AdibM

Mistake

Sorry the date of death should be 1933.

Actually there is reason to believe...

That Ahmad Bahhaj (1853-1953) became a Baha'i later in his life. According to statements made by Ahmad to Lady Blomfield in 1922 (ref: Lady Blomfield, The Chosen Highway, Baha'i i Publishing Trust, 1967, pp. 237-8), Ahmad went to Haifa and remained there until his death in 1933.

Other sources for information about Ahmad Bahhaj include the following:

*E.G. Browne, Traveller's Narrative, pp. 384-6;
*E.G. Browne, "Personal Reminiscences", pp. 766-7;
*E.G. Browne, Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion, pp. 314, 321-2;
*Notes of Jalal Azal at Princeton University Library, pp. 560-572;
*Browne's notebook for his journey to Cyprus and `Akka in 1890, University of Cambridge, Browne Manuscripts, Sup. 21 (8), p. 20.
*the genealogical table compiled by Shoghi Effendi and published in Baha'i World, vol. 5: 1932-4, New York: Baha'i Publishing Committee, 1936, between pp. 204 and 205;
*Malik-Khusravi, `Iqlim-i-Nur, pp. 202-205

Happy researching.

No, he wasn't a Baha'i

Ahmad Bahhaj certainly was not a Baha'i. This is another tall-tale fabrication by fertile Baha'i minds.

About Badi Villar,

//badivillarcardenas.blogspot.com/

Wahid Azal

Ahmad Bahhaj

Ahmad Bahhaj, a son of Mírzá Yahyá was a Bahá'í.

Imaginary Bahais

One of the most annoying and despicably dishonest habits of you people, and one that drove me crazy growing up amongst you, is to claim - or, rather imagine - the offspring of your former ideological adversaries as having come over to your side and become Baha'is. Pray tell, who is this grandson of William McElwee Miller who became a Baha'i? Name him and prove him a grandson of the self-same Miller, if you are able...

You people have also had the temerity in print of claiming Ahmad Samareh, one of the grandsons of Subh-i-Azal, not to mention one of the sons of Subh-i-Azal, as having become a Baha'i - when it is not remotely the case. I happen to know the actual grandson of Ahmad Samareh, and his will and testament is available. Ahmad Samareh never became a Baha'i nor even entertained the idea.

Thankfully the world does not revolve around you people, and the offspring and descendents of your nemeses do not join nor have they ever joined you. That is wishful thinking and internal propaganda to make you feel better about yourselves, but it is completely bogus.

And BTW, for your information, one of the grandsons of Abdu'l-Husayn Ayatai AVARIH is also a personal friend of mine! And he can't stand the sight of you people any more than his grandfather, and he has tales about what you people tried to do and did to his grandfather after he defected that makes Mario Puzo's Godfather look tame by comparison.

413

Strange but Wonderful

Adib, my heartfelt congratulations on your book!

If you would like to know a strange but wonderfully ironic fact, a grandson of William Miller, the Christian missionary who wrote harsh things about the Baha'i Faith in the early 20th century . . .
became a Baha'i!

You aren't the actual author of this book...

 " I suppose the "real authors" are taking my high-school and AP-level classes as well and wrote the original article which later became my book:

//tinyurl.com/irimyths/"

Most probably, that is the case, yes! 

413

To everyone

Thank you all for your kind words; they are much appreciated.

As a matter of fact Iran-Lover, I have used that information in my book. Thank you very much for your concern.

In regards to the remark about my not having actually authored the work in question, I suppose the "real authors" are taking my high-school and AP-level classes as well and wrote the original article which later became my book:

//tinyurl.com/irimyths/ 

Bring it on...

Since the British government has been progressively declassifying its government archives, more and more evidence emerges of full British-Bahai complicity. The bases claimed by Baha'i sources regarding Abbas Effendi's knighthood can now be refuted on prima facie evidence.

You people have no leg to stand on, so you can get as many 18 year olds as you wish and write documents penciling in their names as the purported authors, but still you won't be able to withstand the truth of the matter that you people have fully colluded with Imperialist powers as a fifth columnist force....

From  HOSTAGE TO KHOMEINI by Robert Dreyfuss, based on such evidence, is a statement of fact and not theory. To wit,

//www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf

&

//www.archive.org/details/HostageToKhomeini

...Today the Bahai cult is hated in Iran, and is considered correctly
to be an arm of the British Crown. During the destabilization of the
Shah in 1978, it was widely reported that in several instances the
Bahai cult secretly funded the Khomeini Shi’ite movement. In part, the money would have flowed through the cult’s links to the same
international ‘human rights’ organizations, such as Amnesty
International, that originally sponsored the anti-Shah movement in
Iran. These movements also derive from the “one world” currents
associated with the Bahais since the early 1900s. (If any Iranians
have been misled on the question of the Bahais by the supposed
antipathy of Khomeini’s clique to the Bahais, it should be noted that
the Bahai cultists often deliberately encouraged anti-Bahai
activities as camouflage)...

Also see pp. 115-116 (Pdf page 72)

413

In response to Nima Hazini, Covenant, Ruhi Student, Ravian, etc.

(* denotes me quoting Nima, ** means I'm quoting a work he has cited, for example that of Robert Dreyfuss)

*the big lie is an assertive theory of Adolf Hitler's in Mein Kampf and not Vladimir Illych Ulyanov Lenin's.

Nima, here, you are either trying to twist things or misrepresent what Adib said. Where did this bright young man say BIG lie? Do you not know the difference between Hitler’s BIG lie theory and Lenin’s famous quote which is an example of Proof by Assertion, a form of logical fallacy? If so, check out this link:

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

Adib is actually right. The quote is indeed Lenin’s and not Hitler’s. Google it yourself and find out. I’ll make it easy on you. Here are 4 links (could have included 40!) which says the quote is Lenin’s. You post one that says it’s Hitler’s. But don’t confuse Lenin’s statement (a lie told often enough becomes truth) with the BIG lie theory:

//www.quotationspage.com/quote/838.html

//thinkexist.com/quotation/a_lie_told_often_e...

//www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vladimi...

//constitutionallyright.com/2007/10/03/a-lie-...

*First, regarding the knighting of Abbas Effendi, we have the official printed statement of the British High Commission for Palestine itself - i.e. the very people who knighted Abbas Effendi - that this knighting "... was created by King George V. a K.B.E. for valuable services rendered to the British Government..."

Well, let’s see! Why didn’t you specify what those valuable services were? Could it be that this defeated your purpose?! Nima, you forget that we live in the age of the Internet. You can’t hide behind lies or half-truths. People could investigate and find out for themselves!!

‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s valuable services rendered to the British government boiled down to him offering grain to the starving British soldiers. The same offer he had already made to Muslims, Jews, Christians, and the Druze in the same region. In the process, he saved countless lives. You see, to the Bahá’ís, it doesn’t matter if you are British, Kuwaiti, African, American, Jew, Muslim, Christian etc. A human life is a human life. If you can save it, you should. In your philosophy I guess, he should have let the British soldiers die. If so, how could he have practiced oneness of humanity?

The whole story is here:

//ahang.rabbani.googlepages.com/abu-sinan

By the way, if you know of a better and more detailed history of those days, then post it here.

In summary, during World War I, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá had the foresight to ask the Bahá’í farmers in the region to grow a lot of grain in preparation for potentially hard times. A combination of war, Ottoman government mismanagement and a series of 18 locust attacks destroyed a great deal of farm lands in the Haifa-`Akká region. At ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s instructions, Bahá’í farmers had already stored considerable amounts of grain in silos. As a result, when the famine hit, he ordered the distribution of the grains to the population in the region. When the British army arrived in Palestine, they were subjected to the same hardships. So, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá helped them too as he helped others.

Nima, instead of being proud that a Persian is the first to receive such a humanitarian award, you try to denigrate him and his contributions. It’s truly sad. If receiving this humanitarian award makes ‘‘Abdu’l-Bahá a British spy, then so were the other recipients of the same award including Mother Theresa, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, and Bono!!

Look at the complete list here:

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_honorary_Brit...

There are 17 different categories of Knighthood that the British government has conferred on people from all over the world for various contributions they have made to humanity. So, Nima, if we use your standards, then Stephen Spielberg, Bob Hope, Bill Gates, Billy Graham, and Pele were all British spies, too!

Dear Adib, if you haven't seen these sources, you might include them in the next edition of your book.

*Next, the following declassified British cabinet documents, here:

Boy, just the use of the word “Bahaism” in the title here, rather than using the officially registered name of the religion (Bahá’í Faith) points to how impartial the information is going to be!

*1. (Top Secret) British Government Foreign Countries Report (no.56) 16th November 1921

Congratulations! What an amazing discovery you have made, Nima. We all should be really grateful to you. Once and for all, you have proven that poor Bahá’ís in Persia were desperately trying to send money to their leader in Haifa through the Imperial Bank of Persia (equivalent to the Central Bank of Iran today) for the support of their religious leader, their religious sites and the support of the visiting pilgrims (what an atrocious concept!) and the Persian government was denying them one of their most basic human rights!!!

So, when your government doesn’t allow you “freedom of conscience”, what would YOU have done? You must know enough history of the 19th century Persia to remember that the British and the Russians were the most powerful forces in Persian politics of the time. The British had a mandate (and control) over the Palestine region at the time. So, it made sense for the oppressed Bahá’ís of Persia to go to the British (rather than the Russians) and ask for this basic right of a human. If you can’t empathize with that, maybe you should switch ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’s place with Azal and imagine Hadi Dowlatabadi and other Azalis wanting to provide financial support to Azal for the upkeep of Azali facilities and sites, and welcoming Azali pilgrims to the Haifa-`Akká region. What would you have done?

*2. APPRECIATION OF THE ATTACHED EASTERN REPORT NO. LXX (May 1918)

A clear example of “much ado about nothing!”

For crying out loud Nima, here the British government is basically saying there are voices of moderation in the Muslim world which will be friendly to us (instead of taking up arms against us). Notice that the document identifies them as “Pious Muslims” and includes the Egyptian Muhammad Abduh, one of the most prominent Muslim reformists of the time. I guess this document proves that both Abduh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and for that matter anyone who didn’t want to take up arms and fight the British must be their agents. What you are doing here is no different than the IRI labelling Bahá’ís as agents of the British, Russia, Israel, International Zionism, America, Iraq, etc., etc.

All I can say is that this is truly shameful. However, thanks for putting these documents up on the web so inquiring minds could read them and decide for themselves.

* //www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf

This masterpiece has attracted a grand total of 3 reviews on Amazon!! I quote the only cogent one here and leave the other two mind-boggling observations for Nima to quote!!

This is one of the worst attempts at non-fiction I've ever read. It is a completely ridiculous amalgamation of conspiracy theories that blames the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis in Tehran on a collusion of the Freemasons, the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, the Carter administration, British Oligarchs, the Mossad, and many, many others. Lyndon LaRouche commissioned the writing of this book, and while I don't know much [about] him, I suspect that many of the absurd views held by the author mirror LaRouche's. Also, the author worked at the Executive Intelligence Review so often cited in this 'book' (and I use the term loosely), which LaRouche founded and directs. EIR is presented as a serious news source, although I can't imagine it is anything other than a mouthpiece for his views.

Here's a representative sample of the tripe you can find in this book:

"So far, we have found that the "Islamic fundamentalist revolution" that seized power in February 1979 was instigated by British Petroleum, was given crucial assistance by a NATO general, forged a continuing alliance with the "Satan" government of the United States, and is heavily penetrated by the Israeli secret intelligence service. Now we answer the question: who is the Ayatollah Khomeini?"

For a superb book on the ACTUAL hostage crisis, read "Guests of the Ayatollah", by Mark Bowden. I wouldn't use this book to level a piano.

In short, the book ranks right up there with Dolgorukov’s Memoirs. I found at least 10 errors or sheer lies in the few pages it dedicates to the Bahá’ís. Here are a handful of them:

**The Bahá’í movement was the first project of the 19th British cult aristocracy. It began as an experimental British foray in nonreligious [say what?!!], freemasonic cults; the Bahá’í movement would spawn the organizer of the future pan-Islamic movement- Jamaleddine Al-Afghani.

You can’t be serious!! The same Al-Afghani who bad-mouthed the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh in the Beirut Butrus al-Bustani Encyclopedia?

**The Bahai cult [very objective and impartial] was founded in approximately 1844 by a missionary [say what?!!!] named Mirzá Husayn `Alí.

Wrong. What was founded in 1844 was the Bábí religion by Siyyid `Alí-Muhammad Shirazi. And neither Mirzá Husayn `Alí (Bahá'u'lláh) nor Siyyid `Alí-Muhammad Shirazi (the Báb) were missionaries!!

**The largest Bahá’í temple is in Haifa

No it’s not! We don’t have a Temple anywhere in Israel or the entire Middle East for that matter!

**The world headquarters’ of the organization is in Wilmette, Illinois

Boy, this guy is really confused!! No, actually that would be in Haifa. What is in Wilmette is our U.S. Temple!

**In 1852, a Bahá’í leader was arrested after he tried to assassinate the Sháh

Not true. Three regular Bábí youths (including a confectioner and an engraver) tried to do this with pistols that fired pellets, of all things! That’s how brilliant this plan was and how much chance of success it had.

**During this time the Bahá’í leaders- then including Bahaullah and his son, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá-maintained close ties to both the British Scottish Rite and to a proliferation of branch temples and movements spreading into India, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, and even Africa.

Nima, you can’t be serious in citing rubbish like this as a source, can you?!! All I can say is, “this is a new one!!! Har dam az in bAgh (of conspiracy theories) bari miresad…;)

*Non-Bahais should as well note the following statement of Dr. Sa'eed Khan,

*From Mission Problems in New Persia, 1926, p. 83, 87 & 89 quoted by
William McElwee Miller in The Baha'i Faith: It's History and
Teachings, 1973, p. 289.

**"...There is no conscience with them [ i.e. the Baha'is], they keep
to no principle, they tell you what is untrue, ignoring or denying undoubted historical facts, and this is the character of both the leader and the led...As to morality and honesty, the whole system has proved disappointing...I have been in contact with many Baha'is, and have had dealings with many and have tested many, and unfortunately I have met not a single one who could be called honest or faithful in the full sense of these words..."

OK. So, let’s see what we have here. Dr. Sa’eed Khán quoted here was actually the son of a mullah who converted to Christianity in the late 1800s. See page 159 of “Religion and Nation” by Kathryn Spellman. So, we can be sure of the impartial views of the Bahá’ís by the son of a mullah, Nima, right?!! And we should generalize an early 20th century statement by the son of a mullah who, by converting to Christianity now sees Bahá’ís as potential competition for Muslim conversions and call millions of Bahá’ís worldwide today “dishonest and without conscience.” WOW!

And get this! The quote is from perhaps the most well-known anti-Bahá’í polemical work (otherwise known as Raddiyeh) written by a Christian. William Miller, himself a Christian missionary intentionally gave a misleading title to his book so potential buyers would think it’s an objective book on the Bahá’í Faith. Go figure.

My dear Adib:

I am so proud of you. Such a tender age and such a deep and mature soul. May God bless you. I believe it is the time to face this baseless accusation head on and bring it to open. Time to remove doubts, and lies.

With utmost regards for you,

Tahirih

رقیبان ازلیِ بهائیت، نخستین مروجان نظریه‌ توطئه

رقیبان ازلیِ بهائیت، نخستین مروجان نظریه‌ توطئه

//bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home
-Made in Azalis=Bayani=Hazini=Nur=Ravian Bilani

اما این اتهام از کجا سرچشمه می ‌گیرد؟ ریشه‌ اتهام ارتباط بهائیان با خارجی‌ها چندگانه است.

در دوره ‌اولیه‌ دیانت بهائی، شاخه‌ های مذهبی همسایه‌ آن مانند "ازلی‌ها" تیر این اتهام را به سوی بهائیت روانه کردند.

آن ‌گونه که خانم مانگول بیات در کتاب "نخستین انقلاب ایران؛ تشیع و انقلاب مشروطیت 1909-1905"
(Iran's First Revolution: Shi'ism and the Constitutional Revolution of 1905-1909)

آورده است، ازلی ‌ها که در جنبش مشروطیت فعال بودند و از نظر مذهبی رقیب بهائیان به شمار می ‌رفتند، کوشیدند تا با جا انداختن برچسب "ارتباط با خارجی" حقانیت و اصالت دین بهائیت را به پرسش بگیرند.

ازلی‌ها پیروان میرزا یحیی نوری، ملقب به صبح ازل، جانشین محمد علی باب، بنیادگذار آیین بابی، بودند و در آغاز به ضرورت جهاد و براندازی مسلحانه‌حکومت قاجاریه باور داشتند.

میرزا حسین‌علی بهاء (بعدها بهاء الله)، برادر پدری میرزا یحیی نوری بود. پس از مدتی میان دو برادر بر سر جانشینی پدر اختلاف و دشمنی عمیق افتاد. بابیان به دو شاخه‌ ازلی‌ ها و بهائی‌ ها تقسیم شدند. گروه‌ ازلی‌ها دیری نپایید و فروپاشید، اما بهائیان تا به امروز در سراسر جهان روی به گسترش و فزونی نهادند.

از سوی دیگر، بر پایه‌ آنچه در کتاب "بریتانیا و انقلاب مشروطیت ایران 1911-1906؛ سیاست خارجی، امپریالیسم و مخالفت"
(Britain and the Iranian Constitutional Revolution of 1906-1911; Foreign Policy, Imperialism and Dissent(
، نوشته‌منصور بنکداریان آمده است، ارتداد شماری از یهودیان به آیین بابی و بهائی و نیز گرویدن شماری از انگلیسی‌ها به بهائیت، بدگمانی‌ها در باره‌رابطه‌بابی‌ ها و بهائی ‌ها به "بیگانگان" را افزود.

گفتنی است که از آغاز پیدایش بهائیت، شمار فراوانی از روحانیان شیعه و پیروان ادیان دیگر مانند زردتشتی به این دین گرویده ‌اند.

Nothing debunked. Connection of the Baha'is to the British

Let's look at the facts.  But before we do, we should say that while the memoirs of Prince Dolgorukov are obviously a bad forgery, the fact remains that the connections of the Baha'i leadership with the British establishment are prima facie indisputable. Second, the big lie is an assertive theory of Adolf Hitler's in Mein Kampf and not  Vladimir Illych Ulyanov Lenin's. That said, it appears that a big lie is being propagated by the Baha'is themselves regarding their undisputable historical connections to the British government and establishment, not by those pointing out the blatantly obvious.

First, regarding the knighting of Abbas Effendi, we have the official printed statement of the British High Commission for Palestine itself - i.e. the very people who knighted Abbas Effendi - that this knighting "... was created by King George V. a K.B.E. for valuable services rendered to the British Government..."

Next, the following declassified British cabinet documents, here:

//bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home

1)  1. (Top Secret) British Government Foreign Countries Report (no.56) 16th November 1921

2)  2. APPRECIATION OF THE ATTACHED EASTERN REPORT NO. LXX (May 1918)

demonstrate on the evidence that the capacity of such relationship of Abbas Effendi and his followers with the British government was very much a relationship where the word espionage can very well be applied. In one the Bahais and the British government are clearly attempting to circumvent the Iranian government of the day in order to send funds through the agency of the British authorities in Iran from the Baha'is there to Abbas Effendi in Palestine. In the other we have a war-time foreign policy statement about using and supporting the Abdu'l-Behaists as a front against the Turkish government's Pan-Turanism during the war. Clearly these are not mere theories, but clear and unimpeachable statements issued by the British government itself regarding the Baha'is and their fifth columnist relationship with them in Iran and the rest of the Middle East.

As such the statement made by Robert Dreyfuss in 1980 in his HOSTAGE TO KHOMEINI, based on such evidence, is a statement of fact and not theory. To wit,

//www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf

&

//www.archive.org/details/HostageToKhomeini

...Today the Bahai cult is hated in Iran, and is considered correctly
to be an arm of the British Crown. During the destabilization of the
Shah in 1978, it was widely reported that in several instances the
Bahai cult secretly funded the Khomeini Shi’ite movement. In part, the money would have flowed through the cult’s links to the same
international ‘human rights’ organizations, such as Amnesty
International, that originally sponsored the anti-Shah movement in
Iran. These movements also derive from the “one world” currents
associated with the Bahais since the early 1900s. (If any Iranians
have been misled on the question of the Bahais by the supposed
antipathy of Khomeini’s clique to the Bahais, it should be noted that
the Bahai cultists often deliberately encouraged anti-Bahai activities
as camouflage)...

Also see pp. 115-116 (Pdf page 72)

Non-Bahais should as well note the following statement of Dr. Sa'eed Khan,

From Mission Problems in New Persia, 1926, p. 83, 87 & 89 quoted by
William McElwee Miller in The Baha'i Faith: It's History and
Teachings, 1973, p. 289.

 "...There is no conscience with them [ i.e. the Baha'is], they keep
to no principle, they tell you what is untrue, ignoring or denying undoubted historical facts, and this is the character of both the leader and the led...As to morality and honesty, the whole system has proved disappointing...I have been in contact with many Baha'is, and have had dealings with many and have tested many, and unfortunately I have met not a single one who could be called honest or faithful in the full sense of these words..."

Given all the above, it appears that as hard as the Baha'is might have tried  over the years to dismiss what they label "conspiracy theories" regarding their connections to the British establishment, more and more such theories continue to persist while with each day more evidence emerges proving these theories as fact rather than theory. 

413

CONGRATULATIONS !

Happy Fasting and Happy Nowruz

from Latin America

Thanks!

Thank you, Adib jan!
Happy Nowruz in advance.