house furnishings must be changed every nineteen years. In obedience to this command my old teacher in Persia got rid of his rugs, whose sheen was polished and colours were mellowed with age, and refurnished his house with gaudy modern rugs. In prescribing the Moslem fast and namaz (prayer-rite), with some modifications, Bahaism limits the spirit of liberty, which is the essence of universality.

Copying from the Bab, Baha has seen fit to regulate the calendar. Following the Zoroastrian custom, Baha ordains that the year begin at the vernal equinox—March 21—because that is the spring-time, the time of the renewal of vegetable life. Good! But in Australia it is the time of death—of the approach of winter. The reason assigned is not universal, and is not adapted to all climes. As has been said above, the months are ordained to be nineteen of nineteen days each, with four or five intercalary days in March. The week is abolished, that primitive division of time which has such a definite place in nature, in the phases of the moon, and is established in the three great monotheistic religions with their weekly Sabbaths. Instead of the latter is substituted the nineteenth day Unity feast. How do such changes aid universality or unification? Coinage, fines, taxes, and tithes are arranged on the number 19. Remey's book has nineteen chapters, as the "Bayan" has. The Star of the West, a magazine of the American Bahais, is published every nineteen days, and bears the Bahai calendar on its editorial page. Instances might be indefinitely extended. But later the number nine, the number of Baha, has come more into use. Abbas has set apart the ninth day of the month as well as the nineteenth for certain religious purposes. The Bahai era is sometimes dated from the declaration of the Bab in 1844, and sometimes from the birth of Baha in 1817. Are these innovations more an aid to universality than adherence to the established calendar and era, or than the decimal system or the metric system which the civilized world has been striving to extend? Professor Browne says: "What could be more impractical than the adoption of the number nineteen as the basis of measures or calculations?" It bears the mark of Oriental fancy rather than of divine revelation.

Another illustration of this point—namely, that Bahaism enjoins and regulates specifically, and does not, like Christianity, inculcate guiding principles, is seen in the law regarding civil government. In "Glad Tidings"[85] Baha teaches, as from God, that "although a republican form of government profits, yet the majesty of kingship is one of the signs of God. We do not wish that the countries of the world should be deprived thereof." "Statesmen should combine the two," and[86] "At present the form of government followed by the British nation seems good, for that nation is illuminated both with the light of kingship and consultation—i. e., parliament." "In the principal Laws [of Bahaism] affairs have been placed in the hands of just kings and chiefs, and the House of Justice." As a matter of opinion, I can join with Baha in expressing my admiration for the British Constitution, but prescribing it as a law of revelation is a different matter. A "universal religion" should be adapted to all conditions. It is a fact of history that when the tablet "Glad Tidings" was sent to Russia, section 15 was omitted. The Bahais suppressed this portion from expediency, and it appears thus mutilated in Baron Rosen's translation.[87] Is not this a high-handed way to deal with God's Word, as they profess to regard it? Is it not also conceivable that republics might take offense against Bahaism because it maintains monarchy, even as autocracies because it approves of parliamentary government? Had not a "universal religion" better let politics alone? Christianity could adapt itself even to the government of a Nero.

Another institution of Bahaism, ill-adapted to all races and conditions, and certain to bring the very conflict and strife against which it is supposed to guard, is the House of Justice. This is a religious court, with civil and political functions, to be set up in every town and country. It is to be composed of nine or more Bahai men. "They are divine agents, representatives of God." Much is said of this House of Justice in the Books of Revelation.[88] Dreyfus devotes a chapter to it.[89] It is to have legislative, judicial, and administrative functions. It will regulate estates, taxes, tithes, fines, capital and labour, marriage, divorce, inheritances, minors, servants, charities, reforms, houses of correction, schools, besides all matters of religion and morals. They will rule "absolutely," and be "infallible," "guided by God." It is the old dream of theocratic rule. I must leave it to the imagination of the student of history to picture the dire confusion which would ensue if this politico-religious hierarchy should begin its sway. Those who are familiar with the perpetual conflict between the urfi and the shari, the civil and the religious law in Persia, know how this proposed organization would work confusion worse confounded.

Similar to these invasions of the province of science and Cæsar is the attempt to improve philology by "revelation." Following the Bab again, Baha Ullah promulgated a new alphabet. The Babi alphabet, unlike the Arabic and Persian, was written from left to right. "Each letter consists of thick, oblique straight lines, parallel and equidistant from each other, running down to the left, to which thin hooks and curves are appended to make separate letters." It is called the Khatti-Badi. There were nineteen kinds of it; one kind was called the Khatti-Baha. It was intended for the time when Babism would be prevalent. It appears that Bahais have a new alphabet, different from that of the Babis.

In the Akdas and in the sixth Ishrak[90] it is commanded that the "House of Justice" must select one tongue out of the present languages, or a new language, to teach the children in the schools of the world. Let us suppose they decide on Persian or Arabic. The Anglo-Saxon children must all begin to learn Arabic. Suppose they decide on English. Then Germans, French, and Russians will have an additional reason for opposing the religion. Suppose that Abdul Baha decides on Esperanto, as he seems inclined to do, then will it be heresy for some one to invent a language as much superior to Esperanto as it is to Volapuk? Had not a "universal religion" better let linguistics alone? The spirit of Christianity gives a free field to all tongues—this is the essence of liberty, of universality. After this brief review of some of the provisions of the "New Revelation," we can deny the claim that "its statutes meet the necessity of every land," and that they can serve the world well for 1,000 years.

FOOTNOTES:

[18] Phelps' "Life of Abbas Effendi," p. 144.

[19] "Some Answered Questions," by Barney, p. 19.

[20] Star of the West, May 17, 1913, p. 68. Abbreviated hereafter as S. W.

[21] Page 158 f.

[22] "Story of the Bahai Movement," p. 23.

[23] Phelps, ibid., p. 256.

[24] Phelps, "Jewels of Wisdom," p. 237.

[25] Ibid., p. 145.

[26] Ibid., p. 144.

[27] "The Bahai Movement," p. 20.

[28] "Bahai Proofs," p. 78.

[29] Chase, "The Bahai Revelation," p. 178.

[30] S. W., March 2, 1913, p. 10.

[31] See S. W.

[32] Addresses in New York and Chicago, 1900.

[33] S. W., p. 10, March 2, 1913.

[34] S. W., 1913, p. 267.

[35] Prof. E. G. Browne has translated various books of the Bahais; among them are "The Episode of the Bab," or the "Traveller's Narrative," and the "New History." His investigations and comments have given offense to the Bahais, while his praises of them often wound the Christian reader. I have been kindly permitted by Doctor Kheiralla to examine his English translation of the "Kitab-ul-Akdas" in manuscript.

[36] S. W., July, 1912. See Chapter X.

[37] See "Sacred Mysteries," p. 100.

[38] S. W., Sept. 8, 1913, pp. 170-174.

[39] See "Facts for Behaists."

[40] Dr. H. H. Jessup in N. Y. Outlook, June, 1901.

[41] "A Year in India and Burmah," p. 10. Compare the Trinities of the Nusaireyah, as given in "The Asian Mystery," p. 111. The first is Abel, Adam and Gabriel: after others, comes Simon Peter, Jesus and Rozabah; Ali, Mohammed and Salman the Persian. The first of each group, for example Peter and Ali, is the supreme manifestation, the maana, meaning or essence of God; the second of each group, Mohammed and Jesus represent the ism-azim, the Greatest Name: while the third, that is, Salman is termed the Bab. Baha is the Greatest Name. The place of Peter remains for Abbas.

[42] "Facts for Behaists."

[43] "Ten Days in the Light of Acca," p. 105.

[44] S. W., Nov. 23, 1913, p. 242.

[45] See Chapter IV.

[46] "Tablets of Abdul Baha," Vol. I, p. 10.

[47] "Some Answered Questions," pp. 129-131.

[48] Ibid., p. 148.

[49] "Beha' Ullah," by Kheiralla.

[50] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. xlv, 62-63.

[51] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 359, 368-369.

[52] See Ibid., Index word "Assassination"; "New Hist.," pp. xxiii.-iv.

[53] Ibid., pp. 82, 278; "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 361, 371.

[54] Jour. Roy. As. Soc., 1889, p. 516; 1892, pp. 994-995.

[55] 2 Thess. ii. 4 and 11.

[56] "Bahai Proofs," by Abul Fazl, p. 42.

[57] "New Hist.," p. 112.

[58] Ibid., p. 209.

[59] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 289.

[60] "Bahai Proofs," pp. 67-68, 72.

[61] "Ighan," Chicago Edition, pp. vii-viii.

[62] "Proofs," pp. 258-259.

[63] "New Hist.," p. 381; "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 353-354.

[64] S. W., Nov. 4, 1913, p. 224.

[65] "Life of Abbas," by Phelps, p. xxii.

[66] "Bahai Proofs," p. 93.

[67] Phelps, p. xvii.

[68] "New Hist.," p. xiii.

[69] Ibid.

[70] Phelps, p. xviii.

[71] "A Year Among the Persians," p. 307.

[72] "Bahai Movement," p. 1.

[73] "Life of Abbas," p. 148.

[74] Remey, Ibid., p. 39.

[75] Phelps' "Abbas," p. 254.

[76] Ibid., p. xxi.

[77] December 13, 1913.

[78] S. W., Jan. 10, 1914, p. 282.

[79] "The Universal Religion," p. 43.

[80] "New Hist.," p. xiii.

[81] Ibid., p. xxv.

[82] Ibid., p. xxvi.

[83] Pages 31-32.

[84] Luke xii. 14.

[85] Section 15, p. 91, Chicago Edition.

[86] "Tablet of the World," p. 33.

[87] "New Hist.," p. xxv.

[88] See "Glad Tidings," pp. 39, 90; "Words of Paradise," p. 53; "Tablet of the World," p. 33; "Israket," p. 37; and "Kitab-ul-Akdas."

[89] "Universal Religion," pp. 131-144.

[90] "Ishrakat," p. 36.

III

Its Specific Claims

Bahaism is a Persian delusion, whose headman Baha Ullah in Acre claimed to be an incarnation of God. Abbas Effendi succeeded him and is running the "incarnation" fraud for all it is worth, and it is worth a good deal, as pilgrims constantly come from Persia and bring their offerings in money with great liberality. Such men ... as the Babites of Persia turn up now and then in the East, "go up like a rocket and down like a stick."—H. H. Jessup, "Fifty-three Tears in Syria," p. 637.

I cannot understand how a Christian can possibly exchange the clear consistent plan of salvation through Christ for the misty and mystical platitudes of Bahaism.—Ibid., p. 687.

BAHAISM makes various claims of a practical nature. Some of these will require detailed treatment. Several of them I will group in this chapter. Additional light is thrown on the question of their validity by facts subsequently brought forward, for many facts have a bearing on several subjects.

Among the specific claims put forth by Bahaism is that of being specially adapted to promote the unification of mankind, and of accomplishing that end. Bahaism reiterates the Christian ideas that God hath made of one blood all nations and that all shall be united in God's spiritual kingdom. It repeats as a slogan, "the brotherhood of man." C. M. Remey[91] says: "The Bahai cause stands for the unity of all religions, political unity of nations, the social unity of all classes, peoples and races." "Its aim," says Harold Johnson, "is to knit all the faiths and all the peoples into one."[92] "The essential principle of the teachings of Bahaism is the unification of the religious systems of the world," says MacNutt.[93] This is a high ideal, which interpreted in their several ways is the aim of Christianity, Islam, Socialism, etc. And Bahai writers mean what all the other systems have meant, namely, unity by all accepting their beliefs, for Remey[94] says: "Baha Ullah's mission is to unite those now following many systems into one brotherhood and one universal faith.... May God speed the day when all of us may become true Bahais."

But the claim of Bahaism is presented in another form. It asserts that it is actually bringing about this unification. "Abdul Baha is harmonizing Christians, Jews, Mohammedans, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus in the one and true faith."[95] Dreyfus says: "It is uniting all men in the great universal religion of the future." At Oakland, Cal.,[96] Abdul Baha said, "The revelation of Baha Ullah is the cause of the oneness of the world of humanity. It is a unity which welds together all the races." In illustration of this alleged result, the pilgrims to Acca express their gratification and amazement that at Acca several races meet together in love and unity. So in Rangoon, says Mr. Sprague,[97] "I attended a Bahai meeting at which six of the great world religions were represented united in the wonderful bond of friendship and unity." In like manner Mr. Harold Johnson says, "What Christianity has failed to accomplish, Bahaism has accomplished in uniting men of different races and religions." If these assertions mean external association, it may be said that Christians have had their Parliaments of Religions and Congresses of all faiths, examples of polite toleration and laboratories of the science of religion. If it means that Christianity refuses to put itself on a level with other religions and consort with them as equals, this is true, for Christianity is an exclusive religion. It has entered the world, as it entered the Roman empire, to displace all others. It refuses to have Christ occupy a niche in the Pantheon. But Bahai writers mean rather that Bahaism is to be the bond of unity by all races and religions accepting Baha. In this sense their claim is based on very meagre premises. A few thousand only, outside of Persia, have embraced Bahaism. Harold Johnson says: "The Non-Mohammedans do not number probably very many thousands." But do we not see myriads gathering into the Christian brotherhood out of every race and religion of Asia, including even thousands from Islam. Thirty thousand Moslems have become Christians in Malayasia in Abdul Baha's lifetime. In Asia how many races and religions, forgetting their former antagonisms, are united in the faith and baptism of the Lord Jesus Christ. As an example of the living power of the Christian faith to unite the races of men, take the Conference of the International Christian Students' Federation, held at Lake Mohonk, N. Y. There Hindus and British, Japanese and Koreans, Russians and Chinese, Greeks and Armenians, French and Germans, Canadians and Brazilians, Americans and Mexicans represented the wide world. Mutual esteem, love and spiritual fellowship united members of the various Protestant Churches with representatives of the Oriental Churches. The unity in Bahai Assemblies is on so small a scale as to be not worthy of mention. How little Abdul Baha knows of or appreciates the reality and power of Christian spiritual fellowship is shown in his remarks at West Englewood, N. Y.[98] "This gathering (of Bahais) has no peer or likeness upon the surface of the earth, for all other gatherings and assemblages are due to some physical basis or material interests. Bahai meetings are mirrors of the kingdom." When Abdul Baha speaks about the results of Bahaism in bringing about unification in Persia, his claims seem utterly extravagant. To one who knows that country from long residence they are explicable only on the supposition that he has been misinformed or deceived by his own followers, for it must be borne in mind that Abdul Baha left Persia when a child of six or eight and has never returned. Hear these words which Abdul Baha addressed to Rev. J. T. Bixley, who was writing on the Sect in the North American Review: "The fundamental question is the unification of religious belief. In Persia, during the last fifty years[99] ... the various religionists have united in the utmost love and fellowship. No traces of discord or difference remain: the utmost love, kindness and unity are apparent. They live together like a single family in harmony and accord. Discord and strife have passed away. Love and fellowship now prevail instead. Whether they be Moslems, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Nestorians, Shiites, Sunnis or others—no discord exists among them." In an address at New York,[100] he said:

"In the Orient different races were at constant warfare until about sixty years ago Baha Ullah appeared and caused love and unity to exist among these various peoples. Their former animosities have passed away entirely. It was a dark world, it became radiant.... You now see the same people who were formerly at enmity and strife in far-off Persia, people of various religions and denominations living in the utmost peace." "His Highness, Baha Ullah, established such unity and peace between the various communities." What does such language mean? At their face value these words are erroneous in a high degree. All know indeed that in Persia bigotry and religious and racial hatred have been modified. In bringing this result about, Bahaism has had a share along with Western civilization and education, the Nationalist movement, medical missions, and even Pan-Islamism, for the latter has tended to bring Shiahs and Sunnis nearer to each other. But it is notorious how great the enmity and hatred is yet; how the Kurds have raided the Shiahs and massacred or plundered the Nestorians and the Armenians: how the Moslems oppress the Armenians in Karadagh: how Sheikhis have suffered from Mutasharis; and Ali Allahis continued the practice of tagiya for fear of them both. If Parsees enjoy more ease, it is through the efforts of their co-religionists in India; if Christians are safer, it is through the favour of the Shahs and the power of Christian governments: in neither case is it due to Bahaism. The union with the Bahais of possibly a dozen Armenians, a few score Zoroastrians and several hundred Jews cannot be the basis for such extravagance of language: neither can the rejection by Baha of the Shiah notion that other religions are "unclean," for Sunnis all along held the "peoples of the Book" to be "clean" and Christians of old learned to "call no man common or unclean."

As to unification, how is it? Babis were divided off from Sheikhis, and Bahais from Babis, and Behais from Bahais and the flames of hate and vindictiveness burn hotter between them than between the older sects and races, while the Shiahs curse and at times persecute Babis and Bahais. Instead of unity the Babi-Bahais have brought a greater division of sects: instead of love renewed fires of animosity and fanatical hate. In view of these conditions, how unreasonable for Abdul Baha to say that "through the power of Baha Ullah, such affection and love is produced among the various religions of Persia that they now associate[101] with each other in the utmost love and concord."

Passing now to another phase of this subject, let us inquire what means are prescribed for religious unification. The chief means seems to be the forbidding of the right of private interpretation or opinion. Abdul Baha writes[102] that he is "the Interpreter of all the works and books of the Blessed Perfection. Were this not the case, every one would give an interpretation according to his own inclination—this would lead to great differences." This point is more plainly stated by M. Abul Fazl:[103] "One of the explicit commands of Baha Ullah is the ordinance abrogating differences which separate men.... If those having two points of view, engage in strife in expressing their views, both will be delivered to the fire.... Bahai law prohibits the interpretation of God's word and exposition of personal opinion ... lest different sects arise." "You must ask him (Abdul Baha) regarding the meaning of the texts of the verses. Whatsoever he says is correct. Without his will, not a word shall any one utter."[104] Baha Ullah "made provision against all kinds of differences, so that no man shall be able to create a new sect ... indicating the Interpreter so that no man should be able to say that he explains a certain teaching in this way and thus create a new sect."[105] After Abdul Baha whenever the House of Justice is organized, it will ward off differences. But though the right of private judgment was denied, yet a new sect arose and bitter disunion occurred over the question of the Infallible Interpreter.

Another Bahai scheme to promote unity is the adoption of one language to be a universal language; another is the amalgamation of all the races by the marriage of blacks and whites, and all indiscriminately; another is the discouragement of patriotism or any special love for one's country or people, teaching an internationalism in the words, "Let not him glory who loves his country, but let him glory who loves his kind." These points need not detain us, nor need we stop to enlarge on the fact that the new calendar, feasts, rites, laws, weights and measures, etc., tend to disunion.

The claims of Bahaism in regard to its relation to the movement for peace and arbitration require consideration. Abdul Baha at Boston[106] said: "Baha Ullah spread the teaching of Universal Peace sixty years ago, when it was not even thought of by the people. He sent tablets to kings advising this." He wrote to Mr. Smiley of Lake Mohonk, "The matter of International Peace was instituted by His Highness, Baha Ullah, sixty years ago in Persia." Dreyfus[107] says: "Long before these ideas, i. e., peace, brotherhood and arbitration, had taken form among us, at a time when the Bab himself had sometimes excused the use of arms for the propagation of religion, Baha Ullah had made these high principles the one basis of his religion." Remey[108] states this claim yet more strongly, saying: "Peace, arbitration, in fact universal civilization were unthought of, when over half a century ago these teachers (Baha Ullah and Abdul Baha) announced their message." Again, "Christ states that His dispensation is to be a militant one, which would be followed by another of peace. Baha Ullah has now brought that peace to the world. He is the Prince of Peace who has established the foundations of peace on earth."[109]

Now as to the facts. Bahaism certainly does advocate peace and arbitration, in common with Tolstoism, socialism and many schools of thought. Baha said to Professor Browne at Acca, in 1886: "This fruitless strife, these ruinous wars shall pass away and the Most Great Peace shall come. These strifes and this bloodshed and discord must cease and all men be as one kindred and one family." In accordance with this, Abdul Baha declares[110] universal peace and an international Court of Arbitration to be fundamental principles of Bahaism. The Court will be called the House of Justice and will be composed entirely of Bahais. "Disputes will find a final sentence of absolute justice ... before the Bahai House of Justice. War will be suppressed."[111]

It is good to have such a programme approved by one raised in a Moslem environment. Yet it is evident that the claim to priority and originality regarding it, constitute a grave anachronism and betray ignorance of or perversion of history. Both the ideals and the programme were in existence and in partial operation long before the time of Baha Ullah. In the first place, Bahai teachings on peace are but an echo of Christian hopes and doctrines of "peace on earth: good will to men." Baha has but thrown on the screen again the vision of the seers of Israel who foretold the age when "men shall learn war no more." The hopes of the prophets, the longings of saints, the anthems of the worshipping church found voice through the Christian centuries, with a faith never dimmed, a desire never quenched, anticipating that

"Then shall wars and tumults cease,
Then be banished grief and pain,
Righteousness and joy and peace
Undisturbed shall ever reign."

Baha's teaching, though growing up in Islam, is transplanted from Christian soil. He repudiates the teaching of Mohammed regarding "holy wars." "The first Glad Tidings is the abolition of religious warfare from the Book," i. e., the Koran. What Bahais would do in case of provocation, accompanied by reasonable opportunity of success, is not evident. The Babis were fierce warriors (1848-1850) and the Bab expected that wars would continue. In the "Bayan" he makes provision for the distribution of the spoils.[112] Baha, together with Azal, started for and tried to join the army at Tabarsi,[113] and was absent from participation in its sanguinary conflict, solely because his arrest by the Persian authorities at Amul prevented him from reaching the fort. After his release he fell under suspicion because[114] he "not improbably harboured designs of setting up a standard of revolt on his own account." He was, therefore, rearrested and sent to the capital. But during his exile in Turkey, he tried to be reconciled to the Shah of Persia. Following this change of policy, he was able to claim later[115] that "for nigh upon thirty-five years no action opposed to the government or prejudicial to the nation has emanated from this sect." The Bahais did not join in the effort to establish constitutional government in 1908-1911.[116] They have never had an even chance to fight for their own cause and it remains to be seen what they would do in such a case. There is no assurance that they would act like Quakers or Dukhobors, for even Abdul Baha at times identifies himself and his cause with the fighting Babis and appropriates their martial glory. He said to Mr. Anton Hadad:[117] "When in Persia we were very few but owing to animosity we stood before our numerous enemies, fought and defeated them and gained the victory." He wrote a prayer on behalf of the American army for the use of Bahais: "O God! Strengthen its soldiers and its flag."[118] In his teachings, he leaves several pretexts for the prosecution of war. He says:[119] "War is sometimes the foundation of peace. If, for example, a sovereign should wage war against a threatening foe or for the unification of the people, this war may be attuned to peace: this fury is kindness; this war is a source of reconciliation." In his scheme for arbitration, one is reminded of the old saw, "we must have peace even if we have to fight for it." For he says: "If any nation dares to refuse to abide by the decision of the international court, all the other nations must arise and put down this rebellion, ... they must rise up and destroy it, ... band together and exterminate it."[120]

As to the claim that Baha originated the movement for universal peace and international arbitration, it only deserves consideration because it is apparently put forth in sincerity. It absolutely contradicts history. In fact the movement for "peace on earth" has long been an active one in Christian lands, and arbitration has long been recognized and employed as a method for promoting peace." "Under the influence of religious and feudal ideas," says Professor Moore,[121] "arbitrations were very frequent in the Middle Ages, which offered the remarkable spectacle of conciliation and peace making way." Treaties were made which provided for arbitration. In Italy there were one hundred arbitrations in the thirteenth century. In the following centuries they were frequent in Europe. Sometimes a king acted as arbitrator between kings or between king and people. At other times a city, as for example the Republic of Hamburg, or a great juristconsult or a Professor of a University acted in this capacity. More often "the predominance of the popes constituted them natural judges of international cases." Projects for universal peace were put forward. One of the most celebrated was formed by Sully, the minister of Henry IV. The Abbe de St. Pierre in 1713 published a scheme for the federation of Christian States, with a central council to decide all disputes. Grotius strongly advocated arbitration as a means of avoiding war and the placing of nations under obligations to settle disputes peaceably. Bentham in the eighteenth century proposed a plan for a common tribunal to maintain universal and permanent peace.[122] Fox, Penn and the Quakers, from Christian principles, strenuously opposed war. There were nine principal arbitrations between the United States and Great Britain, France and Spain from 1794 to 1863.

In 1815, before Baha's day, the Massachusetts Peace Society was formed and in the following year the American Peace Society "to promote universal permanent peace through arbitration and disarmament."[123] For this purpose World Congresses were held at London 1843, Brussels 1848, Paris 1849, Frankfort 1850, London 1851, etc., and with great enthusiasm. Men like Elihu Burritt, Victor Hugo, Richard Cobden, John Bright and Charles Sumner led in advocacy of the cause. Tennyson, too, saw the vision of peace,

"In the Parliament of men, the Federation of the World,"

and the Scottish bard declared,

"It's coming yet for a' that
When man to man, the world o'er,
Shall brothers be and a' that."

We can easily conceive how these ideas would penetrate the Near East and how Baha Ullah in Turkey caught an echo of them and was happily influenced to become himself an advocate of peace.

But what becomes of the claims of Abdul Baha and other Bahais, mentioned above, that Baha, in 1863-1867, "instituted the movement for peace and arbitration" that he advised it to kings "when it had not even been thought of," "before the attention of Western thinkers had to any degree been directed towards universal peace." They are like so many claims made by Bahaists, utterly groundless. Such statements, when made by Abdul Baha, we may attribute to ignorance of the history of the Occident, but this does not excuse American advocates of Bahaism for endorsing such errors.

I need not discuss the assertion of Bahais that the Millennium began in 1844[124] or at latest in 1892, nor the announcement that the Most Great Peace will be inaugurated in 1917, which they declare to be the end of the 1335 days of Dan. xii. 12.[125]

Another claim made for Bahaism is that it is a rational and undogmatic religion. Remey[126] says: "It does not put forth doctrine or dogma.... It is a religion free from dogma." It is "logical and reasonable." Dreyfus denounces "dogmatic religions," and claims that Bahaism has paved the way for the harmony of religion with free thought."[127] With these accord the words of Abdul Baha to Pastor Monnier in Paris.[128] "Our aim is to free religion from dogmas. Dogmas are the cause of strife. We must give up dogmas." Now it is evident that Bahaism has not a fixed body of doctrines: that it has not a definite and clear system of theology. But it is very dogmatic in the common usages of that word. Webster defines it as (1) positive, authoritative, and (2) as asserting or disposed to assert with authority or with overbearing and arrogance. Is not Bahaism a mass of assertions? For example, Baha declares that "the universe hath neither beginning nor ending." Abdul Baha adds the comment:[129] "By this simple statement he has set aside elaborate theories and exhaustive labours of scientists and philosophers." Similarly he is said to have settled by a single word all discussions about divine sovereignty and free agency. Abdul Baha might be called the Lord of dogmas, for from his dicta none must vary by a hair's breadth. Remey himself dogmatizes as follows: "The religion of Baha is the cause of God, outside of which there is no truth in the world." Much in Bahaism must be taken on faith, without logical proof. Professor Browne[130] puts it mildly when he says: "The system appears to me to contain enough of the mysterious and the transcendental to make its intellectual acceptance at least as difficult as the theology of most Christian churches to the sceptic." Elsewhere he says:[131] "It must be clearly understood that Babism (or Bahaism) is in no sense latitudinarian or eclectic, and stands therefore in the sharpest antagonism to Sufism. However vague Babi doctrine may be on certain points, it is essentially dogmatic, and every utterance or command uttered by the Manifestation of the Period, i. e., Bab or Baha Ullah or Abbas Effendi must be accepted without reserve."[132] Similarly Dr. G. W. Holmes[133] writes: "Baha's appeal is only to his own word and to his own arbitrary and forced interpretation of the Word of God, which interpretations, as he states, find their sanction solely in his own authority."

There are other claims of Bahaism of a specific nature which might be considered. They would be found equally assertive and equally groundless. Bahaism reminds me of a horse which was offered for sale in Persia. It appeared like a fat and well fed animal. But the would-be purchaser was warned that its skin had been puffed up with air which would soon leak out, and he would have on his hands a lean, lank, bony yabi scrub. Bahaism does not even stop short of claiming that the civilization of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is due to it. Its braggart attitude may be fittingly symbolized by Rostand's "Chanticler," standing in the barnyard, flapping its wings in vain exultation, imagining that it, by its crowing, has caused the sun to rise.

FOOTNOTES:

[91] "The Bahai Movement," p. 73.

[92] Contemporary Review, March, 1912.

[93] In "Unity Through Love."

[94] "The Bahai Movement," p. 39.

[95] Ibid., p. 27.

[96] S. W., Oct. 1912, p. 190.

[97] "Story of the Bahai Movement," p. 4.

[98] June 29, 1912.

[99] S. W., Sept. 27, 1912.

[100] S. W., Sept. 8, 1912.

[101] Professor Browne, in the Ency. of Ethics and Religion, article "Bab," writes: "The Bahais are strongly antagonistic alike to the Sufis and the Mohammedans, but for quite different reasons. In the case of the Sufis they object to their latitudinarianism, their Pantheism, their individualism and their doctrine of the inner light. With the Mohammedan they resent the persecutions they have suffered. The Bahais detest the Azalis, the followers of Abbas Effendi dislike and despise the followers of his brother Mehemet Ali."

[102] S. W., Aug. 20, 1914.

[103] "Brilliant Proof," pp. 26-28.

[104] S. W., Nov. 23, 1913, p. 238.

[105] S. W., April 9, 1914.

[106] S. W,, July 13, 1913, p. 122.

[107] "The Universal Religion."

[108] "Bahai Movement," p. 75.

[109] Page 54. In Dealy's "Dawn of Knowledge," the chapter on Baha Ullah is entitled "Prince of Peace."

[110] S. W., Vol. IV, pp. 6, 8 and 254.

[111] "Answered Questions," p. 74; "Tablet of the World," p. 28.

[112] "Trav.'s Narr.," p. 287.

[113] "New Hist.," pp. 378, 379.

[114] Ibid., p. 380.

[115] "Trav.'s Narr.," pp. 65-67.

[116] See Chapter VI.

[117] "A Message from Acca," p. 9.

[118] Tablet "9," p. 8, published by the New York Bahai Council.

[119] "Principles of the Bahai Movement," pp. 43, 47, Washington, 1912.

[120] Ibid., pp. 43, 45.

[121] "International Arbitrations," pp. 4826-4833.

[122] New International Ency., Art. "Arbitration," p. 713.

[123] Atlantic Monthly, Vol. XCIV, p. 358.

[124] S. W., March 21, 1914, p. 8.

[125] Dealy's "Dawn of Knowledge," p. 44; Kheiralla's "Beha Ullah," pp. 480, 483.

[126] Tract "Peace," pp. 8 and 14; "Bahai Movement," p. 89.

[127] "The Universal Religion," pp. 21, 44.

[128] S. W., April 28, 1913, p. 55.

[129] S. W., June 5, 1913, p. 90.

[130] Phelps, p. xviii.

[131] Ency. of Religion and Ethics, Art. "Bab."

[132] See also his "Literary History of Persia," p. 422.

[133] "Missions and Modern History," by Robert E. Speer, p. 171.

IV

Bahaism and Christianity

The whole Bahai movement is in fact, whatever it may have been in the mind of its originator the Bab, a counterfeit of the Messiahship of Christ. At least this is the side of it that is turned towards both Christians and Jews. All that relates to the second coming of Christ in the Old Testament or the New is bodily appropriated by Baha to himself and everything in them relating to God is boldly applied to himself.... It will bring a few of the Persians nearer to Christ. By far the greater number of its adherents will be brought into more active antagonism to Christianity than before.—G. W. Holmes, M. D., in Speer's "Missions and Modern History," Vol. I, p. 169.
Can Bahaism make good its claim to be the fulfillment of and substitute for Christianity? It has no place for Christ except as one of a series, one, moreover, whose brief day of authority closed when Mohammed began to preach in Mecca.... If the claim be admitted that Bahaism is a republication of Christianity, the whole interpretation of the death of Christ contained in the Epistles must first be rejected.—W. A. Shedd, in "Miss. Rev. of World," 1911.

ABDUL BAHA says: "Some say Abdul Baha is Antichrist. They are not informed of Bahai principles. Baha Ullah[134] established Christ in the East. He has praised Christ, honoured Christ, exalted Him, called Him the Word of God, the Spirit of God, and spread His mention."[135] These words could be written with the name Mohammed substituted for Baha Ullah. But in the case of both of them it is the kiss of betrayal. Judas also made known Jesus. Both Mohammed and Baha write "ex" before His title "King of Kings." To accept Baha and Abdul Baha is to deny and forsake Christ.

I hear some Christian say: "Of course. What you say is self-evident. Bahaism is a new religion whose aim is to supplant Christianity." This is true. Yet the claim is put forth by Bahais, and, more strangely, it is accepted by some Christians, that the two religions are not antagonistic, and may be held at one time by the same person. To an esteemed Christian lady I expressed my regret that a certain doctor, forsaking Christ, had gone as a Bahai missionary to Persia. The reply startled me: "Doctor——is very much a Christian." Yet why was I startled? It was simply hearing an idea with which I was familiar in the writings of the Bahais. Sydney Sprague says: "The true Bahai is also the truest Christian."[136] Charles M. Remey says: "To be a real Christian in spirit is to be a Bahai, and to be a real Bahai is to be a Christian," for "Bahai teaching is only the perfection of Christianity."[137] A report of an interview of Rev. R. J. Campbell, of City Temple, London, with Abdul Baha, states the claim of Bahaism as follows: "It does not seek to proselyte. One can be a Bahai without ceasing to be a Christian, a Jew, or a Mohammedan."[138] In accordance with this idea, Thornton Chase and some Bahais in America continued to worship and teach in Christian churches, and to have their dead buried by pastors. Some in London, in connection with the City Temple and St. John's Church (Canon Wilberforce's), profess both Christianity and Bahaism. Of Southern India, Dr. A. L. Wylie said: "It is said that there are thirty-five Bahais in our city [Ratnagiri]. Some of these are Christian converts. They continue to be Christians, saying that they can remain such and are instructed to do so." Such an erroneous idea, when not due to the misrepresentations of the leaders and Oriental tagiya ("dissimulation"), must arise from ignorance of or dislike to true Christianity or ignorance of what Bahaism is.

I. Bahaism assigns Christianity a place as but one among the true religions. Bahaism indorses and accepts in the same category with Judaism and Christianity, as true and divinely revealed religions, Zoroastrianism, Confucianism, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Mohammedanism, Babism, and Bahaism. Abdul Baha says: "The reality of the religions is one, the difference is one of imitation."[139] Remey says: "Bahais consider all religions to be, from a spiritual standpoint, one religion."[140] "Every religion has had its birth in the advent of its divine founder."[141] "The founders of the world religions have been seers as well as channels of truth to the people."[142] It tries to build on all the other religions by professing to be the fulfillment of each one. "The Bahai propaganda in India," says Sprague, "has not the difficulty that besets a Christian missionary, that of pulling down: his duty is only to build on what is already there. He sees the Hindu, Buddhist, and Mohammedan with the same eye, acknowledges their truth and shows that a further revelation has come through Baha Ullah."[143] It says to each one, Baha fulfills your traditions and prophecies.[144]

But this liberality is only apparent. Only original Buddhism, Christianity, etc., was God-given and true. Now all are corrupted. "The key-note of Bahai teaching is identical with the Christian, but in Christianity it was so forgotten that it came almost as a fresh, new illumination from Baha."[145]

Christianity refuses to be classed with the ethnic religions. In its nature it is exclusive. It admits that there is a measure of truth in all religions, but Christ's gospel is the truth "once for all" delivered to men.

II. Bahaism claims to abrogate and supersede Christianity. Bahaism in its origin is a Mohammedan sect. It declares that Islam is from God. Christianity was a divine revelation, but Islam was a better one. In the "Ikan," Baha maintains the validity of Islam, testifies to its truth, defends Mohammed's prophetic mission as the fulfillment of the New Testament prophecies, and the Koran as the Book of God. [146] Abdul Baha exalts Mohammed, and declares that he "gave more spiritual education than any of the others,"[147] i. e., than Moses or Jesus. He justifies Mohammed's life and conduct, and defends his laws and doctrines."[148] He declares that "whatever European and American historians have written regarding His Highness Mohammed, the Messenger of God, is mostly falsehood.... The narrators are either ignorant or antagonistic." [149] Christians have therefore been in the wrong for thirteen centuries. They have sinned against God, and were a stiff-necked and perverse people in rejecting Mohammed, as the Jews were in rejecting Jesus the Christ. "If those who have accepted a revelation refuse to believe a subsequent revelation, their faith becomes null and void."

Similarly Babism abrogated Islam. At the Badasht (Shahrud) Conference (1848) the law of the Koran was formally declared to be annulled. Baha abrogated Babism in the Rizwan at Bagdad in 1864. Bahaism is the New Covenant, "which confirms and completes all religious teaching which has gone before."[150]

Christianity is, according to this, a system of the distant past. It was effective in its day, for "the Christian teaching was illumined by the Sun of Truth: the Christian civilization was the best,"[151] concedes Abdul Baha. But now, says Remey, "Bahaism is not one of many phases of Universal Truth, but the Truth, the only Living Truth to-day, ... the only source of Divine Knowledge to mankind.... Abdul Baha's word is the Truth.... There are those who will say, 'Have we not Jesus? We want no other.' The Revelation of Jesus is no longer the Point of Guidance to the world. We are in total blindness if we refuse this new Revelation which is the end of the Revelations of the past.... All the teachings of the past are past.... Only that which is revealed by the Supreme Pen, Baha Ullah, and that which issues from the Centre of the Covenant, Abdul Baha, is spiritual food."[152] Bahaism in proclaiming thus the abrogation of Christianity is emphatically antichristian.

III. Bahaism casts Christ from His throne as the unique manifestation of God. Bahaism recognizes two classes of prophets: (1) The independent prophets, who were lawgivers and founders of new cycles. Of this class were Abraham, Moses, Christ, Mohammed, the Bab, and Baha. (2) The others are dependent prophets, who are as "branches." Such were Isaiah and Daniel. All the greater prophets, of the first class, were Manifestations of God.[153] So Bahaism continues to honour Christ as the Incarnate Word, the Spirit of God, God manifest in the flesh. At the same time it exalts Baha to supreme and unique dignity and glory above Christ and all prophets. In order to understand this essential, fundamental doctrine of Bahaism, we must know its doctrine concerning God and His Manifestation.

The teaching of Bahaism regarding God is hard to grasp, because it oscillates between Theism and Pantheism. Myron Phelps' exposition of it is certainly pantheistic.[154] Baha Ullah in many places bears out his interpretation, as, for example, "God alone is the one Power which animates and dominates all things, which are but manifestations of its energy."[155] In subsequent expositions, as in "Answered Questions," Abdul Baha repudiates Pantheism, and so does M. Abul Fazl in "The Brilliant Proof." Kheiralla, while maintaining that Baha taught Theism, accused Abdul Baha of Pantheism. In "The Epistle to the Shah" Baha simulates a monotheism almost as rigid as Islam: "We bear witness that there is no God but Him. He is independent of the worlds. No one hath known Him.... God singly and alone abideth in His own place which is holy, above space or time, mention and utterance, sign, description, definition, height and depth.... The way is closed and seeking is forbidden." A favourite text is that of the Koran, in which God says: "I was a hid treasure, I desired to be known, therefore I created the world." In this process "the first thing which emanated from God [eternally] was that universal reality which the ancient philosophers termed the 'First Mind,' and which the people of Baha call the 'Primal Will.' This is without beginning or end, essentially but not temporally contingent, and without power to become an associate with God."[156] The Primal Will, Holy Essence, Word, Spirit, is manifested in perfect men, who are the Great Prophets. They are supreme, holy, sinless souls, godlike in their attributes. They show the perfections of God.[157] This reality does not change, but the garment in which it is clothed is different. One day it is the garment of Abraham, who is Zoroaster, then Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Christ, Mohammed, the Bab, and Baha Ullah.[158] Abul Fazl says: "All the prophets are respectively the Manifestations of the single Reality and one Essence."[159] The "Ikan" says: "All are one, as the sun of yesterday and to-day are one. The sun is one, the dawning-points of the sun are numerous. One light, many lanterns."[160] "Baha is the same light in a new lamp."[161] Yet there are differences in degree. Of the Bab, Baha says: "His rank is greater than all the prophets, and His Mission loftier and higher."[162] But he is merely as a forerunner in comparison with Baha. Baha is superior to all, greater, more glorious.[163] He is infallible, absolute, universal. "All the prophets were perfect mirrors of God, but in Baha, in some sense, the Divine Essence is manifested."[164] "All preceding ones are inferior to him: all subsequent ones are to be under his shadow."[165] But even the latter are not to come for a "thousand or thousands of years," and perhaps not then, for the "Kitab-ul-Akdas" says: "O Pen, write and inform mankind that the Manifestations are ended by this luminous and effulgent Theophany."

The Manifestation has two stations: "One is the station of oneness and the rank of absolute Deity, the second station is one of temporal conditions and servitude. If the manifestation says, 'Verily I am only a man like you,' or 'Verily, I am God,' each is true and without doubt." The "Tajallayat" quotes the Bab as saying concerning "Him whom God shall manifest"; "Verily he shall utter, 'I am God. There is no God but Me, the Lord of all things, and all besides is created by Me! O ye, my creatures, ye are to worship Me.'"[166] In Bahai literature such words as the following are not uncommon: "Baha Ullah is the Lord of Hosts, the Heavenly Father, the Prince of Peace, the Glory of God."[167] "He is the framer of the whole Universe, the Cause of the life of the world, and of the unity and harmony of the creatures."[168] "No one of the Manifestations had such great power of influence as was with El-Baha."[169] In passing, it may be noticed how little ground for such boasting they have. How great in comparison was the influence of Moses as leader of Israel, emancipator, lawgiver, and prophet! How great even was Mohammed's success and influence, compared with what Baha has accomplished! How evidently antichristian is Bahaism in denying that Christ's name and glory are above all, and that to Him every knee should bow!

IV. Bahaism wrongly assumes that its leader is Christ come again. There is confusion about this claim, for some Bahais represent Baha to be Christ, and others make Abdul Baha Abbas to be Christ come the second time. Confusion also arises from the fact that Baha is set forth as the Manifestation of all the "promised ones." He is set forth as the Messiah for the Jews, God the Father, the Word, and the Spirit for the Christians, Aurora or Shah Bahram for the Zoroastrians, the fifth Buddha for Buddhists, reincarnated Krishna for Brahmans, the Mahdi or the twelfth Imam or Husain for the Moslems.[170] "All are realized in the coming of Baha Ullah."[171] In accord with this, Baha declared in his "Epistle to the Pope": "Consider those who turned away from the Spirit [Christ] when He came to them. Verily He hath come from heaven as He came the first time. Beware lest ye oppose Him as the Pharisees opposed Him. Verily the Spirit of Truth has come to guide you into all truth. He hath come from the Heaven of Preëxistence." "Baha," says the editor of the Star of the West, "is the fulfillment of the promise of the 'second coming' with a new name (Rev. iii. 11-13)."[172]

It must be remembered that Bahaism, chameleon-like, takes on a different aspect according to the environment of its adherents. In Persia its creed is different from that of America in regard to the "return." For the most part American Bahais regard Baha as God the Father, and Abdul Baha Abbas as the Son of God, Jesus Christ. After the quarrel and schism following the death of Baha (1892), Abbas became very wary of assuming titles and dignities, lest he give a handle to his opponents to accuse him of claiming to be a "Manifestation." So he assumed the title Abd-ul-Baha, the "servant of Baha," which his followers translate "Servant of God." He also calls himself the "Centre of the Covenant." Baha had entitled him the "Greatest Branch of God" (Zech. vi. 12) and the "Mystery of God" (1 Tim. iii. 16). He was commonly called "Agha," an equivalent in Persia of Effendi or Mister, but his followers translate it "Master," and put into it the full New Testament significance. Undoubtedly Western Bahais worship Abdul Baha as Jesus Christ the Master come again. In spite of all disavowals and beclouding by words, their faith is plain. Getsinger, a leader and missionary, says: "Abbas is heir and Master of the Kingdom: he was on earth 1,900 years ago as the Nazarene." Mrs. Corinne True says: "If this is not the resurrection of the pure Spirit of the Nazarene of 1,900 years ago, then we need not look elsewhere."[173] Mr. Anton Hadad says: "The Master, Abbas Effendi, the Lord of the Kingdom, is the one who was to renew and drink the cup with his disciples in the Kingdom of the Father, the one who taught the world to pray, 'Thy kingdom come,'" i. e., Jesus Christ.[174] Chase says: "He has come again in the Kingdom of his Father."[175] Mrs. Brittingham, on pilgrimage to Acca, writes: "I have seen the King in his beauty, the Master is here and we need not look for another. This is the return of the Lion of the tribe of Judah, of the Lamb that once was slain;—the Glory of God and the Glory of the Lamb."[176]

Emphasizing the side of his divinity, we have such declarations as these: M. Haydar Ali taught Mrs. Goodall, "God is not realized except through His Manifestations. Now you have recognized Him and have come to see Him,"[177] i. e., Abdul Baha (1908). M. Asad Ullah gave instructions (1914): "This world has an owner, and Abdul Baha owns the world and all that is in it."[178] "He is the Son of God"[179]—the only Door, "the Lord of Mankind."[180] A supplication from Persia, given out for publication, says: "O! Abdul Baha! Forgiver of sins, merciful, bountiful, compassionate! How can a sinner like me reach Thee? Thou art through all the Forgiver of Sins."[181]