From the Book of Samuel G. Wilson
BAHA’IS particularly boast of love as one of their characteristics. They often quote the words of Baha “to consort with all religions with spirituality and fragrance.” Phelps claims for them  “a peculiar spirit, which marks them off from other men,–whose essence is expressed in one word, Love. These men are Lovers; lovers of God, of their Master and teachers, of all mankind.” Dreyfus, with a forgetfulness or ignoring of facts that is astounding, says, “Their conduct is so perfect, their harmony so complete that although they have been there at Acca for forty years, no judge had yet to intervene for them in any dispute.” Chase says “Baha’ism removes religious rancour.”  Let facts speak. Let me array them first by showing the relation of the Baha’is to the Moslems, and then to the Azalis (see chapter on “Religious Assassination “) and finally to each other (see chapter on “The Quarrel over the Succession”). The Babis and Baha’is show great hatred and
1. Page 112.
2. Yet Phelps, p. 158, and Chase themselves inveigh against orthodox Christianity with bitterness and scorn.
animosity against the Shias of Persia, abuse and revile them and heap maledictions and curses upon them. These evil feelings are shown specially against the Mullahs and the rulers. The Babi and Baha’i historians indulge so much in diatribes and maledictions that Professor Browne wearies of translating them and omits pages of abuse.  More than enough is at hand to show the rancorous spirit of the new religion.
First take a short backward glance at the Babis. Professor Browne says:  “The Babis entertained for the Kajar rulers a hatred equal to that for the Mullahs.” Mohammed Shah and Nasr-ud-Din Shah are called “bastard” and “scoundrel” and Mohammed Shah is consigned to hell at his death. The Shi’ites are called “foul Guebres” and the Mullahs heaped with abuse. “They hated the Mohammedan clergy with an intense and bitter hatred” and anticipated the fulfillment of the prophecy “when the Kaim or Mahdi should behead 70,000 mullahs like dogs.” The Bab called Haji Kazim Khan, chief of the Sheikhis, “the Quintessence of Hell Fire and the infernal tree of Zakkum.” He even at times emphasized his words with blows.  “When a prisoner in the household of Anti-Christ–that accursed one (i. e., the Shah), the Mullah of Maku showed him some discourtesy, whereupon the Ocean of Divine Wrath was stirred and He (the Bab) brought down his staff with such vigour on the unclean form
1. New Hist.,” pp. 320 f, 281, 289.
2. Ibid., pp. xvii. and 354.
3. “Mirza Jani,” pp. 131-132.
of that foul creature that the august staff broke in two. He then ordered Aga Sayid Hasan (his scribe) to drive out that dog from the room, though the accursed fellow was a person of great consideration.” “The Bab took leave of his jailer, Ali Khan, with the words, ‘Ay mal’oon (‘Accursed One ‘).”  It is unnecessary further to enlarge on the feelings of the Babis towards the Shiahs, for the sanguinary wars and persecutions explain them and they made no secret of their feelings of hatred.
I pass on to the Baha’is, whom Abul Fazl claims were reformed and transformed by Baha. Baha’u’llah himself the “Iqaan” calls the Shias “a foul, erring sect,” who said of his Turkish guards, “Shame upon them! God shall consume their livers with fire, and verily he is the fiercest of avengers” (Lawh-i-Rais) and who exultingly celebrated, in a hymn of triumph, the death of Fuad Pasha,  the vizier who had exiled him, and consigned him to hell “where the heart boils and the tormenting angel melts him.” Baha’s winsome words about the mullahs are, in the “Ikan,” “1278 years have passed and all these worthless wretches have read the Koran every morning and have not yet attained to a single letter of the purport of it.”
The spirit of love (?) is shown by Mirza Abul Fazl, the preacher and apologist for Baha’ism, in his discussion (1873) as recorded in the “New History.”  His abusive language runs on page after page.
1. The New Hist.,” p. 352.
2. Jour. Roy. As. Soc., 1892, p. 271.
3. Pages 173-190.
mullahs of Persia are called mischief-makers, dolts, a pack of scoundrels, tyrants, fools, plunderers of men’s properties and wives, sectarian zealots steeped in prejudice and thinly disguising their greed of worldly lucre under a veil of sanctity, sprung from the rustic population and the scum of the towns, ignorant of the decencies of society and neglectful of good breeding, with wickedness, worldliness, rapacity and selfishness which are incurable and folly that exceeds all bounds and surpasses all conception, with stupidity, overweening arrogance and presumption absolutely unparallelled, hiding the truth in falsehood, circulating false reports, possessing malignant hatred, malice, spite and great injustice, and notoriously eager to shed blood, yet with cowardice like a timid girl.
He avers further that they are lacking in patriotism, nullify sovereign authority, encroach upon and usurp the power of kings, dismiss viziers, invite the people to rebel, cause national decay, set their feet upon the necks of all mankind, menace the order and well-being of the government, devour public wealth and substitute treason for service. “Perish their homes of folly whose learning is all pretense, their colleges which never yielded a man of sense.” This is a condensation of the Baha’i philosopher’s amiable (!) description of the chiefs of his national religion. The author of the “New History” almost surpasses him in abuse.  He compares the mullahs to a ” host of foul reptiles who befoul and pollute the pure water
1. Pages 4-5, written 1880.
of life so that it waxeth loathsome and abominable. . . They are fraudulent and sophistical hypocrites . . inwardly reprobate and outwardly devout, clothing themselves in the garb of spurious asceticism and simulated piety: fabricators of ‘authentic traditions.” Later Haji M. Haidar Ali,  writing by command of Abdul Baha, says of Persia, “The old religious sects . . . degenerated into ferocious wolves and mad dogs, even surpassing the ravenous man-eating beasts.” Apropos of the martyrdom of Aga Sayid J afar of Abargoo, “Our Great Lord and Master Abdul Baha revealed the following in a Visiting Tablet “to be chanted at the tomb:” Hell is for such as rejected thee, fire for such as sentenced thee to death, infernal flame for such as betrayed thee, and the hellish gulf for such as shed thy blood.”  These quotations show the vindictive spirit of the Baha’i leaders. Any one who is acquainted with Baha’is in Persia knows that this is the spirit that animates them, that they revile the Mutasharis and Sheikhis and especially their mullahs. They are brotherly and helpful to their own particular sect of Baha’is, vindictive to all who have opposed them. Doctor Frame quotes a Persian as saying this of the attitude of Abdul Baha, “He is very kind towards his friends and bitter towards his enemies. In view of all that has been brought forward, how can Mr. Phelps aver “that they have no trace of bitterness or resentment for their sufferings.” The habit of Baha’is in denying that they have
1. “Martyrs of 1903,” p. 3.
2. “Visiting Tablets,” p. 12, N. Y. Baha’i Board of Counsel.
animosity against other religions reminds me of one of their own stories. A certain mullah said to his friend, “If you notice in me any objectionable habit please inform me.” “I perceive no fault in you,” answered his friend, “save a habit of using abusive language.” “Abusive language ! ” cried the mullah. “What rascally knave calls me abusive? What shameless ruffian have I abused that he should dare accuse me?”