We have no direct evidence that Yaḥya Khan was dismissed from his office as a mark of the royal displeasure at his gentleness. But he must have been already removed and imprisoned, [Footnote: NH, p. 353.] when the vizier wrote to the Crown Prince (Nasiru'd-Din, afterwards Shah) and governor of Azarbaijan directing him to summon the Bāb to Tabriz and convene an assembly of clergy and laity to discuss in the Bāb's presence the validity of his claims. [Footnote: Ibid. p. 284.] The Bāb was therefore sent, and the meeting held, but there is (as Browne has shown) no trustworthy account of the deliberations. [Footnote: TN, Note M, 'Bāb Examined at Tabriz.'] Of course, the Bāb had something better to do than to record the often trivial questions put to him from anything but a simple desire for truth, so that unless the great Accused had some friend to accompany him (which does not appear to have been the case) there could hardly be an authentic Bābī narrative. And as for the Muslim accounts, those which we have before us do not bear the stamp of truth: they seem to be forgeries. Knowing what we do of the Bāb, it is probable that he had the best of the argument, and that the doctors and functionaries who attended the meeting were unwilling to put upon record their own fiasco.
The result, however, is known, and it is not precisely what might have been expected, i.e. it is not a capital sentence for this troublesome person. The punishment now allotted to him was one which marked him out, most unfairly, as guilty of a common misdemeanour—some act which would rightly disgust every educated person. How, indeed, could any one adopt as his teacher one who had actually been disgraced by the infliction of stripes? [Footnote: Cp. Isaiah liii. 5.] If the Bāb had been captured in battle, bravely fighting, it might have been possible to admire him, but, as Court politicians kept on saying, he was but 'a vulgar charlatan, a timid dreamer.' [Footnote: Gobineau, p. 257.] According to Mirza Jani, it was the Crown Prince who gave the order for stripes, but his 'farrashes declared that they would rather throw themselves down from the roof of the palace than carry it out.' [Footnote: NH, p. 290.] Therefore the Sheykhu'l Islam charged a certain Sayyid with the 'baleful task,' by whom the Messenger of God was bastinadoed.
It seems clear, however, that there must have been a difference of opinion among the advisers of the Shah, for shortly before Shah Muḥammad's death (which was impending when the Bāb was in Tabriz) we are told that Prince Mahdi-Kuli dreamed that he saw the Sayyid shoot the Shah at a levee. [Footnote: Ibid. p. 355.] Evidently there were some Court politicians who held that the Bāb was dangerous. Probably Shah Muḥammad's vizier took the disparaging view mentioned above (i.e. that the Bāb was a mere mystic dreamer), but Shah Muḥammad's successor dismissed Mirza Aḳasi, and appointed Mirza Taḳi Khan in his place. It was Mirza Taḳi Khan to whom the Great Catastrophe is owing. When the Bāb returned to his confinement, now really rigorous, at Chihriḳ, he was still under the control of the old, capricious, and now doubly anxious grand vizier, but it was not the will of Providence that this should continue much longer. A release was at hand.
It was the insurrection of Zanjan which changed the tone of the courtiers and brought near to the Bāb a glorious departure. Not, be it observed, except indirectly, his theosophical novelties; the penalty of death for deviations from the True Faith had long fallen into desuetude in Persia, if indeed it had ever taken root there. [Footnote: Gobineau, p. 262.] Only if the Kingdom of Righteousness were to be brought in by the Bāb by material weapons would this heresiarch be politically dangerous; mere religious innovations did not disturb high Court functionaries. But could the political leaders any longer indulge the fancy that the Bāb was a mere mystic dreamer? Such was probably the mental state of Mirza Taḳi Khan when he wrote from Tihran, directing the governor to summon the Bāb to come once more for examination to Tabriz. The governor of Azarbaijan at this time was Prince Hamzé Mirza.
The end of the Bāb's earthly Manifestation is now close upon us. He knew it himself before the event, [Footnote: NH, pp. 235, 309-311, 418 (Ṣubḥ-i-Ezel).] and was not displeased at the presentiment. He had already 'set his house in order,' as regards the spiritual affairs of the Bābī community, which he had, if I mistake not, confided to the intuitive wisdom of Baha-'ullah. His literary executorship he now committed to the same competent hands. This is what the Baha'is History (The Travellers Narrative) relates,—
'Now the Sayyid Bāb … had placed his writings, and even his ring and pen-case, in a specially prepared box, put the key of the box in an envelope, and sent it by means of Mullā Baḳir, who was one of his first associates, to Mullā 'Abdu'l Karim of Kazwin. This trust Mullā Baḳir delivered over to Mullā 'Abdu'l Karim at Ḳum in presence of a numerous company…. Then Mullā 'Abdu'l Karim conveyed the trust to its destination.' [Footnote: TN, pp. 41, 42.]
The destination was Baha-'ullah, as Mullā Baḳir expressly told the 'numerous company.' It also appears that the Bāb sent another letter to the same trusted personage respecting the disposal of his remains.
It is impossible not to feel that this is far more probable than the view which makes Ṣubḥ-i-Ezel the custodian of the sacred writings and the arranger of a resting-place for the sacred remains. I much fear that the Ezelites have manipulated tradition in the interest of their party.
To return to our narrative. From the first no indignity was spared to the holy prisoner. With night-cap instead of seemly turban, and clad only in an under-coat, [Footnote: NH, p. 294.] he reached Tabriz. It is true, his first experience was favourable. A man of probity, the confidential friend of Prince Hamzé Mirza, the governor, summoned the Bāb to a first non-ecclesiastical examination. The tone of the inquiry seems to have been quite respectful, though the accused frankly stated that he was 'that promised deliverer for whom ye have waited 1260 years, to wit the Ḳa'im.' Next morning, however, all this was reversed. The 'man of probity' gave way to the mullās and the populace, [Footnote: See New History, pp. 296 f., a graphic narration.] who dragged the Bāb, with every circumstance of indignity, to the houses of two or three well-known members of the clergy. 'These reviled him; but to all who questioned him he declared, without any attempt at denial, that he was the Ḳa'im [ = he that ariseth]. At length Mullā Muḥammad Mama-ghuri, one of the Sheykhi party, and sundry others, assembled together in the porch of a house belonging to one of their number, questioned him fiercely and insultingly, and when he had answered them explicitly, condemned him to death.
'So they imprisoned him who was athirst for the draught of martyrdom for three days, along with Aḳa Sayyid Ḥuseyn of Yezd, the amanuensis, and Aḳa Sayyid Ḥasan, which twain were brothers, wont to pass their time for the most part in the Bāb's presence….