Poisonous Envy

The spiritual world which continually surrounds us, but of which we are only dimly aware, has its own natural laws, so to speak. Among these are laws governing the ways in which the human soul interacts with that world. For some souls, close proximity with the spiritual world draws out the best in them, for a few it draws out the worst.

Abdu’l Baha alluded to these patterns in talks he gave over dinner to visiting western pilgrims. In short, that human beings may choose to rise to angelic heights or plunge to demonic behaviours.

Consider, likewise, the differences that exist among the members of the human race. Christ was in the form of a man and so was Caiaphas; Moses was a man and so was Pharaoh; Abel was a man and so was Cain; Bahá’u’lláh was a man and so was Yaḥyá.[1]

The reference to “Yahya” is to Bahá’u’lláh’s half-brother who caused so much harm to Bahá’u’lláh. The story is as old as human nature – an envy so burning that it leads to the most evil actions.

Let us briefly recall the story of Abel and Cain in the ancient wisdom of the Jewish people as recorded in the Bible. The story is something like this:

Abel and Cain were brothers, both children of Adam and Eve, the first human beings. Abel kept flocks, and Cain raised crops. One day Abel and Cain each brought offerings to the Lord. Abel brought the best he could of his flock. Cain brought some offerings from his crops. The Lord accepted Abel’s offering but did not accept Cain’s offering. Cain became angry and sad. The Lord cautioned him to do good. Later Cain lured his brother into the fields, and taking a stone, he struck and killed Abel. He buried Abel’s body, later seeking to hide his crime, though the Lord was well aware of his actions.

This ancient story speaks to the reality of envy in human nature.

In his earliest writings, Bahá’u’lláh foreshadowed that he would be the target of envy. In the Seven Valleys he wrote:

O My friend! Many a hound pursueth this gazelle of the desert of oneness; many a talon claweth at this thrush of the eternal garden. Pitiless ravens do lie in wait for this bird of the heavens of God, and the huntsman of envy stalketh this deer of the meadow of love.[2]

Let us explore some of this history.

Mirza Yahya was Bahá’u’lláh’s younger half-brother, who was under the care of Bahá’u’lláh. At Bahá’u’lláh’s suggestion, Mirza Yahya was appointed as a nominal figure-head by the Bab. The purpose of this appointment was to draw attention away from Bahá’u’lláh – who had already been identified by the Persian government and a hostile clergy as a “leader” of the Babis – as evident in Baha’u’llah’s imprisonment in the Siyah-Chal and his subsequent exile to Baghdad.[1] Shoghi Effendi affirms that the Bab never appointed a “successor” or an “interpreter” – as none was needed – and that Mirza Yahya was solely a figure-head pending the new manifestation.[2]

Mirza Yahya who was still a young man at the time came under the influence of one Siyyid Muhammad and the results were toxic. The activities connected with them were one of the reasons Bahá’u’lláh withdrew to the mountains of Kurdistan.  Much of the time Mirza Yahya, due to fear for his own safety, was inaccessible to the followers of the Bab. At other times his actions or lack of wisdom undermined their faith.

After Bahá’u’lláh’s return, as discussed in a previous article, he restored the Babi community. Over a period of a decade, he entirely transformed the fortunes of the Babi community. Ultimately Bahá’u’lláh’s growing fame led to his exile to Constantinople and then to Adrianople. As he left Baghdad his departure was accompanied by an outpouring of love and grief by the people of Baghdad.

Over years Mirza Yahya had grown increasingly envious of Baha’u’llah. As they were leaving Baghdad, Nabil heard these ominous words from Mirza Yahya.

Had I not chosen to hide myself, had I revealed my identity, the honor accorded Him (Bahá’u’lláh) on this day would have been mine too.[2]

On departing Baghdad, Bahá’u’lláh had announced to his closest followers that he was the prophet promised by the Bab. Gradually this began to be known to a wider audience among the followers of the Bab – for example through the Tablet of Ahmad. These developments spelt the end of even the nominal authority that Mirza Yahya held, as the Bab had required all to love and support the new prophet when he arrived. That nominal authority Mirza Yahya had already largely lost as a result of his inadequacies of character and behaviour.

Mirza Yahya increased in his hatred and envy of Bahá’u’lláh – even desiring his destruction. After their arrival in Adrianople, on one occasion he succeeded in poisoning Bahá’u’lláh after inviting him for tea — almost killing Bahá’u’lláh. The poisoning left Bahá’u’lláh so weak that he had to remain in bed for weeks and for the rest of his life Bahá’u’lláh had a permanent tremor in his hand. On another occasion Mirza Yahya attempted to persuade one of the Babis, Ustad Muhammad-i-Salman, to murder Bahá’u’lláh. So outraged was Ustad at the suggestion; that he never again spoke to Mirza Yahya. Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l Baha counselled simply not to speak of the matter. Despite this, Ustad Muhammad could not contain himself, and news of Mirza Yahya’s actions began to become known among the Babis and caused confusion and disharmony.

Conditions could not continue as they were. Bahá’u’lláh wrote the “Sura of Command” to Mirza Yahya, formally proclaiming Bahá’u’lláh’s mission and asking for Mirza Yahya’s response. Although Mirza Yahya was well aware of Bahá’u’lláh’s station — this was an opportunity for him to acknowledge Bahá’u’lláh openly – which the teachings of the Bab whom he claimed to follow, required him to do.

Rather than accepting or rejecting Bahá’u’lláh’s claim, the next day, Mirza Yahya himself claimed to be a recipient of divine revelation and a prophet. A palpably false claim – that is not repeated by Mirza Yahya or his followers in later years (for example in information collected by E.G. Browne).

In any case, in response to these developments, Bahá’u’lláh withdrew for a month from the community, moving to another residence, and saying that the Babis should choose between Bahá’u’lláh and Mirza Yahya.

Thinking that Bahá’u’lláh would not accept, Siyyid Muhammad encouraged Mirza Yahya to challenge Bahá’u’lláh to a public debate and set a time and place for them to meet: at the Sultan Selim mosque. Bahá’u’lláh did accept.

A large crowd had gathered to hear the debate. Haji Mirza Haydar-Ali who was present in Adrianople recorded the scene in his memoirs:

[the intended debate] became known among the peoples of the Muslim, Christian and Jewish religions in the city. All of them had heard of the miracles of Moses and the story of His confrontation with Pharaoh. And now they were expecting the meeting face to face in the mosque between His Holiness the Shaykh Effendi [a designation by which the people called Bahá’u’lláh to express their reverence for Him] and Mirza Ali who had denied Him. [For fear of being recognised [Mirza Yahya] had called himself by this name.] Therefore, from the morning of Friday until noon a large multitude drawn from the followers of these three religions had thronged the area … and the entrance to the mosque. The crowd was so large that it was difficult to move about. … the people … greeting Him with salutations, bowed and opened the way for Him to Pass. Many of them prostrated themselves at His feet and kissed them. … As soon as he entered the mosque, the preacher, who was delivering his discourse, became speechless or perhaps he forgot his words. Bahá’u’lláh went forward, seated Himself and then gave permission for the preacher to continue. Eventually the preaching and prayers came to an end. [Translation in Adib Taherzadeh, Covenant of Baha’u’llah]

Mirza Yahya failed to appear.

Before long the vast bulk of the Babis became followers of Bahá’u’lláh – and thus Baha’is.

Nonetheless, inevitably these events caused Bahá’u’lláh great sorrow and pain, but they were not the end of the trouble.

Mirza Yahya and Siyyid Muhammad began to agitate with the government. As a result, the government began to enquire into the Babis after which it became clear to them that Bahá’u’lláh claimed to be the founder of a new religion. After an investigation, the Ottoman authorities (but without giving Bahá’u’lláh an opportunity to defend himself) condemned him to perpetual imprisonment in Akka, while Mirza Yahya was similarly exiled to Cyprus. The grounds of Bahá’u’lláh’s imprisonment was Bahá’u’lláh’s claim to prophethood and their fear that this religion would spread.

After his arrival in Akka, Bahá’u’lláh was to write:

“For what crime were they imprisoned?”, they would answer and say: “They, verily, sought to supplant the Faith with a new religion!” If that which is ancient be what ye prefer, wherefore, then, have ye discarded that which hath been set down in the Torah and the Evangel? Clear it up, O men! By My life! There is no place for you to flee to in this day. If this be My crime, then Muḥammad, the Apostle of God, committed it before Me, and before Him He Who was the Spirit of God, and yet earlier He Who conversed with God. And if My sin be this, that I have exalted the Word of God and revealed His Cause, then indeed am I the greatest of sinners! Such a sin I will not barter for the kingdoms of earth and heaven.[3]

Image: Interior of the Sultan Selim mosque, Adrianople (Edirne), where Mirza Yahya failed to meet Bahá’u’lláh. Creative commons image by Peanut 99

Selected Sources:

Shoghi Effendi, God Passes By

H.M. Balyuzi, Bahá’u’lláh King of Glory

Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh, Volume 2, Chapter 7

Adib Taherzadeh, The Covenant of Baha’u’llah, pp 91-92

Necati Alkan, Dissent and Heterodoxy in the Late Ottoman Empire

E.G. Browne, Selections from the Writings of E.G. Browne on the Babi and Baha’i Religions

(This article is the 134th in a series of what I hope will be 200 articles in 200 days for the 200th anniversary of the birth of Bahá’u’lláh. The anniversary is being celebrated around the world on 21 and 22 October 2017, The articles are simply my personal reflections on Bahá’u’lláh’s life and work. Any errors or inadequacies in these articles are solely my responsibility.)