The BAYANI community of Iran
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
The BAYANI community of Iran
02-Mar-2009
Whether by anecdotal rumor or in the literature, the Baha’i leadership and organization has over the years gone out of its way to deny agency as well as in numerous circumstances to deny the very existence of the Bayani community. The Bayanis, whom popular terminology has termed Azalis (a term which they take as a pejorative and thus a term of derision), are the remaining followers of the post-Islamic esoteric Twelver Shi’ite religion founded by Siyyid ‘Ali Muhammad Shirazi, the Essence of the Seven Letters, the Bab (d. 1850).
In 1849, a little under a year before his execution in Tabriz on July 8th 1850, the Bab had nominated the then nineteen year old Mirza Yahya Nuri Subh-i-Azal (d. 1912) to succeed him as his ‘mirror’ (mirat) and successor (janeshin). Among sundry other titles and epithets he had received from the Bab, Mirza Yahya Nuri has come to be known primarily as Subh-i-Azal, i.e. the Dawn or Morning of Pre-Eternity, given that the Bab held the years of his revelatory ministry to accord with the famous but cryptic Tradition of Ultimate Reality (hadith al-haqiqa), otherwise known as the hadith kumayl, i.e. the Zen-like (and possibly apocryphal) discussion said to have occurred between the first Shi’ite Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661) and Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-Nakhai (d. 701) regarding the nature of ultimate reality. The fifth theophanic sequence of this Tradition states, “A Light Illuminating from the Morning-Dawn of Pre-Eternity and shedding its traces upon the tablets of the Talismanic-Temples of Mono-Unitarian Unicity (nurun ashraqa min subh al-azal fa-yaluha ‘ala hayakil-t-tawhid atharihi).” Subh-i-Azal had appeared amongst the Babis in the fifth year of the Bab’s revelatory ministry, thus the epithet.
The Bab further sent numerous epistles and tablets to his nominated successor making ecstatic, proclamatory locutions about him, such as, “I am you and you are I (anta ana wa ana anta),” and in his longest testamentary document he made the pronouncement, “O Name of the Pre-Eternal [referring to Azal], I verily testify upon this that there is no other god but I the Dearly Precious, the Best Beloved, then I testify upon this that there is no other god but Thee the Protector, the Peerless!” It was the Baha’i patriarch ‘Abbas Effendi ‘Abdu’l-Baha (d. 1921) who first coined the term Azali as a sectarian slur to cast the adherents of the Bayan as exclusive followers of Subh-i-Azal rather than as followers of the Bayan and Subh-i-Azal as the mirror and successor of the Bab. Unfortunately the term has since stuck in the popular consciousness, yet it is not the term its adherents have ever known themselves by.
In April 1912, almost sixty-three years after he had been nominated by the Bab, Subh-i-Azal died in exile in Larnaca, Cyprus, where he is now buried in a small, modest shrine. Although some Western language sources, including E.G. Browne (d. 1926), have stated that Hadi Dowlatabadi (1908-09?) had initially been nominated by Subh-i-Azal to succeed him - upon whose own death the succession is then held by these sources to have devolved upon his son Yahya Dawlatabadi (d. 1939) -, the fact of the matter is that there is absolutely no primary source documentation or any other evidence supporting this assertion. The unanimous position of the Bayani community today is that Subh-i-Azal left no will and testament; that therefore there was no successor; and so effectively the leadership of the Bayani community became henceforth a collective endeavor, a position foreseen by the Bab himself in the aforementioned will and testament.
The survival of the Bayani community in the face of often virulent hostility and persecution from both the majoritarian orthodox Shi’ite Islamic milieu of Iran as well as by the Baha’i organization is in itself a significant story demanding to be told. It is also an important case-study of non-traditional forms of (especially post-Islamic) Iranian esoteric spirituality to merit independent investigation on several fronts. Unfortunately the largely disorganized status of this community since the teens of the last century, coupled with its conspicuous lack of an organizational center and charismatic leadership; not to mention its consistent deployment of the discipline of the arcane (taqîya); together with the fact that the bulk of the present information and sources on the internal history of the Bayanis from 1912 to the present is in the form of anecdotal stories or unpublished memoirs and diaries in private hands; has made such an endeavour virtually impossible until pretty much now. The situation began to change in the early part of this decade with an internet list on yahoogroups and then entered a new phase in late 2004/early 2005 with the launching of the website bayanic.com.
With the public re-emergence of the Bayani community we are now in a postion to employ both narrative as well as the methodologies of the social sciences to begin seriously examining both the wider historical as well as the wider sociological position of the Bayani community of Iran and its contribution(s) to the greater modern Iranian polity in its social and historical trajectories. The historians Mangol Bayat and Janet Afary in the ‘80s and ‘90s respectively have already done some preliminary contextualization to that end, especially in regard to those Bayanis prominently involved politically in the Constitutional Revolution; but the real meat, as it were, still remains to be written. One significant aspect which requires careful exploration is the impact Bayani intellectuals had on the modern study of Persian literature, since this area was pioneered by luminaries such as Allameh Mohammad Qazvini (d. 1949), a lifelong Bayani who co-authored the lengthy introduction to the Leiden edition of Hajji Mirza Jani Kashani's (d. 1852) kitab-i-nuqtat'ul-kaf with E.G. Browne, and Ali-Akbar Dehkhoda (d. 1959), the author of the monumental, multi-volume loghat-nameh encyclopedia, who is rumored to have been one. On other fronts we have feminists and democratic liberals such as Sadiqah Dowlatabadi, who herself and whose whole family remained dedicated, lifelong Bayanis, not to mention the prime minister Mohammad-Ali Forughi (d. 1943). In the best tradition of Tahirih Qurrat'ul-'Ayn (d. 1852), i.e. the Bab's seventeenth Letter of the Living and the famous remover of the veil, it will be recalled that the Sorbonne educated Sadiqah Dawlatabadi was the first modern Iranian woman who appeared unveiled in the streets of Tehran in 1927 dressed in European attire. In her last will and testament she declares, "I will never forgive any woman who visits my grave veiled" (quoted by Janet Afary in The Iranian Constitutional Revolution, 1905-1911, New York, 1997, p.187).
Indeed the position of the Bayani community in the movement for democratic freedoms, change and reform in Iran is a long, well-documented but tortuous one. The veritable founding fathers of the Constitutional Revolution, Shaykh Ahmad Ruhi (d. 1896) and Mirza Aqa Khan Kirmani (d. 1896), were both sons-in-law of Subh-i-Azal and the joint authors of a Bayani apologetic text entitled Hasht Behesht (8 Heavens), which was edited by E.G. Browne. Although considered a Shi’ite source of emulation (marja’ taqlid) and not a Bayani per se, nevertheless Mirza Hasan Shirazi whose fatwa trigerred the tobacco rebellion of 1890-91 against Nasiruddin Shah's (d. 1896) foreign concession was a cousin of the Bab’s and could very well have been somewhat influenced by the Bab and the ideas behind the religion he founded. It should be noted that on flimsy and rather contrived evidence, the Baha’is have actually gone to outright claim Mirza-ye Shirazi as one of their own. Be that as it may, let us here also mention the constitutionalists Va’ez Kirmani, Shaykh Ahmad Majd al-Islam Kirmani, Mirza Jahangir Khan Shirazi and Malik’u-Motakalemin who were all lifelong Bayanis.
To conclude this maiden post to my Iranian.com blog, I ask the unbiased reader to now consider the photograph I have posted along with this post: a photograph taken in the late 1930s/early 1940s of a group of Iranian Bayanis gathered in assembly presumably in Tehran during the very period that Western Baha’i sources, and especially the Baha’i patriarch Shoghi Effendi Rabbani (d. 1957), were claiming in the West and the East that no ‘Babis’ (meaning Bayanis/Azalis) any longer existed in the world and that all Babis had become Baha’is! This photograph demonstrates for posterity the tout court falsity of that position.
| Recently by NUR | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Haifan Baha'is name Apostates: Moojan Momen's 2007 article | 16 | May 07, 2009 |
| The Baha'i Hezbollah (pt.2): Abbas Effendi the Murderer | 6 | May 07, 2009 |
| Happy 162 to the Bayani community | 18 | May 06, 2009 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Also from Mowlavi (i.e. Masnavi)
by NUR on Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:12 PM PDTچون بي رنگی اسیر رنگ شدموسى با عيسى اندر جنگ شد
یگانگی بجای بیگانگی
Sahameddin GhiassiSat Apr 11, 2009 02:04 PM PDT
این همه جنگ و جدل حاصل کوته نظری است چون درون پاک کنی حرم دیر یکی کعبه و بت خانه یکی است.
فرض کنید که همه پیامبران به اراده خدای یکتا به زمین بیایند و این بار با هم بیایند. و نه تک تک. خداوند که قادر است هر کاری بکند پس میتواند اینکار را هم انجام دهد حال حضرت زرتشت در کنار حضرت موسی و حضرت عیسی د ر کنار حضرت موسی و حضرت محمد و بقیه پیامبران همه در کنار هم نشسته اند حتی حضرت آدم و حضرت ابراهیم هم در کنار دیگر حضرات پیامبران نشسته اند. و همه میدانیم که همه آنان از جانب خداوند یکتا برای رهنمایی ما آمده اند. آیا آنان با فکر میکنید که بگو مگو و مجادله خواهند داشت؟ مسلم است که نخواهند داشت پس ما چرا که تنها پیروان آن حضرات هستیم با هم بایست بگو مگو و مجادله داشته باشیم و وقت عزیز را که بایست صرف خدمت بهم نوع کنیم به بحث های بی جهت میگذرانیم.
مولوی حافظ و سعدی چه گفته اند و یا عطار و بهایی
صورت زیبای ظاهر هیچ نیست ای برادر سیرت زیبا بیار. درخت تو گر بار دانش بگیرد بزیر آوری چرخ نیلوفری را.
سعدیا مرد نکو نام نمیرد هرگز مرده آنست که نامش به نیکویی نبرند. ای بی خبران کجایید کجایید محبوب در اینجا ست بیایید بیایید. توکز محنت دیگران بی غمی نشاید که نامت نهند آدمی متاسفانه کسی که حرف ما را نمیپسندد و یا حرف دیگری برای گفتن دارد به او حتی اجازه سخن گفتن هم نمیدهیم و اورا تکفیر میکنیم. بایست به عقاید دیگران ولو اینکه بنظر ما غلط و اشتباه هم باشد احترام بگذاریم چه بسا که فکر و اندیشه ما نادرست میتواند باشد.
CAUTION NON-BAHAIS: Baha'i Hate-Mongering & Libel
by NUR on Tue Apr 07, 2009 07:18 PM PDTBAHAI Tactics & Techniques - CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
"Slanderous Vilification" = The Baha'i Technique - Ad Hominem, Libel, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Backbite, Defame, Vilify, Discredit, Smear, Revile, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball, Deceive, Coerce, Silence, Harass... etc., etc.... CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
1. As far as possible they hold back from responding
2. Then they claim no knowledge of the given issue by feigning
ignorance
3. After the exposer has exposed they will try to divert to secondary
and totally peripheral and irrelevent side-issues
4. The exposer is then painted as someone with an axe to grind,
biased, deluded (while they, the bahaim, still have not responded to the main issue exposed)
5. Next they relate mental instability and insanity to the exposer,
i.e. shoot the messenger
6. Then, the last tactic, is to wheel out several dubious personas on
the scene who claim to be neutral non-bahai observers who then begin attacking the exposer as well as the issue exposed while supporting the bahais and their issues as so-called non-bahais
Professor Juan Cole, February 23, 1999:
"There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices ...Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith. The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent. With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them. This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute."
//www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole71.htm
See, www.juancole.com
&
Sourcewatch article, Baha'i Faith
[Comment and time of posting recorded in the event of deletion by the censor of this site]
A complete profile on NUR now emerging...
by CAUTION DETOUR AHEAD on Tue Apr 07, 2009 06:01 PM PDT//iranian.com/main/blog/faryarm/early-heartfelt-message-about-nima-wahid-azal-nur-old-friend
Haifan Baha'ism is now exposed and it is now evident why...
by NUR on Tue Apr 07, 2009 01:57 AM PDT//www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Baha%27i_Faith
NUR is now exposed and it is now clear why...
by CAUTION DETOUR AHEAD on Mon Apr 06, 2009 08:44 AM PDT//iranian.com/main/blog/faryarm/source-watch-0
DETNUR
No shame...you answer first
by NUR on Mon Apr 06, 2009 01:39 AM PDTwww.bayanic.com
1) Who are you and what is your real name?
2) What creed or organization do you belong to?
3) What position do you occupy?
4) Are you now or have you ever worked on behalf of the Baha'i Internet Agency headed by Matthew Weinberg at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa, occupied Palestine?
5) Why do you see the need in hiding behind a pseudonym and masking your identity?
6) What are your goals to that end?
7) What is your primary motivation in ascertaining logistical information about my group?
8) Are you a sayanim and work for Mossad?
9) Is your organization attempting to manufacture consent through fictitious and exagerrated narratives about persecution in Iran?
10) What would you consider your motivation to that end?
11) Is your organization attempting to foment international discord and lobby for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran?
12) What is your position on the current policy of President Obama in wishing engagement with Iran?
13) Do you believe that Baha'ism should replace the national religion in Iran, and is your organization attempting to replace the mullah's theocracy with a Baha'i theocracy?
Don't get frustrated. Just answer the questions. Looking in the mirror of your organizational duplicity and Stalinism can't be that bad. Or can it?
See Sourcewatch entry, Baha'i Faith.
NUR - It is now clear that you are ashamed to answer these Qs
by CAUTION DETOUR AHEAD on Sun Apr 05, 2009 08:25 PM PDT1) How many people in your group?
2) Are you a clergyman in this group?
3) How often do you meet?
4) Where do most of these people live?
5) Is this group growing in numbers or dwindling? How do you know? Any references you can site?
6) What are the goals of this group?
7) How does this group organize itself or does it have a community?
8) Is this group recognized by any organization or civil or international body?
9) Is this group persecuted in Iran or elsewhere? If so, can you reference any evidence to support this claim?
10) What would be considered an achievement for this group?
11) Could you tell us some of the principles of your Faith?
and finally...
12) Why don't you answer these basic questions?
Even if you don't have a reference to cite, it would good to at least tell us the basis for the answers.
DETNUR
Your answer same as before...
by NUR on Sun Apr 05, 2009 07:48 PM PDT//www.bayanic.com
None of your business.
Now answer a few of mine,
1) Who are you and what is your real name?
2) What creed or organization do you belong to?
3) What position do you occupy?
4) Are you now or have you ever worked on behalf of the Baha'i Internet Agency headed by Matthew Weinberg at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa, occupied Palestine?
5) Why do you see the need in hiding behind a pseudonym and masking your identity?
6) What are your goals to that end?
7) What is your primary motivation in ascertaining logistical information about my group?
8) Are you a sayanim and work for Mossad?
9) Is your organization attempting to manufacture consent through fictitious and exagerrated narratives about persecution in Iran?
10) What would you consider your motivation to that end?
11) Is your organization attempting to foment international discord and lobby for a pre-emptive military strike on Iran?
12) What is your position on the current policy of President Obama in wishing engagement with Iran?
13) Do you believe that Baha'ism should replace the national religion in Iran, and is your organization attempting to replace the mullah's theocracy with a Baha'i theocracy?
Don't get frustrated. Just answer the questions. Looking in the mirror of your organizational duplicity and Stalinism can't be that bad. Or can it?
See Sourcewatch entry, Baha'i Faith.
NUR_ Now that you are resonding, you can try answering next!
by CAUTION DETOUR AHEAD on Sun Apr 05, 2009 09:51 AM PDT1) How many people in your group?
2) Are you a clergyman in this group?
3) How often do you meet?
4) Where do most of these people live?
5) Is this group growing in numbers or dwindling? How do you know? Any references you can site?
6) What are the goals of this group?
7) How does this group organize itself or does it have a community?
8) Is this group recognized by any organization or civil or international body?
9) Is this group persecuted in Iran or elsewhere? If so, can you reference any evidence to support this claim?
10) What would be considered an achievement for this group?
11) Could you tell us some of the principles of your Faith?
and finally...
12) Why don't you answer these basic questions?
Even if you don't have a reference to cite, it would good to at least tell us the basis for the answers.
DETNUR
Your answer has already been given
by NUR on Fri Apr 03, 2009 02:04 AM PDTNONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!
413
NUR - Just answer these questions..
by CAUTION DETOUR AHEAD on Fri Apr 03, 2009 01:34 AM PDT1) How many people in your group?
2) Are you a clergyman in this group?
3) How often do you meet?
4) Where do most of these people live?
5) Is this group growing in numbers or dwindling?
6) What are the goals of this group?
7) How does this group organize itself or does it have a community?
8) Is this group recognized by any organization or civil or international body?
9) Is this group persecuted in Iran or elsewhere? If so, can you reference any evidence to support this claim?
10) What would be considered an achievement for this group?
11) Could you tell us some of the principles of your Faith?
Don't get frustrated, just answer these questions. Looking in the mirror can't be that bad. (or is it?)
DETNUR
Thank you Sophia
by NUR on Mon Mar 16, 2009 09:42 PM PDTDear Sophia,
Thanks again for your kind words of support. An article you should probably look at is S.G. Wilson's Bahaism and Religious Deception, which can be found here:
//wahidazal66.googlepages.com/babidocuments%28westernsources%29
This article details some of the modalities of Baha'i discourse, together with a few of the issues, being touched here. But you have noted well the primarily fascist and totalitarian modality of attack engaged by the Baha'is here.
413
Response to anti-Bayani BAHAI HATE SPEECH & Historical Lies
by NUR on Mon Mar 16, 2009 09:34 PM PDTDisguised behind his cover, his real name is Nima Hazini,
Actually my real name is Wahid Azal not Nima Hazini, nor have I tried to mask my identity as you have. Arguably, however, you are Sasan Pasabani, i.e. the individual who writes on USENET under the alias mash_ghasem and who has a long history of hate-speech against Muslims and other non-Bahais, and one who regularly denies their affiliation as a Baha’i under the mash_ghasem alias.
and those who know him know that he is no representative of the Babis including Azali Babis.
And who are those who know me, that you have in mind here? Are these members of your own cult? And, again, we are Bayanis, not Azali Babis!
He is the same person who tried to ridicule both the Babis and baha'is by claiming a few years ago that he is the Promised One that the Babis are expecting, issuing letters to the Babis and of course rejecting Baha'u'llah.
Quote and cite the purported letters I sent.
Since no one paid attention to him he started this new tactic of attacking the Baha'is in close cooperation with the agenda of Islamic regime of Iran.
This is the typical Baha’i technique of slander, defamation, libel, character assassination and outright deception and lies. No such thing is the case, on either score, since my history of opposition to the Islamic Republic is long and well-documented. However it stands to reason that the Haifan Baha’i organization to which you belong is in close cooperation and cahoots with the agendas of Zionism, Neo-colonialism in the Middle East and especially those agendas attempting a forced regime change in Iran as they did in Iraq in 2003.
He also does not represent the Babi community because right now both Babis and Baha'is are severely persecuted by the Islamic regime,
No they aren’t being persecuted. No one is persecuting the Bayani community, since no one in Iran knows who the Bayanis are, and neither are the Baha’is being widely persecuted either – other than in the manufactured consent of insidious forces of neo-colonialism attempting regime change by force in Iran as they did in Iraq. If you have information that any members of the Bayani community are being persecuted, kindly provide the evidence here.
and thus aside from their theological differences, they both believe in the necessity of promoting civil rights for all including the Babis and the baha'is.
All Bayanis support civil rights and human rights, including me. But you Baha’is, who are well-known hypocrites with double-standards, do not support it unless it is specifically in your community’s political self-interest and the advancement of your nefarious ultra-rightwing, pro-Western, pro-British, pro-Zionist, totalitarian New World Order political agendas.
You people have not once publicly supported the human and civil rights of the Palestinians your IsraHELLi patrons are committing outright genocide against. You people have not once publicly decried the human rights abuses of the mullahs towards the Iranian opposition groups. You people were silent after the murder of Zahra’ Kazemi. You people were silent when the mullahs butchered innocent Iranians at Tehran University. In short, you have never supported or advocated for the civil and human rights of any group or organization beyond your own. And this is fact you cannot dispute!
In Iran the Babis especially appreciate the sacrifices of their Baha'i brothers and sisters
Nonesense. This is a lie! And the clear evidence of this nonsense and lie is in the conspicuous manner in which you deny their self-designation as Bayanis.
since the Babis are in taqiyyih and it is the Baha'is that defend the Bab and his truth with their blood.
Here is the official website of the Bayani community, www.bayanic.com. Find me one single statement on that website that remotely supports your self-serving lies here.
But Hazini is so hateful of the Baha'is that he actively promotes the propaganda of the Islamic regime against the Baha'is in the name of defending the Babis.
Again, the name is Azal, not Hazini. And Azal is not promoting the propaganda of the mullocracy when the issues are about the clear, the transparent and the well-documented history of lies, historical whitewash and abuse perpetrated by your organization which transcends the historical existence of the Islamic republic itself.
Every word shows the degree of his hate.
And every word of yours, shows yours; not to mention your level of typical Baha’ deceit, malice, sleaze and deception.
1. the most ourageous lie presented in the comments is that Hazini claims that after assasination attempt on Naser-al-Din shah in 1852, Baha'u'llah was not imprisoned for four months in Tehran, and that Baha'is have made this up.
This is not what I said. My statements here, elsewhere online and in my published work show with documented historical evidence that 1) Husayn ‘Ali Nuri sought refuge in the Russian embassy in Tehran after the assassination attempt on Nasiruddin Shah (which every non-Bahai history of the period in Persian has also recorded); 2) that the location that you Baha’is claim as the Siyah-Chal dungeon where Husayn ‘Ali Nuri was purportedly imprisoned and received his so-called revelation was a water reservoir (ab anbar) and not possible for use as a place of incarcerating prisoners; and 3) Subh-i-Azal’s flight to Baghdad preceded that of Husayn ‘Ali Nuri’s.
Only a perverted mind can say a lie like that. This one fortunately is not a matter of rumors or Baha'i said-babi said disagreement. It is an event that is recorded by tens of official Iranian history at the time.
Quote the histories. Proof by assertion is not proof. I can quote you dozens of non-Bahai histories, whether Nasikh’u-Tawarikh or Fars-Nameh-i-Nasiri or otherwise, that categorically contradict the narrative you Baha’is have peddled regarding this so-called event.
For example the official daily newspaper of Iran called Waqayehe Ettefaghiyyeh in its August 26, 1852 issue reports in detail that Baha'u'llah was arrested in Iran, and that since shah could not find any evidence implicating him in the terror attempt he sentenced him to imprisonment for life (his justice was like present Islamic court justice, since you are innocent: life imprisonment, reduced later to imprisonment and exile for life).
Quote and reproduce it. And btw the Waqayehe Ettefaghiyyeh (originally started by Mirza Taqi Khan Amir Kabir) merely mentions “Babis under royal custody” as a result of the botched assassination attempt, but reproduces the royal edict (farman) for the apprehension and arrest of the Babis of Takur, chief amongst them being Subh-i-Azal - which is why Subh-i-Azal went to Baghdad. The royal farman published in Waqayehe Ettefaghiyyeh assumes that Husayn ‘Ali Nari was in Takur at the time FYI!
As you know Baha'u'llah discusses his imprisonment in Tehran by the order of shah himself and describes the conditions of his prison in his letter to Naser-al-Din Shah and talks about his revelation there.
Whatever! This is the fictitious narrative of your Baha’i mythos, and not fact. Here is what Badieh Mirati Nuri has to say regarding the event:
…After the martyrdom of the believers [following the botched assassination attempt on Násiruddín Sháh], his eminence the Mírzá [Husayn ‘Alí] was called forth from the Russian embassy, and they [the government] said [to the Russians] that due to the fact that he is a reprobate towards the government, he should not be given shelter. Because of the incessant pleas of Mírzá Majíd [his brother who was working there] to the Russian consul, he [the consul] obtained assurances from the government that unlike the others, he [Husayn ‘Alí] would not be put to death, thereby [Husayn ‘Alí] was then delivered to the government and imprisoned.
My translation, vaqá’i-i-rástín-i-takúr-i-núr (A True Account of Takúr in Núr), p. 15.
It is beyond reason to assume that Baha'u'llah would write to the person who directly issued the order and knew about it completely and lies about it.
Husayn ‘Ali Nuri lied about it, as he lied about a great many other things as well, such as, this,
//bayanic.com/notes/bahaTest/BahaTestament.html
But what is more inconceivable is why Husayn ‘Ali Nuri would even write to the great butcher of the Babis to begin with? What was the motivation of Husayn ‘Ali Nuri in attempting a rapproachment with one of the most corrupt monarchs of Iranian history, and a man who issued the execution order for the Bab and had the blood of thousands of Babis on his hands?
2. Hazini says that the term Azali was created by Abdu'l-Baha as a pejorative term since it means that the Azalis believe in Azal and not the Bab.Yes, because this is the case, as clearly documented.
This is another double lie. First long time before anything Abdu'l-Baha would say, the Muslim authors created this divisions: Baha'i= followers of Baha, Azali= followers of azal, Babi=both Azali and Baha'i (which is the common usage even now, even in some of the comments to this same article).
Nonsense! The term Azali as well as Yahya’i was first coined by Abbas Effendi. Until the coining of this neologism, the Muslim authors did not make any distinctions between Bayanis and the bahais, continuing to label both under the term Babi.
They were using these labels during the time of Baha'u'llah in their publications including in various Arabic Encyclopedia of the time that some of them are published and are publicly available.
Quote it. You are making an assertion without proof.
The other lie of Hazini statement relates to the fact that the term Azali does not mean one who believes in Azal and not the Bab. If this were the case then the term Shi'ih should be a pejorative term because it means partisans of Ali.
The nonesensical stupidity here is beyond words, but typical to discursive modalities of Baha’i misinformation discourses and historical whitewashes. First, the word Shi’a in Arabic basically means “party.” Alawi is always placed as an adjective and descriptive to Shi’a, not as the primary descriptive noun. So how can Shi’a be a pejorative term here in the same way the Baha’is use Azali as a pejorative? The reason why Azali is a pejorative term to the Bayanis is because it is deceptively attempting to claim that Subh-i-Azal spontaneously started his own sect or religion separate from the Bayan, when such is not remotely the case! Subh-i-Azal was the designated successor of the Primal Point, the Bab, and the Mirror of the Bayan. To us Bayanis he was to the Bab as ‘Ali was to Muhammad. So if the Baha’is wish to assert that ‘Ali’s vicegerency (wilaya) to Muhammad is a separate entity to the religion of Islam founded by Muhammad, that is their business to advance such spurious argumentation. But, as usual, it appears the Baha’is wish to both have their cake and eat it too here, as well as engage in some of the most ridiculous (a)historical argumentation – and without any evidence either!
the term Shaykhiyyih should be understood as pejorative since it implies they believe in Shakh Ahsa'i
Actually, with Shaykh Ahmad Ahsa’i and his successor that would be the case indeed, yes, since they both insisted that they were not attempting to found any separate sects or schools, as they held their teachings and doctrine to be the pristine teachings of the Imams, and thus the core and essence of Islam itself. Shaykh Ahmad and Siyyid Kazim Rashti would have serious problems with the term ‘shaykhiya’. In fact the term was first coined by Shaykh Ahmad Ahsa’is enemies amongst the Baraghani family who passed the famous takfir (judgement of infidelity) against him. To Shaykh Ahmad himself, he was the follower of the Imams and his teaching the teachings of the Imams! If you would like, find me any piece of writing by Shaykh Ahmad Ahsa'i and his successor Sayyid Kazim Rashti where they describe themselves as Shaykhis. Besides the term Muslim, the only designation the Shaykhi leaders used for themselves formally in their sermons and writings was Muwwahid and Muwwahidin, i.e. Unitarians!
and peerhaps Abdu'l-Baha created that too befre he himself was born!
Evidently he would, and your argument is spurious nonsense all around from first to last, beginning to end.
3, Subhe azal is not one of the titles that the Bab gave to Azal.
Here is one of the most well-known historical lies and whitewashes of the Baha’is, and one which would decisively disabuse any Bayani on the planet from ever making common cause with the Baha’is on any level or for anything! The Bab directly named Mirza Yahya Subh-i-Azal SUBH-I-AZAL (as well as countless other epithets he gave him) in numerous works. In the Book of the Five Grades (kitab-i-panj-sh’an) the references to Subh-i-Azal as SUBH-I-AZAL are replete and numerous. If you weren’t such a typical, one-dimensional Baha’i imbecile I would quote these for you one by one.
In the writings of the Bab the term means the Bab himself.
No, it decidedly does not! And here is the reason: Subh-i-Azal (Morning-Dawn of Pre-Eternity) refers to the element which issues from the Sun of Pre-Eternity (shams al-azal), i.e. which is the Primal Point (nuqtat’ul-‘ula). In his Commentary on the Hadith Kumayl the Bab makes this abundantly clear when he states that Subh-i-Azal is the cipher referring to ‘Ali and the station of Providential Guidance (wilaya) and Mirrorhood (miratiya) while Shams al-Azal refers to Muhammad and the stations of Messengership (risala) and Pointhood (nuqtawiya) – with NUR (light) referring to Fatima Zahra’; the Talismanic-Temples of Unicity (hayakil al-tawhid) referring to the Imams and the Traces (athar) referring to all the Abrahamic messenger prophets together. Furthermore, the Bab held that the six years of his revelation each referred to one of the theophanic sequences of the Hadith Kumayl itself, and he details this is in the Seven Proofs (dala’il-i-saba’) as well. These are, to wit,
1) kashf subuhat al-jalal min ghayr ishara/the disclosure of the majesties of glorification without indication = Year 1 1844-45 (Shiraz & Mecca)
2) mahw al-mawhum wa sahw al-ma’lum/The [apophatic] negation of all speculation and the realization of that which can be realized = Year 2 1845-46 (Mecca & Shiraz)
3) hatik al-sitr li-ghulbat al-sirr/the nullficative annihilation of the secret by victorious rending of the veil off the mystery of the secret = Year 3 1846-47 (Isfahan & Maku)
4) jadhb al-ahadiya li-sifat al-tawhid/the attraction of the divine oneness by the attributive apprehension of the divine unicity = Year 4 1847-48 (Maku)
5) nurun ashraqa min subh al-azal fa-yaluha ‘ala hayakil al-tawhid atharihi/a light illuminating from the morning-dawn of pre-eternity and shedding its traces upon the tablets of the talismanic-temples of unicity = Year 5 1848-49 (Maku & Chihriq)
6) fa-atif al-siraj faqad tala’a al-subh/so extinguish the lamp for the dawn hath indeed arisen = Year 6 1849-50(Chihriq & Tabriz)
As attested by the Bab himself and countless other Babis at the time, specifically Aqa Sayyid Husayn Yazdi (the Bab’s personal scribe and Letter of the Living), Mirza Yahya Nuri Subh-i-Azal appeared in the 5th Year of the Manifestation (1848-50), after the martyrdom of His Holiness Quddus (who was held to be equal to the Bab), thus his designation as Subh-i-Azal to accord with the 5th theophanic sequence of the Hadith Kumayl. Furthermore, besides his equality with the Bab, Subh-i-Azal was held also to be the Return (rij'at) of His Holiness Quddus as well, as clearly attested by Hajji Mirza Jani Kashani in Nuqtat’ul-Kaf.
But since azalis used the term to denote azal it has become the common use everywhere.
Nonsense (see above).
4. Never an informed Baha'i says there is no Babi any more.
Informed Bahai is a contradiction in terms, but you Baha’is have asserted in many places that no Babis exist. This is the case! Your foremost, official Baha’i scholar, Susan Maneck, is on record publicly to me for denying the existence of Bayanis!
It is just an amazing fact that te vast majority of the Babis accepted the claim of Baha'u'llah and convereted to the new religion rather than staying with their Babi belief and faith.
This is nonsense and a myth. Name the majority of the Babis who converted to your founder’s cult! And if these majority Babis converted to your founders cult, why is it that not a single remaining leader of the first generation of the Babis converted to your founder’s cult? Why did your founder have people such as Siraj, Qahir, Siyyid Muhammad Isfahani and others – all who had been second tier Letters of the Living – killed and assassinated? You people have no answer to this dilemma and conundrum, yet continue to lie and peddle fictions about those fictitious majority Babis who converted to your founder’s cult. Na janam, khaab mibind/no, my dear, you are dreaming!
This is a historical fact that has no precedence in religious history.
No, it is not. It is an out and out blatant historical lie and whitewash!
5. Tahirih was executed before Baha'u'llah would make his claim. But it does not mean that she would not have recognized Baha'u'llah had she lived through.
This is a straw man and a red herring argument. Tahirih was a Letter of the Living of the religion of the Bayan who publicly acknowledged the succession of Subh-i-Azal as the Mirror of the Bayan, and the panegyric poem I have translated by her here is solid, historical proof of it.
Simply from a probablistic point of view, given the fact that majority of the babis accepted Baha'u'llah one is safer to predict that way.
This is a straw man and a red herring argument. Tahirih was a Letter of the Living of the religion of the Bayan who publicly acknowledged the succession of Subh-i-Azal as the Mirror of the Bayan, and the panegyric poem I have translated by her here is solid, historical proof of it.
In any case the fact that she was not Baha'i does not mean that she was a Bayani meaning a person who would reject baha'u'llah.
This is a straw man and a red herring argument, and pure ahistorical fantasy and falsification. Tahirih was a Letter of the Living of the religion of the Bayan who publicly acknowledged the succession of Subh-i-Azal as the Mirror of the Bayan, and the panegyric poem I have translated by her here is solid and decisive historical proof of it.
Finally, the title Baha’u’llah was a title given to her by the Bab. It is evidenced in the Book of the Five Grades and other letters and epistles sent to her. Mirza Husayn ‘Ali Nuri was a nobody during that period and all the records and evidence proves he was known by no other title other than 238 (i.e. the abjad of Husayn ‘Ali) and the ‘brother of the Fruit’. Historically or argumentatively you and your fellow co-cultists do not have a leg to stand on, as proven above!
413
Talk about shooting the messenger-again!
by sophia on Mon Mar 16, 2009 06:35 PM PDTI find the various responses to Nur's posts veryinteresting. What I find most disturbing about the nature of the responses frompeople here who I assume are supporters of the Baha'is is the way they all makealmost exactly the same types of comments about Nur's posts. They call them aliar, they call them crazy, in need of mental help. They say that their postsare angry, motivated by bitterness. Such responses all sound so pre-programmed,almost like they are coming out of the mouths of brainwashed people. And italso sounds so much like the ways in which totalitarian regimes around theworld attack their critics, paint them as unbalanced lunatics, as someonewith an axe to grind who is looking to upset some kind of illusory 'stateharmony', even in face of quite solid evidence to the contrary. For those whoknow anything about this, such techniques are the classic instruments ofgovernments to quash dissidents and turn genuine critics into paraiahs. In thecontext of the Baha'is, it also seems that anyone who stands against the HaifanBaha'i organization somehow supports the Mullahs, rather than being able tohave perfectly reasonable reasons to dislike their ideology, and believe thatthere has been a great deal of censorship, propaganda and whitewashing ofhistory undertaken in order to hide certain uncomfortable truths about thefaith's past. And what better way to justify that than to say it has been donein such a way because the world will not understand why it is necessary untilsome time into the future! Perfect! It seems so symptomatic of the response ofmany Baha'is that they are so utterly locked into their own completelytotalitarian, homogenising (no matter what the teachings say about this), andpower driven mindset that they can only produce responses to genuine historicalevidence by dismissing it as the lies of an agitator.
Nima's response
by Behyar (not verified) on Mon Mar 16, 2009 06:11 PM PDTStephen has laid out strong criticisms of Nima (Nur)'s article
- that there is is plenty of evidence that Baha'u'llah was imprisoned in 1852 (evidence that is far stronger than the late 20th century musings of an Azali polemicist that Nima cites)
- that no informed Baha'i ever said there were no Azalis in Iran
- that `Abdu'l-Baha did not create the term Azali - it was being used by Browne and others many years earlier
And all Nima can do is to loose a stream of invective in his response (Bahai Tactics & Techniques - CAUTION NON-BAHAIS)- typical!
In Iran the government can suppress the Baha'is and invent falsehoods against them and no-one is able to respond publically - but you are not going to be able to get away with that on the Internet
Behyar
Bahai Tactics & Techniques - CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
by NUR on Mon Mar 16, 2009 05:27 PM PDTSee,
Baha'is In My Backyard
-
Also see,
Recent court victory by the Orthodox Baha'is (OBF = Orthodox Baha'i Faith), and the suit brought by the Haifan Bahai organization against them:
//trueseeker.typepad.info/true_seeker/court_case.html
and
//www.truebahai.com/court/139-opinion.pdf (judge's actual
decision)
Note particularly,
//www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/LF1FFZY0.mp3
-
BAHAIM Tactics & Techniques - CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
"Slanderous Vilification" = The Baha'i Technique - Ad Hominem, Libel, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Ostracize, Shun, Banish, Backbite, Defame, Vilify, Discredit, Smear, Revile, Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball, Deceive, Coerce, Silence, Harass... etc., etc.... CAUTION NON-BAHAIS
1. As far as possible they hold back from responding
2. Then they claim no knowledge of the given issue by feigning
ignorance
3. After the exposer has exposed they will try to divert to secondary
and totally peripheral and irrelevent side-issues
4. The exposer is then painted as someone with an axe to grind,
biased, deluded (while they, the bahaim, still have not responded to
the main issue exposed)
5. Next they relate mental instability and insanity to the exposer,
i.e. shoot the messenger
6. Then, the last tactic, is to wheel out several dubious personas on
the scene who claim to be neutral non-bahai observers who then begin attacking the exposer as well as the issue exposed and supporting the bahais and their issues as so-called non-bahais
-
Also see S.G. Wilson,
BAHAISM AND RELIGIOUS ASSASSINATION The Muslim World vol. 4, issue 4, 1914
&
BAHAISM AND RELIGIOUS DECEPTION The Muslim World, Volume 5, Issue 2, 1914-1915.
at,
//wahidazal66.googlepages.com/babidocuments%28westernsources%29
And, BAHAISM AND THE BRITISH,
//bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home
==CAUTION NON-BAHAIS==
Hateful speech
by stephen (not verified) on Mon Mar 16, 2009 08:39 AM PDTThe article by Nur and his comments are among the worst kinds of hateful speech, filled with lies and distortions. Disguised behind his cover, his real name is Nima Hazini, and those who know him know that he is no representative of the Babis including Azali Babis. He is the same person who tried to ridicule both the Babis and baha'is by claiming a few years ago that he is the Promised One that the Babis are expecting, issuing letters to the Babis and of course rejecting Baha'u'llah. Since no one paid attention to him he started this new tactic of attacking the Baha'is in close cooperation with the agenda of Islamic regime of Iran. He also does not represent the Babi community because right now both Babis and Baha'is are severely persecuted by the Islamic regime, and thus aside from their theological differences, they both believe in the necessity of promoting civil rights for all including the Babis and the baha'is. In Iran the Babis especially appreciate the sacrifices of their Baha'i brothers and sisters since the Babis are in taqiyyih and it is the Baha'is that defend the Bab and his truth with their blood. But Hazini is so hateful of the Baha'is that he actively promotes the propaganda of the Islamic regime against the Baha'is in the name of defending the Babis. Every word shows the degree of his hate.
But the article and comments are filled with errors. Examples:
1. the most ourageous lie presented in the comments is that Hazini claims that after assasination attempt on Naser-al-Din shah in 1852, Baha'u'llah was not imprisoned for four months in Tehran, and that Baha'is have made this up. Only a perverted mind can say a lie like that. This one fortunately is not a matter of rumors or Baha'i said-babi said disagreement. It is an event that is recorded by tens of official Iranian history at the time. For example the official daily newspaper of Iran called Waqayehe Ettefaghiyyeh in its August 26, 1852 issue reports in detail that Baha'u'llah was arrested in Iran, and that since shah could not find any evidence implicating him in the terror attempt he sentenced him to imprisonment for life (his justice was like present Islamic court justice, since you are innocent: life imprisonment, reduced later to imprisonment and exile for life). As you know Baha'u'llah discusses his imprisonment in Tehran by the order of shah himself and describes the conditions of his prison in his letter to Naser-al-Din Shah and talks about his revelation there. It is beyond reason to assume that Baha'u'llah would write to the person who directly issued the order and knew about it completely and lies about it.
2. Hazini says that the term Azali was created by Abdu'l-Baha as a pejorative term since it means that the Azalis believe in Azal and not the Bab. This is another double lie. First long time before anything Abdu'l-Baha would say, the Muslim authors created this divisions: Baha'i= followers of Baha, Azali= followers of azal, Babi=both Azali and Baha'i (which is the common usage even now, even in some of the comments to this same article). They were using these labels during the time of Baha'u'llah in their publications including in various Arabic Encyclopedia of the time that some of them are published and are publicly available. The other lie of Hazini statement relates to the fact that the term Azali does not mean one who believes in Azal and not the Bab. If this were the case then the term Shi'ih should be a pejorative term because it means partisans of Ali. Does that imply that the shi'ih do not believe in Muhammad? or was the term shi'ih an invention of Abdu'l-Baha too? or the term Shaykhiyyih should be understood as pejorative since it implies they believe in Shakh Ahsa'i and not Muhammad, and peerhaps Abdu'l-Baha created that too befre he himself was born!
3, Subhe azal is not one of the titles that the Bab gave to Azal. In the writings of the Bab the term means the Bab himself. But since azalis used the term to denote azal it has become the common use everywhere. Lots of errors there based on this false assumption (Tahirih praise, Tradition of Kumayl...).
4. Never an informed Baha'i says there is no Babi any more. The uninformed Baha'i may say so but that is an innocent mistake because thee babis are engaged in Taqiyyih and hide their belief and have no public presence so that people would know. It is just an amazing fact that te vast majority of the Babis accepted the claim of Baha'u'llah and convereted to the new religion rather than staying with their Babi belief and faith. This is a historical fact that has no precedence in religious history. For example majority of Christians have not yet accepted Muhammad after 14 centuries of Islam. Hazini is just angry about this fact and uses hateful language to express his anger.
5. Tahirih was executed before Baha'u'llah would make his claim. But it does not mean that she would not have recognized Baha'u'llah had she lived through. Simply from a probablistic point of view, given the fact that majority of the babis accepted Baha'u'llah one is safer to predict that way. In any case the fact that she was not Baha'i does not mean that she was a Bayani meaning a person who would reject baha'u'llah. Hazini is engaged in distortion of words as well.
and so much more lies.
BAYANI not Azali
by NUR on Mon Mar 09, 2009 07:17 PM PDTAs I put in the article above, we call ourselves Bayani and consider the term Azali (which was fabricated as a term of derision by 'Abbas Effendi) an offensive and misleading term.
413
Nur is an Azali!
by abcdef (not verified) on Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:55 AM PDTرقیبان ازلیِ بهائیت، نخستین مروجان نظریه توطئه
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.
The siyah-chal revelation is a fiction
by NUR on Fri Mar 06, 2009 07:41 PM PSTThe so-called siyah-chal revelation of Husayn 'Ali Nuri is a post facto fiction (afsaneh) the Baha'i histories have fabricated out of thin air after the fact, just like the so-called declaration of Ridwan in 1863 - which I posted elsewhere about. There is no prima facie evidence that Husayn 'Ali Nuri was anywhere captive after the botched assassination attempt on Nasiruddin Shah in the summer of 1852 other than hiding inside the Russian embassy where his step-brother worked. Furthemore, there is no evidence whatsoever that what the Baha'i sources have called the siyah-chal was even being used for incarcerating prisoners. According to the archive of Qajar government documents from the period 1840-80, the place the Baha'i sources claim was this siyah-chal were Husayn 'Ali Nuri supposedly received his so-called revelation was actually being used at the time as a royal water reservoir (ab ambar) at the very period Baha'is claim Husayn 'Ali Nuri was supposed to have been there. So unless Husayn 'Ali Nuri received his mission as an aquatic revelation underwater this essentially proves the whole story a complete fabricated fiction and yet another example of Baha'i historical whitewash (pak-sazi-i-tarikh). If you'd like, I can quote to you from Badieh Mirati Nuri - his own kinswoman - as to what Husayn 'Ali Nuri was actually doing at the time you claim he was receiving revelation in some fictitious siyah-chal.
Tahirih Qurra'tul-'Ayn was a Bayani
by NUR on Fri Mar 06, 2009 07:23 PM PSTIndeed Farzaneh Milani, Afsaneh Najmabadi, Mangol Bayat and most recently in Soraya Adambakan's published German PhD dissertation entitled Qurrat al-'Ayn. Eine Studie der religiösen und gesellschaftlichen
Folgen ihres Wirkens.
Islamkundliche Untersuchungen Band 278
Klaus Schwarz Verlag
ISBN 978-3-87997-341-5
//www.klaus-schwarz-verlag.com/index.php?title=Soraya+Adambakan+Qurrat+al-%92Ayn+Eine+Studie+der+religi%F6sen+und+gesellschaftlichen+Folgen+ihres+Wirkens&art_no=IU278&PHPSESSID=fba7c83edef9ba06c8c9abbea9f32d91
Umm Salmih Zarin Taj Fatima Baraghani Qazvini - known to posterity as Tahirih Qurra'tul-'Ayn (the Pure Soalce of the Eyes) - is outright acknowledged as a Bayani. Here below is my translation of her longest surviving poem in laudation of Subh-i-Azal (dar madh-i-Azal). A facsimile of the original autograph of this poem in her own hand can be found in E.G. Browne's Materials for the Study of the Babi Religion (Cambridge: 1961), p. 343. A typescript of the Persian script can be found in Qurrat'ul-`Ayn: be-yad-e sadomin sal-e
shahadat-e nabeghe-ye dowran (Qurrat'ul-`Ayn: In memory of the 100th anniversary of the martyrdom of a genius of an era) (Tehran: 1368 shamsi), pp.29-32, scans and a Pdf of which can be found, here. BTW the Baha'is should note that the title Baha'u'llah (Splendor of God) was bestowed by the Bab on Her and it is a title legitimately belonging to Her not to Mirza Husayn 'Ali Nuri.
Azaliyyah
(trans. Wahid Azal 2004)
("The Pre-Eternal")
1. He is the best Beloved!
2. Come, Saqi, O royal falcon victorious
And honor us with a cup of that reddish wine of the soul.
3. For I shall once more make an ornament from a wine goblet
Which will burn my firm footing, head to toe.
4. Come, O Saqi, give me a chalice of wine
So that the bitter pangs of yester may depart my heart.
5. Grant new life to the dead
And honor a cup to those dejected hearts.
6. Quality of a Samandar for I am in this fire
Sanctify it, O Saqi, this, my stuporless wine.
7. Cast now this veil from the moon's mien
Take it off and give a cup of wine.
8. From this chalice of my purity , you, make me drunk!
And disclose the theophany of that friend to my soul.
9. In the light like Moses I shall swoon away from myself
Leveling this mountain of the body as like Sinai.
10. I shall burn away my existence, all of it, from top to bottom
So that in my two worlds no trace is left.
11. O Saqi, bring wine to this associate of pain
For my pivot of the idols disheveled tress.
12. If I am intoxicated by that reddish wine of yester night
Bring me another goblet from yourself so that reason may return to my
head.
13. Since I have bound my heart to your curly lock, Saqi
I have been delivered from the fetters of two worlds.
14. From pre-eternity I had no creed or religion
Other than the sun of your affection, I had no sacred rite.
15. With my pre-eternal covenant I have grown resolved
From faith I will make your love my free choice.
16. In that I should have accepted your love
Give a cup, do not make me blameworthy.
17. Moment to moment sanctify my chalice of wine
As I am drowned in a sea of woe.
18. A chalice of wine for me shall not suffice
Me to you, Saqi, other than the embrace of your ocean.
19. So that in that ocean I may dive therein
Be annihilated and quit of myself.
20. From this Yemen of the heart I shall break the shell
And take out the pearl of the soul and lay it upon my palm.
21. Come, O Saqi, the world has become a new spring
The land has become an emerald and verdant.
22. It is spring and the flower-gardens have blossomed
Spread yourself out in the rose-garden!
23. The singer intones the secret of the river's lute
Bringing consolation to the heart torn lovers.
24. Cast off this vest, O Saqi
And place the heavenly tunic upon the body.
25. Ambergris from the curly lock of the houris
Burning for you in the incense of scattering gold.
26. To the folk of heaven open the gate of delight
To the inhabitants of paradise disclose the theophany of your self.
27. From the preeminence of your service in the sublimity of eternity
Say thou that houri and youth shall inhabit the earth.
28. To the head to head joyous dancing of the rosy cheeked ones
This banquet shall become luminous like the moon.
29. The revolving Venus shall become clear in the mist
The clouds beholding the moon with Jupiter .
30. You, spread out over the earth
As saith the angel in the empyrean firmament, ‘praise' !
31. To the created universe, O Saqi, give good tidings
For the eve of disconsolation attained the morning of delight .
32. Give the chalice of purity to the misfortunate ones
Lift up the invitation to the heart-torn lovers.
33. For the manifestation of the essence of eternity has come
The beauty of godhood has appeared.
34. To this happy news, if my self-sacrifice be worthy,
Fortunate is [he], the Supreme Lord , by this good tiding.
35. From the truly real his light has shown forth
His Sinai has enveloped the whole universe.
36. Place a chalice of wine in my hand right now!
So that in salutation to this king I may open my mouth.
37. If my laudation be not acceptable to him
What shall I sing? This is my habit.
38. From the aeons of eternity my obligation remained firmly fixed [on
this]
For I was nursed on the milk of his love.
39. O king, what exposition should I make of your description?
The singer of your praise, existent creation of being and becoming.
40. You are the one who is the almighty creator of this world
O God, you are the peerless and the ariser.
41. I have become a passive patient, I call you God
Many gods have become your upright slaves.
42. The criers of "I am God" are your servants
The god makers are your apprentices.
43. By your command were the atoms of creation [brought forth]
You are the first point , we proceed [from] you.
44. Because the light of your beauty became evident
You have been called the fruit by the mercy of the lord of the Bayan .
45. The intention of tree is nothing else than fruit
A tree becomes manifest by its fruit.
46. Because of you the Bayan became complete
All the hidden secrets were seen in truth.
47. There is naught in your [whole] existence but the Bayan
May there remain no trace of faith in the world.
48. From you the cause of God has become exalted
The majesty of gods have become manifest.
49. You are the goal of religion in every age
[As] the theophany of preeminence of the aeon has proclaimed.
50. No seal [are you] that a last I should know you by
No principal [are you] that a first I should call you by.
51. In the universe you are the first of the last
You are manifest in the [very] atoms of the cosmos.
52. To each people has there turned a guide
The [point of the] worship [which] they indicate is you.
53. To a name of your names are they prostrated
The breadth of whose totality they are self-effaced and humbled [by].
54. Illumined by your light is church and sanctuary
You are [indeed] the manifestation of the essence of the face of the
ancient.
55. Where am I, and where your description, O honored one?
Since obliterating nothingness becomes [all] descriptions of the
essence of the ancient.
56. Everything is absolute idolatry, you are my mono-theity
You are [far] transcendent of my praises.
57. If I am an idolatrous heretic, it is from you
If am a sinning deviant, it is from you.
58. Sin has become the coquettish blandishment of the servants
And become the grace of forgiveness for the lord of sovereignty.
59. One cup with grace shall I sanctify
Which shall burn away all my idolatry, O honored one.
60. From the chalice of love honor me my wine
If the annihilation of my existence be my good fortune.
--
61. O that from the illumination of the beauty of [your divine] power
You burned the veils one by one.
62. Further, O all-powerful lord of the gates,
Nothing remains of any portion of any particle of any atom.
63. From the veils of the curtains of grandeur
By the stations of the coverings of limit.
64. O God, O creator, I burned
From the evils of divine gold [and silver].
65. O my lord, find from the excellences of existence
So that I may be ennobled by the attraction of being.
66. O beautiful one and O precious one of splendor
Illuminate the tablet by the fire of appearance.
67. Make the heart pure, O beloved of the gnostics
From that which negates certainty.
68. So that I may be exalted in the expanse of justice
From the resemblance of states other than emaciation.
69. O God, to me there was naught but you
Other than the twin bond there was no defender from the exterior.
70. O God, the truth of the king of kings [who is]
Reclining on the regal sofa of the excellences of the essences.
71. [I have] passed by from all the fetters of existence
Drunk and intoxicated by the proclamations of Alast .
72. They saw the remitter of the fine and remitted the fine
That which they behooved they removed.
73. O God, their supreme design
Praise be to their exalted design.
74. Other than your pure face, O lord of existence,
The lofty expanses were annihilated by the vicissitudes.
75. From the inclining elevation and power of the Bayan
To the elevation of the expanses of the highest heights [of the
divine] abodes.
76. Therefore the highest dwelling in the expanded breast of sublimity
Are the totality of the particles [of existence] innovated by them.
77. O God, from these excellences of yours
They found the power of these splendors of yours .
78. But, O lord, I must roll in the dust of the furrows of the ground
Next to that particle that was essentialised by them.
79. Because they are the most excellent and most noble
Possessor of being, they are the most sublime and the most lofty.
80. O God, you have them [close] to yourself
You have them and you have them and you have them!
81. Their becoming, the station of no description
Their carrying off, to the abode of majesty.
82. You took away from them, and gave [them] your own state
Whatever was itself, it became that.
83. O God, I must purify myself
[And] let there be [the invocation of the] remembrance of holiness for
them.
84. Perchance your grace will show assistance
From my custom in these states of contemptibility.
85. When you take nothingness away from me, O beloved
You bring forth absolute existence from out of my pocket.
86. O God, the truth of these king of kings,
Repeatedly I [find myself] in the grades of these mean spirits .
87. O God, the truly real, lord of the worlds
O sincere beloved, [you are] the greatest of all exonerating forgivers!
To Nur-Revelation of Baha'u'llah !
by abc (not verified) on Fri Mar 06, 2009 05:37 AM PSTAs you surely know the revelation of Baha'u'llah happened in Siyah-Chal in 1852 .
//info.bahai.org/article-1-3-2-2.html
//www.nybahai.org/siyahchal/
//www.bahai-library.org/provisionals/rashh-am...
You are fantastic....
by Covenant9 (not verified) on Fri Mar 06, 2009 05:01 AM PSTI love you :-)
To Nur!
by annonymt (not verified) on Fri Mar 06, 2009 04:26 AM PSTIs there any historical evidence that Tahirih was an Azali??
I mean an evidence which is based on research from a SCHOLAR Iranian like Mrs.Farzaneh Milani, or Mrs.Afary or so.
Do you mean that Azal's revelation as God's manifestation happened when Tahirih was still alive?
Take your facts...
by NUR on Thu Mar 05, 2009 04:59 PM PSTHello? Bahaism did not exist in 1852 when Tahirih Qurra'tul-'Ayn was martyred! She was a Bayani and the 17th Letter of the Living. According to your own Baha'i histories Mirza Husayn 'Ali Nuri Baha'u'llah only made his claim in 1863. So if Tahirih was already dead for 11 years in 1863, how could she be a Baha'i?! Stop advancing nonsensical propaganda, lies and ahistorical whitewash.
And the facts regarding the poisoning incident are actually the other way around, Baha' attempted to poison Azal, not Azal Baha':
//www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/articles/A-E/browne/RBT/RBT296.gif
//www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/articles/A-E/browne/RBT/RBT297.gif
[Translation from Hasht Behesht] The first juggle and trick of sorcery which he [i.e. Mirza Husayn 'Ali Nuri Baha'u'llah] outlined was this, that he brought to Hazrat-i-Azal a dish of plain food, with one side of which was mixed with poison, intending to poison His Holiness. For hitherto the apportioned breakfast and supper of His Holiness the Fruit [Hazrat-i-Thamara, one of the titles given to Subh-i-Azal by his followers] had been from the house of Mirza Husayn 'Ali. When that poisoned dish was placed before His Holiness, Mirza Husayn 'Ali pressed him to partake of it. By a fortunate chance the smell of onions was perceptible in the food, and His Holiness being averse to onions, refused to taste it. Mirza Husayn 'Ali continued to press him urgently to eat. He replied 'Since it smells of onions, I will not eat it; if it is [so] good, eat it yourself!' From this answer Mirza Husayn 'Ali supposed that His Holiness had divined his evil design, and, simply with the view of disguising [the truth] and putting a better appearance on the matter, ate a little from the other side of the dish, in order that the suspicions of His Holiness might perhaps be dispelled and he might eat of the poisoned side. But His Holiness, because of the smell of onions, would not eat. Now, inasmuch as the poison had to some extent diffused itself to the other side [i.e. the unpoisoned side], it produced some slight effect on the aforesaid Mirza [Huseyn 'Ali], causing him sickness and vomitting. Then he summoned the physcians, gathered his own people around him, and privately informed them of his state, declaring that Hazrat-i-Azal had poisoned him...
Original Persian at,
//www.bayanic.com/lib/fwd/hasht/hasht-FWD.html?id=hasht
…It was in fact the Mírzá [i.e. Baha’u’llah] who had sought to poison His Holiness [Azal]. [On the day in question] Sultán Khánúm (entitled the Greatest Holy Leaf), who at the time was still a believer in her most august uncle [i.e. Azal], with blinks and glances, [when the food was brought out by the servants] indicated that that he [Azal] should not partake of the meal placed before him. When the Mírzá [i.e. Bahá’u’llah] insisted that His Holiness should eat, His Holiness refused, thereupon the aforementioned saw that His Holiness had become appraised of their evil intentions [i.e. to kill him], and therefore, in order to deflect attention [from the deed], he proceeded to eat a few portions from that plate of food himself. Immediately his [i.e. Baha’u’llah’s] state was overturned [i.e. he became violently ill]. He then threw the plate of food in the courtyard outside. In that yard there was a dog who immediately began to eat [the discarded food] and thereupon fell dead shortly thereafter. When the Mírzá beheld this scene, he was immediately embarrassed, and so sought out a physician. After regaining his health, he proceeded to spread rumours that His Holiness [Azal] had attempted to poison him... No one has asked [thereby indicating the truth of the matter that], O noble gentlemen, the kitchen and its cook [on that day] was at your [exclusive] disposal! It was you who had graciously invited His Holiness over to lunch as your guest [in your home]. Had He hidden this [vial of] poison in his sleeve thereby depositing it in the food [right under your noses without you noticing]?
My translation, vaqá’i-i-rástín-i-takúr-i-núr (A True Account of Takúr in Núr), pp. 43-44.
Original Persian at,
//bayanic.com/lib/fwd/rastin/Rastin-FWD.html
413
Fact
by annonymt (not verified) on Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:47 AM PSTTahirih Qurrat'ul-'Ayn was a Baha'i and not an Azali/Bayani!!
She did believe in Bab and Baha'u'llah and yes she was one of Bab's seventeenth Letter of the Living .
//www.tahirih.org/tahirih/about/tahirih.html
Baha'u'llah had been poisoned by Azal who were stepbrothers.
Why was my response deleted?
by NUR on Wed Mar 04, 2009 07:41 PM PSTWhy have the moderators deleted my last comment here?
413
Why there are no Azalis abroad ?
by Kabir (not verified) on Wed Mar 04, 2009 04:26 AM PSTI wonder why there is not a single Azali in United States. How many LSAs do you have Mr. Nur ?
To Nur
by Anonym (not verified) on Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:55 AM PST"Personally I think the number is probably closer to the 500,000 mark than even 1 million"
Firstly why are upset?I just asked a simple question!!!
Secondly I trust wikipedia and Britannica more than your statistic.
Thirdly I am a woman!