My personal knowledge of these circumstances is supported by abundant printed evidence. First of all there is Abdul Baha's own statement. He said in America,[285] "In Persia the Bahais have no part in the movements which have terminated in corruption. They must have nothing to do with seditious movements." Excerpts from his letters[286] show that they were constantly enjoined "from the very beginning of the revolution to stand aside from the struggle and war." To the same effect are the words of the Bahai Remey,[287] "The Bahais had remained neutral in the struggle for constitutional liberty and the renewal of Persia." So Dreyfus, another Bahai,[288] "He (Abdul Baha) dissuaded them from mixing themselves up in the political struggle. This explains the apparently passive rôle played by the Bahais in contemporary events in Persia." Because of this attitude, Professor Browne accuses them of lack of patriotism and laments their inaction. But this attitude of neutrality was only maintained by them as far as taking up arms and public action were concerned. Their secret influence was on the side of the reactionary party. It is plain that the constitutionalists regarded the Bahais as their opponents, and Mohammed Ali Shah counted them as his supporters. Abdul Baha said in New York,[289] "The Bahais have taken no part whatever in political questions and disturbances. Their clamorous persecutors were the revolutionists. These discontents wanted constitutional rights and privileges. They were politicians, not religionists." Certainly the hostile animus of these words is unmistakable. There is indubitable proof, too, that Abdul Baha carried on correspondence with Mohammed Ali Shah. M. H. Ford, a Bahai writer,[290] states the fact in detail. Its purport was such that, when the Constitutionalists knew it, Abdul Baha feared violence. This was commonly reported in Persia. In Chicago the first Bahai missionary to America confirmed this fact which he had heard from Acca. He said, "The authorities intercepted Abbas's letter intriguing with Mohammed Ali Shah, and therefore the revolutionists threatened him." Remey shows the affiliation of the Bahais with the Shah, and his satisfaction with them. He arrived at Teheran just when the Shah had scattered the parliament and hanged the editors. He says, "We found the Bahais in the utmost peace and happiness. They were in good esteem and respect of the [reactionary] Government, and were now enjoying unusual privileges.... Several of the Bahais had been appointed to high governmental positions." In accord with all these facts is the statement of J. D. Frame, M. D., of Resht:
"The political influence of the Bahais has been grossly exaggerated. They were forbidden to accept seats in the first parliament and professed to maintain strict neutrality, but in the spring of 1908 a 'tablet' was circulated among them, promising that Mohammed Ali Shah would rule for the remainder of his life; and the writer possesses a copy of another 'tablet' promising him speedy peace and prosperity. The subsequent forced abdication of the king cost the Bahais considerable prestige and some followers."[291]
We thus see a double failure on the part of this movement. As Babism it failed in 1848-1852 in its rebellion and wars against the Kajars; as Bahaism it failed to enter into and assist the modern movement, which, aiming at reform and progress, inaugurated a constitution. The cause of the latter is not far to seek; Bahaism has a political scheme of its own. We will now consider it.
III. Bahaism has set forth a system of civil government. Claiming to be a revelation from God, it has enunciated the laws and regulations of the future State. It approves of constitutional monarchy as the best form of government, and permits republics.[292] But this monarchy will be limited not so much by its constitution as by the law of Bahaism and its hierarchy. Baha, in the "Kitab-ul-Akdas," the Book of Laws, directs that Bet-Adl, houses of justice, be established in every place, with nine or more members, all Bahai men, who shall be Trustees of the Merciful, Administrators for God. In the thirteenth of the "Glad Tidings"[293] he says:
"The affairs of the people are placed in charge of the men of the House of Justice. They are daysprings of command (divine agents, representatives of God). They may execute what they deem advisable. It is incumbent upon all to obey them. Their
souls will be inspired with divine aspiration. God will inspire them with what He willeth."
With them will lie the interpretation of points of doctrine. They must decree and judge according to Bahai revelation. "They must gaze day and night towards that which hath been revealed from the horizon of the Supreme Pen." They shall rule by divine right. Their authority shall be absolute. Abdul Baha restates the words of Baha:[294] "The House of Justice must be obeyed in all things." "It is the centre of true government." "The Law of God will be invested in them, and they will render decisions." "All judgment will be from the standpoint of God's laws." "Its decisions and commands will be guarded from mistake. It will have conferred upon it infallibility." The House of Justice will have local councils, national ones, and an international one.[295] Of the latter, Abdul Baha said in an address in New York:
"A universal or world House of Justice shall be organized. That which it orders shall be the Truth in explaining the commands of Baha Ullah and shall be obeyed by all. All men shall be under its supervision."[296]
Its functions are not confined to matters of faith, for Abdul Baha continues: "The House of Justice is endowed with a political as well as a religious aspect. It embodies both aspects, and is protected by the preserving power of Baha Ullah himself." In the political aspect it will be supreme. "The separation of the Religion and the State can only be temporary," says Dreyfus,[297] "a momentary stage. For the present the two spheres are separate. When Bahaism triumphs they will be united." "The House of Justice[298] will have under its control almost the whole administration, and naturally will take the place of our municipal councils. Such has been Baha Ullah's intention. Further he clearly aims not only at a municipal House of Justice, but also at a legislative one, sitting as a national parliament and as an international tribunal." Remember that all the members are to be Bahais. So Remey says, "There will be a union of Religion and the State—the governments of the nations. The material laws of men will be founded and enforced according to Bahaism."[299] In this politico-religious régime, the political will be subject to the religious. "The kings and rulers of the world," says Abdul Baha,[300] "will find their true authority under the rulings of the House of Justice. It will decide between kings and kings." Baha addressed letters[301] to kings with arrogant assumption of authority to control the civil powers.