I pass on to the Bahais, whom Abul Fazl claims were reformed and transformed by Baha. Baha himself it is, who in the "Ikan" calls the Shiahs "a foul, erring sect," who said of his Turkish guards, "Shame upon them! God shall consume their livers with fire, and verily he is the fiercest of avengers" (Lawh-i-Rais) and who exultingly celebrated, in a hymn of triumph, the death of Fuad Pasha,[484] the vizier who had exiled him, and consigned him to hell "where the heart boils and the tormenting angel melts him." Baha's winsome words about the mullahs are, in the "Ikan," "1278 years have passed and all these worthless wretches have read the Koran every morning and have not yet attained to a single letter of the purport of it."
The spirit of love (?) is shown by Mirza Abul Fazl, the preacher and apologist for Bahaism, in his discussion (1873) as recorded in the "New History."[485] His abusive language runs on page after page. The mullahs of Persia are called mischief-makers, dolts, a pack of scoundrels, tyrants, fools, plunderers of men's properties and wives, sectarian zealots steeped in prejudice and thinly disguising their greed of worldly lucre under a veil of sanctity, sprung from the rustic population and the scum of the towns, ignorant of the decencies of society and neglectful of good breeding, with wickedness, worldliness, rapacity and selfishness which are incurable and folly that exceeds all bounds and surpasses all conception, with stupidity, overweening arrogance and presumption absolutely unparallelled, hiding the truth in falsehood, circulating false reports, possessing malignant hatred, malice, spite and great injustice, and notoriously eager to shed blood, yet with cowardice like a timid girl.
He avers further that they are lacking in patriotism, nullify sovereign authority, encroach upon and usurp the power of kings, dismiss viziers, invite the people to rebel, cause national decay, set their feet upon the necks of all mankind, menace the order and well-being of the government, devour public wealth and substitute treason for service. "Perish their homes of folly whose learning is all pretense, their colleges which never yielded a man of sense." This is a condensation of the Bahai philosopher's amiable (!) description of the chiefs of his national religion. The author of the "New History" almost surpasses him in abuse.[486] He compares the mullahs to a "host of foul reptiles who befoul and pollute the pure water of life so that it waxeth loathsome and abominable.... They are fraudulent and sophistical hypocrites ... inwardly reprobate and outwardly devout, clothing themselves in the garb of spurious asceticism and simulated piety: fabricators of 'authentic' traditions." Later Haji M. Haidar Ali,[487] writing by command of Abdul Baha, says of Persia, "The old religious sects ... degenerated into ferocious wolves and mad dogs, even surpassing the ravenous man-eating beasts." Apropos of the martyrdom of Aga Sayid Jafar of Abargoo, "Our Great Lord and Master Abdul Baha revealed the following in a Visiting Tablet" to be chanted at the tomb: "Hell is for such as rejected thee, fire for such as sentenced thee to death, infernal flame for such as betrayed thee, and the hellish gulf for such as shed thy blood."[488] These quotations show the vindictive spirit of the Bahai leaders. Any one who is acquainted with Bahais in Persia knows that this is the spirit that animates them, that they revile the Mutasharis and Sheikhis and especially their mullahs. They are brotherly and helpful to their own particular sect of Bahais, vindictive to all who have opposed them. Doctor Frame quotes a Persian as saying this of the attitude of Abdul Baha, "He is very kind towards his friends and bitter towards his enemies." In view of all that has been brought forward, how can Mr. Phelps aver "that they have no trace of bitterness or resentment for their sufferings." The habit of Bahais in denying that they have animosity against other religions reminds me of one of their own stories. A certain mullah said to his friend, "If you notice in me any objectionable habit please inform me." "I perceive no fault in you," answered his friend, "save a habit of using abusive language." "Abusive language!" cried the mullah. "What rascally knave calls me abusive? What shameless ruffian have I abused that he should dare accuse me?"
In the statements of Bahais which I quoted above, they laid claim to superior chastity and sobriety. In the chapter on "Bahaism and Woman" I have noticed their defects in regard to the treatment of women. In regard to sexual immorality, they are neither better nor worse than Persians of the middle class to which they mostly belong. Bahai law follows the Moslem law in prohibiting the use of alcohol as a beverage, as did the law of the Bab. The Bab prohibited opium and tobacco. Azal follows the Bab in these restrictions, while Baha exempts tobacco from the prohibition. A good many Moslems, especially of the cities and upper classes, are addicted to alcohol, and have been through the centuries of Islam. My observation leads me to believe that Bahais are more addicted to the use of intoxicants than Moslems are. Regarding the relation of Bahais to wine and opium, we have an impartial witness who writes his experience without prejudice or motive. Professor Browne, in his "A Year Among the Persians," tells of his social intercourse with the Babis, Azalis and Bahais. His prolonged stay in Kirman was largely spent among the Bahais. He became so intimate with them as to be considered one of them by many in the city. He joined in their convivialities and he gives us a simple narrative of everyday events and experiences. Read the volume from page 475 to 540 and see how many of the Bahais lived in the habitual use of wine and opium. It is shocking and shows what goes on behind their doors. No other one has had opportunity to see and reveal their hidden life. One and another and another of the Bahais is referred to by name and occupation as addicted to intoxicants.[489] Sheikh Ibrahim "is a drunkard and a libertine"; Usta Akbar, the pea-parcher, "returned in a state of boastful intoxication, talking blasphemous nonsense"; the son of the Bahai postmaster "wants money to get drunk and play the libertine"; Haji Shirazi is "a drinker and a libertine" and a reviler; another is a victim of copious libations of beer; another a drunkard and blasphemous in his cups.
Regarding the use of opium they appear to be worse. It seems to be a common habit among them. See pages 499, 500, 505, 520, 524, 525, 540. Of certain dinners Professor Browne says, "All present were Babis (Bahais) and we sat sipping our tea and whiffing opium." "We sat talking late and smoking opium." "The wildest ascriptions of Deity to Baha were made when intoxicated with wine and opium: then they praised the 'Beloved.'" "The poor lad, the son of the telegrapher whom I had seen smoking opium, was dead." "A Bahai dervish was engaged in smoking an opium pipe." The Prince secretary, an Azali Babi, "was a confirmed opium smoker." Browne even joined the Bahais in the use of opium and almost became a victim of the habit. On one occasion[490] they secretly filled his pipe with hashish (Bhang). He recognized the taste and refused it. Why did they do so? Would they possibly have shown him visions with the hope of persuading him of the truth of Bahaism? Maybe some such incidents are the basis of the Moslem accusations against the Bahais of using hashish on neophytes. The point of the above citations is plain. Bahaism does not exercise the transforming power that is claimed for it. The Persian Bahais are yet in the bonds of iniquity. The boasts of Bahais are ungrounded. What of Abul Fazl's question,[491] "Have you ever heard of a Bahai accused[492] of drinking wine?[493] None are accused of evil deeds or bad morals." Again Sprague says, "The conditions of the Millennium are already visible among these people," and Thornton Chase declares, "It brings men to a higher conception of duty and life than has been the heritage of the churches." How blind to facts is such faith!
FOOTNOTES:
[478] Page 112.
[479] Yet Phelps, p. 158, and Chase themselves inveigh against orthodox Christianity with bitterness and scorn.
[480] "New Hist.," pp. 320 f, 281, 289.
[481] "Ibid., pp. xvii. and 354.