Antichrist-Dajjal III - Babi-Baha'i Interpretations

ἀντίχριστος

Antichrist-Dajjal - Babi-Baha'i Inerpretations

Stephen Lambden UC Merced,

IN PROGRESS - BEING REVISED AND SUPPLEMENTED.

Last updated 30-03-2018.

This article was originally published in the Baha'i Studies Bulletin (ed. Lambden, Newcastle upon Tyne. UK) as `Antichrist-Dajjāl : Some Notes on the Christian and Islamic Antichrist traditions and their Bahā’ī Interpretations'. VOLUME 1 No. 3 December 1982 -  Part II, p. 3f.

Interpretations of the Abrahamic, Biblical-post-biblical, Qur'anic-extra Qur'anic  and  other texts and traditions about the eschatological figure, life and personal traits of the Anti-Christ-Dajjal are numerous. They exist in Jewish, Christian Islamic and other religious texts that have been taken seriously for many centuries. In the  latter,, apocalyptic days of the end-time, a demoniac figure who is a parody of the divine Jesus Christ is expected to wreak havoc on earth and destroy or corrupt religious communities.

The Babi-Baha'i Inerpretations of the Antichrist-Dajjal Traditions

Having sketched some aspecte of the Antichrist-Dajjäl traditions in (largely) Christian and Isllamic sourcee we may now turn to their Babi-Bahä'I interpreta:tion 138 Firstly, those Biblical texts that relate to the Antichrist tradition may be conunented upon along with a few notes on the figures thought to be referred to in them and who are believed by Bahä tis to be manifestations of the Antichrist idea.

Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī  (c. 1830-1912 CE) and Sayyid Muhammad Isfahani (d. 1872).

Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī  (d. 1912)

Mīrzā Yaḥyā and Sayyid Muhammad Isfahani : the "Son of Perdition", the Dajjāl and the Antichrist as the central figures of the Baha'i religion came to view them.

Mīzrā Yaḥyā who was entitled Subh‑i Azal ("The Morn of Eternity" c.1830-­1912) was one of the half‑brothers of the founder of the Bahāi movement, Mīrzā Ḥusayn `Alī Bahā'u'llāh. The son of one of the concubines of Mīrzā Buzurg‑i Nūrī (d. 1839) he was only 13‑14 years old when Siyyid `Alī Muhammad the Bāb `declared his mission' in Shiraz (Iran) in 1844 CE. He, like his half‑brother Bahā'u'llāh, became a Bābī (follower of the Bāb) and, though not one of the `Letters of the Living' (Ḥurūf‑i ḥayy) or prominent disciples of the Bāb, was generally recognised as being the nominal head of the Bābī community after the execution of the Bāb in Tabriz in July 1850. His leadership of the Bābī community proved to be largely ineffective for, on receipt of the news of his master's martyrdom, at least in Bahā’ī sources, is said to have fled in disguise from Tehran to Māzandarān and to have remained for several years in a state of marked dissimulation (fn. 139 = Refer, for example, `Abdu'l‑Bahā in Trav. Narr. : 51ff; Shoghi Effendi, GPB:114ff; Balyuzi,1970:3ff; idem, 1980:107ff; Taherzadeh, RB I:53ff; Miller, 1974:70ff.). Assuming various names and disguises he eventually joined Bahā'u'llāh and his close companions at Kirmānshāh in 1853 journeying with them to Baghdad where they had been exiled after the Bābi attempt on the life of the Shāh in 1852 (fn 140 = GPB:114).

Shortly after his arrival in Baghdād Mīrzā Yaḥyā assumed the name Hajj `Alī-yi Lāsh-Furūsh (implying that he was a silk dealer) and forged links with Siyyid Muhammad Isfahānī (d.1872) a Bābi  then resident in Karbalā (Balyuzi, 1970:3; idem 1980:107; GPB:112ff). Siyyid Muhammad is represented in Bahā’ī sources as being, even at this early stage, antagonistic towards Bahā'u'llāh. He is represented as an evil schemer who fanned Mīrzā Yaḥyā's jealousy of his half‑brother's growing prestige. (Taherzadeh, RB.II:152ff).  While Mīrzā Yaḥyā as head of the Bābī community apparently elevated Siyyid Muhammad to the rank of `First Witness of the Bayān' (Bābī movement) Bahā'u'llāh, as we shall see, later excommunicated him (sometime between 1863 and 1866). For Bahā'īs Siyyid Muhammad has come to be regarded as one of the most notorious manifestations of the Antichrist idea.

Due in large measure to the dissension and corruption within the Bābī  community in Baghdād and elsewhere in the early 1850's, Bahā'u'llāh decided to withdraw to Kurdistan, initially contemplating no return:

"In the early days of our arrival in this land (Irāq) when We discerned the signs of impending events, We decided, ere they happened, to retire. We betook Ourselves to the wilderness, and there, separated and alone, led for two years a life of complete solitude.. By the righteousness of God! Our withdrawal contemplated no return, and our separation hoped for no reunion." (KI:XX/160;  fn.143 = see also Bahā'u'llāh's Lawḥ-i Maryam, a Tablet to his aunt of the  Akkā' period  (refer Ganj:184) parts of which are translated in Browne 1918 [1961]:8, and in Shoghi Effendi's GPB:120.)

During Bahā'u'llāh's absence from Baghdad (1854‑1856) Mīrzā Yaḥyā failed to exercise an effective or charismatic leadership. That this was so may perhaps be highlighted by the fact that some twenty-five prominent Bābīs, including Mullā Muh

ammad Nabīl-i Zarandī (d.1892) the Bahā’ī poet and historian, claimed to be divine incarnations or aspired to special leadership. (cf. GPB:125; Balyuzi, 1970:43; 1980:120ff). The erudite Mīrzā Assad Allāh of Khūy entitled named Dayyān ("Judge") by the Bāb is, in certain sources, said to have made such a claim and to have written a treatise in support of it which he had presented to Mīrzā Yaḥyā. The latter, whose ability to answer doctrinal questions had for some proven to be inadequate, wrote in response a work entitled Mustayqi ("Sleeper Awakened") in which Dayyān was denounced in the strongest terms. Then, shortly after Bahā'u'llāh's return from Baghdād at the bidding of the "Mystic Source", Mirza Yaḥyā had Dayyān executed by his servant Mīrzā Muhammad Mazandarānī. Again, around the same time, Mirza Yaḥyā is said in Bahā’ī sources to have been the instigator of the murder of a cousin of the Bāb named Mīrzā `Alī Akbar and to have prompted Mīrzā Āqā Jān to make (another) attempt on the life of the Shāh (Refer, for example, Bahā'u'llāh, Lawh‑i Sarrāj (c.1867) in Mā'idih VII:61ff; the Azali work Hasht Bihisht ("The Eight Paradises") trans.(in part) in TN:357  -- on this work rrefer, Balyuzi, 1970:18ff); Balyuzi, 1970:43f; idem 1980:124; Taherzadeh, RB.II:250ff. While Balyuzi (1970:43. cf.1980:124) and other Bahā’ī writers, it may be noted here, imply that Dayyān made an exalted claim for himself, Taherzadeh (RB I: 250) states that Bahā'u'llāh in his Kitāb‑i Badi` ( c.1867) teaches that Dayyān merely circulated some prayers which he had written (without making any exalted claim) the perusal of which made Mizrā Yahyā jealous such that he determined to have him killed. On other assasination plots attributed to Mīrzā Yahyā refer, for example, Shoghi Effendi, GPB:124f. Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī  thus came to be pictured in Bahā’ī sources as an immoral murderer or one whose main concern was to consolidate his position in the Bābī hierarchy ‑ a position he was to occupy in order to divert hostile attention away from Bahā'u'llāh.

Modern Biblical scholars have identified a number of of texts that (though Paul does not directly quote them) seem to lie behind II Thess 2:1ff.i.o. Ezek. 28:2ff, Isa 14:12ff, Dan 11:36. The passage has been thought by some to have been influenced by Caligula's attempt to set up an effigy of himself in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem (destroyed in 70 A.D.) and it is of interest to note that Isa 14:12ff (which the author of II Thess drew on and which is identified  as a funeral lament or māshāl over the king of Babylon‑‑perhaps Nebuchadnezzar or Nabonidus) has been applied by a few of the church fathers to the Antichrist and by a few Bahā’ī writers to Mīrzā Yaḥya. 

Kheiralla, it is of interest to note, found prophecies about the activities and person of Mīrzā Yaḥyā in both the Old and New Testaments. Again, in his bulky work Behá`U'lláh (Vol. 2) he writes:  "According to prophecy, Satan, the "adversary" of God should appear in the Kingdom, at the time of the "Manifestation", and, refusing to acknowledge his authority of revelation would be cast out, loosing the name which had been bestowed upon h1m. This name is the "Morning Star", "Sun of the East" or Subh‑i‑Ezel [sic.]. This casting down of Satan out of Heaven, is the battle between Michael and His angels against the "adversary" of God [cf. Isa.14:12f, Rev 12:7f, etc.]. By it we are taught that he should be cast from his high spiritual position, into the earth, meaning that h  shall become earthly, materially minded and belong to the party of Cain. In the 49th chapter of Jeremiah, the adversary is given the name of "Esau", in contradistinction to the "Manifestation" [i.e. Bahā`u~'llāh], who is termed "Jacob", implying that the "Satan" of the Kingdom, would be a brother of the Manifestation. All these prophecies were fulfiIled literally in Sub-i-Ezel [sic.], a brothor of Beha`U'Ilah, who had been appointed by the Bāb, but who, after the death of the Bāb, refused to acknowledge "He whom God shall manifest" [the Bābī  messiah, Man yuhiruhu'llāh ], thereby accomplishing his own dethronement and by his wickedness, being cast out of the Kingdom of God" (pp 417‑8)

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of the Dawn! (Heb =        ). How are you cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, `I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high..I will make myself like the Most High (           ).  Isaiah 13:12f (RSV)

 

Isaiah 13:12f (RSV). These verses in Isaiah were probably originally based on an ancient myth about the banishment of a divine being from heaven. The        ("Day Star son of the Dawn") figure is reminiscient of the planet Venus  or the deity associated with it. In the Ugaritic texts Šahar is a god of the dawn and hālāl the morning star (see modern commentaries for details). I wonder, it may be noted here, whether the idea that the Antichrist‑Dajjāl would have an eye like the "morning star" (as registered below, one of the most consistent features of the physiognomic descriptions of the Antichrist in Christian and Islamic literatures) is related to Isaiah 14:12?

What in this text evidently led to its application to Mīrzā Yaḥyā was the phrase "Day star, son of the Dawn" (the Hebrew        ) which suggests the morning star and hence the dawn.  This was related to Yaḥyā's title Subḥ‑i Azal, ("the Morn of Eternity"). In, for example, the Arabic translation of the Hebrew Bible published by Richard Watts in 1831 where Isa 14:12a reads :            

XXX          

(Kitāb al-muqaddas.. R. Watts London 1831).

Though Bahā'u'llāh does not, as far as I am aware, himself apply either II Thess. 2:3ff or Isa 14:12ff to his half‑brother he does, in at least two of his writings refers Amos 4:13   to the circumstances of his own mission and to his eclipse of his half-brother, Mīrzā Yayā, Subh-i Azal ("The Morn of Eternity"). In a lengthy Persian "tablet" of the `Akkā' period perhaps written in the late 1880's Bahā'u'llāh, after applying various passages from the Bāb's writings to himself as the concealed yet "most great announcement" (cf .Qur'ān 78:2) and quoting and commenting on a number of Biblical texts (Mk.13:32/Matt.24:36, Joel 2:11b, Jer.30:7a, Psalm 108:90 and Isaiah 40:9‑lOa), refers to Amos 1:2 and 4:12b‑13. (see Mā'idih 7:173ff). The translation of the latter  text which is quoted in Arabic is as follows:

"Prepare to meet thy God, O Israel, For, lo, He that formeth the mountains and createth the wind, and declareth unto man what is his thought, that maketh the morning darkness (            = yuj`al al-fajr ilāl  an) and treadeth upon the high places of the earth (                = mashraf al-ar?) the Lord ( Y-H-W-H = Yahweh "Jehovah"), the God of Hosts (            = ilāh al-junād) is his name." (Arabic text in Mā'idih VII:191‑2 and Lawh-i Shaykh 171-2 trans. Shoghi Effendi, ESW:145-6 (identical Arabic text of Amos 4:12b‑13)

After quoting a few passages from the book of Isaiah Bahā'u'llāh goes on to state that these Biblical texts, which he has quoted in illustration of his own greatness and divinity and the falsity of such other claimants as Mīrzā Yaḥyā stand in "no need of commentary" being as "shining and manifest as the sun" (ESW:146). ­The  allusion to Subh‑i Azal can readily be discerned. Then, underlining the fact that Biblical (and other) texts he has quoted point to his own exalted station and not to the pretensions of Mīrzā Yaḥyā and the Azalis Bahā'u'llāh exhorts mankind to fear God and give no heed to the breakers of God's covenant:

"Say: Fear God, O people, and follow not the doubts of such as shout aloud, who have broken the covenant of God and his Testament, and denied His mercy that hath preceeded all that are in the heavens and all that are on earth." (ESW:146).

Bahā'u'llāh thus himself applies Biblical texts to the matter of his eclipse of Subh‑i Azal the nominee of the Bāb. Though he does not apply such texts to the person of Siyyid Muammad he does condemn him in a large number of his writings. It is of interest to note that though Bahā'u'llāh rebuked those Bahā'is who murdered Siyyid Muhammad and other Azalās in `Akkā in January 1872 (see below) he, in his al-Kitāb al‑Aqdas (c.1873) not only refers to Mīrzā Yaḥyā as the "dawning place of deviation" (                    ) but appears to speak of Siyyid Muammad's death as an act of God. He writes in the latter connection: "God verily, hath taken the one who led you [Mīrzā Yaḥyā] astray" (          ) (Bahā'u'llāh, Aqdas (al‑Ḥasanī) 130).

1 John - Codex Alexandrinus (5th cent. CE).

The ἀντίχριστος Antichrist(s) of the Johannine Epistles of the New Testament.

Παιδία, ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν, καὶ καθὼς ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἀντίχριστος ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἀντίχριστοι πολλοὶ γεγόνασιν· ὅθεν γινώσκομεν ὅτι ἐσχάτη ὥρα ἐστίν.  1 John 2:18.

Little children, it is the last time [hour]: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. (KJV/AV trans.).

As noted below the Johannine Epistles are the only Biblical writings that explicitly mention the Antichrist figure which is `demythologized' in the sense of signifying the eschatological appearance of a plurality of heretics or `antichrists'. Despite the fact that Bahā’ī writers have at times `demythologized' the mainstream Antichrist tradition like the author(s) of 1 and 2 John, these texts are seldom quoted by them. `Abdu'l‑Bahā  was, however, asked about the meaning of 1 Jn 4:3 in February 1909 by an American Bahā’ī couple, Mr. and Mrs. Joseph H. Hannan. In their record of their pilgrimage to `Akkā' and Haifa entitled Akka Lights  they note that they asked `Abdu'l‑Bahā the following question:

"Question‑ 2 Cor., 11:14‑15. St.Paul says: Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness: and in 1 John 4:3, St. John speaks of Anti‑Christ as the spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. What is the application of these teachings to this day, and how may the spirit of Anti‑Christ be identified today?"

`Abdu'l‑Bahā's reply is of considerable interest. He begins by stating that these New Testament texts refer to the "great disturbance" that is to occur in the latter days. Exalted souls will be abased and lowly souls will attain great glory in these times just as Caiphas was abased and Peter and Mary Magdalene were elevated in the time of Christ. Thus, at the time of Bahā'u'llāh even Mirzā Yaḥyā became "the lowest of men, whereas remote souls became the nearest to the throne."

The spirit of Antichrist which denies the bodily incarnation of Jesus in these days, `Abdu'l‑Bahā continues, signifies Ḥajji Mīrzā Muhammad Karīm Khān Kirmānī (see further below) who rejected the Bāb and Bahā'u'llāh;

"The spirit of Anti‑Christ was identified at the day of the Manifestation in the person of Haji Mohammad Karīm Khān, who did not confess that the Christ‑spirit had become manifest in the flesh in this day. (Words attributed to `Abdu'l-Bahā in Hannan, Akka Lights, 6),

Virgie Viola Vail stands among the few Bahā’ī writers who have commented on the Antichrist[s] of 1 and 2 John. She wrote a now quite rare and little known book entitled The Glorious Kingdom of the Father Foretold  which was one of the major contributions to the Bahā’ī interpretation of the Bible in the light of the mission of Bahā'u'llāh (her book is 262 pages long; see bibliography). In her treatment of the meaning of the "return of Christ" she argues that Christians and others who hold that Christ will not come again as another divine man "in the flesh" (i.e. as Bahā'u'llāh) are the eschatological manifestation of the "spirit" of the Antichrist or the "antichrists" (Vail, 1940:23).­

Then, in her chapter on False Christs, she quotes 1 Jn 4:1‑3 and 2 Jn 7 and stresses that Bahā'u'llāh has appeared as Christ come again "in the flesh" and "in like manner" (cf. Acts 1:11), she teaches that the Antichrist[s] of the Johannine Epistles are "athiests who do not acknowledge the power of God to send His word (Bahā'u'llāh) into the human realm by manifesting in human form." (Vail, 1940:62-3). While then, hypocritical religionists are the false teachers or prophets mentioned in Matt 24:5, athiests and others become latter day docetists in that they deny the incarnation of the Word of God in the person of Bahā'u'llāh who is the return of the spirit of Christ "in the flesh".

It is possible that Virgie Vail was influenced in her interpretation of the "spirit" of the Antichrist by earlier speculations of Mason Remey (1874‑1973). He championod a Bahā’ī "orthodoxy" in America and elsewhere when "covenant breaking" (conceived as aberrant  indulgence in quasi‑Bahā’ī metaphysical speculation or occult theosophy contrary to the teachings of `Abdu'l‑Bahā or assoc­iation with persons in oppoition to him) threatened the unity of the Bahā’ī community.  From around the time of the first world war, Remey, who was a prolific writer and zealous Bahā'ī, had managed to establish himself as the leading occidental exponent of the Bahā’ī philosophy of the covenant. (see  P. Smith, The American Bahā’ī Community, 1894‑1917: A Preliminary Survey (unpublished essay), p.85ff). Writing from Hawaii to an American Bahā’ī assembly in 1913 he expressed his conviction that there is a "natural human force" in man that resists the "religion of God" and which has "ever been the spirit of the Anti‑Christ". This "spirit of Anti‑Christ" is "the spirit of denial of the Word manifest" which  serves to quicken those souls who are "steadfast in the Kingdom". See Remey, `Letter to a Bahá'í Assembly written from Hawaii' and dated July 19th 1913 printed in Star of the West 4/10 (Chicago, September 8th 1913) 172. In the early 1960s Mason Remey himself was expelled from the Bahā’ī Cause as a "covenant breaker" (For some details refer, Johnson, Ph.D. theisis, 1974, 374).

At the time of the Chicago `Reading Room affair' of 1917‑18 which was partly triggered by the supposedly heterodox occult philosophy of a Boston metaphysician named W.W. Harmon who had been encouragod to write by `Abdu'l‑Bahā,   ­Remey and his associates initiated what was practically a Bahā’ī inquisition.  For some details refer Smith, American Bahā’ī Community,  94ff. According to W. W. Harmon (Divine Illumination, 8)  `Abdu'l-­Bahā said to him in August 1912 "I want you to write a book on `Divine Illumination'". A year later he sent the manuscript to `Abdu'l‑Bahā and it was apparently approved in a letter to him dated April 20th 1914. Harmon's other major work is entitled The Seven Principles of the Microcosm and Macrocosm.. (see bibliography). His writings came to be seen as heterodox if not heretical and he was branded a "covenant breaker".

A remarkable set of observations designed to foster "firmness in the Bahā’ī covenant" (privately circulated in limited mimeographed edition) entitled The Protection of the Cause of God (approved by the "Committee of Investigation") were circulated by Remey in 1918. At one point Remey writes:

"It is found in this day that many people unawakened spiritually naturally resent the doctrine of the "Manifested Word" or the "Incarnate Christ". In other words the spirit of the anti‑Christ is abroad everywhere. Some people when questioned, who perhaps may bear the name Christian, are often found to be vague upon this point which is the very foundation of God's religion, for it has been found that while the Manifestation of God is the point of guidance to the believer after one is confirmed, the Manifestation of God is also the point of the greatest test to those who are yet in doubt.. Of all the religious movements in the world, I know none upon which the people place more stress than do the Bahā'ās upon the Revealed Word, and there is no body of people who take a stronger stand against the spirit of anti‑Christ than they do. Basically speaking, the spiritual war which the Bahā'ās are now waging against the spiritual darkness of the world is the struggle of the Christ against the anti‑Christ spirit in its many forms..". Refer, Remey, `The Protection of the Cause of God..' (1918) 24‑5. cf. also, idem  `Report of the Bahā’ī Committee of Investigation 1917‑1918'; `An Open Letter to the Baha'is in America..'; `Firmness in the Covenant' (see bibliography).

This passage speaks largely for itself. Remey saw the spirit of the Antichrist everywhere and believed that Bahā’ī doctrine as he and his associates conceived it constituted the true recognit­ion of the "Manifested Word" or person of Bahā'u'llāh. He imagined himself to be engaged in a veritable "battle of Armageddon" against the spirit of the Antichrist at a time when Bahā’ī "covenant breaking" and world unrest and war threatened the recognition of the second Christ and the true understanding of the station of `Abdu'l‑Bahā.

At this point it may be noted that `Abdu'l‑Bahā in his Risāla‑yi Siyāsiyya  ("Treatise on Politics", written in 1892‑3) which was primarily addressed to the Bahā'is of Iran, identifies the (human) Dajjāl with Bahā’ī hypocrites who are the cause of discord or

who inwardly violate the Bahā’ī covenant - on the date of the Risāla-yi sīyāsīyih  see Mā'idih  5:198.  ­He writes:

"O Beloved of God! Give ear, consider attentively and endeavour to guard yourselves against violation [ fisādā; or `sedition']; and if you smell the odour of corruption from ayone, even if he appear to be a person of great importance and incomparably learned, know that he is the [human (manifestation of the)] Dajjāl  and the enemy of the Glorious One (al‑Jalāl)." (Refer, `Abdu'l‑Bahā, Risāla-yi Sāyāsāyih (nd.np.) 20. The text reproduced in Fādil-i Māzandarānī's Āsrār al‑āthār  Vol.2:232 (entry Dajjāl) differs slightly from that aforementioned (omitting ___ after the word Dajjāl).

Bahā’ī writers, it will be evident, do not exactly restrict the significance of the eschatological appearance of the Antichrist/Dajjāl to any single individual of an infamous nature. Certain individuals are however, singled out as being, as it were, supreme incarnations of the Antichrist idea. Such a perspective has been expressed by Shoghi Effendi who probably had in mind the following points‑ 1) the Bahā’ī denial of the supernatural or real existence of Satan, or the  Devil, (frequently mentioned by `Abdu'l‑Bahā) and 2) the fact that various Bābī  and Bahā’ī writers have identified a plethora of anti‑Bābī ‑Bahā’ī individuals as manifestations of the Antichrist/ Dajjāl idea. Conscious of the need to refute the Christian idea that the Antichrist would be a single supernatural eschatological adver­sary he wrote,

"We [Bahā'īs] do not believe in Anti‑Christ in the sense the Christians do. Anyone who violently and determinedly sought to oppose the Manifestation could be called an "anti‑Christ", such as the Vazīr in the Bāb's days, Hājī Mīrzā Āqāsī".  (Shoghi Effendi, from a letter of Shoghi Effendi quoted in High Endeavours (1976) 69 (No.85).

 

حاج میرزا آقاسی‎

`Abbas Erevani (c,1784- 1849 CE), Hāji Mīrzā Āqāsī, the Grand Vizier of Muhammad Shah Qāǰār (r. 1250-64/1834-48) between 1251-64/1835-48, the "Antichrist" of the Bābī Dispensation.

 

"[Muhammad Shāh's] evil genius, the omnipotent Hají Mírzá Áqásí, the power behind the throne and the chief instigator of the outrages perpetrated against the Bāb.. the Antichrist of the Bábí Revelation" (Shoghi Effendi, GPB:82,164).

A great deal has been written by Bābī  and Bahā’ī writers  about Mīrzā `Abbās Īravāni (of Yerevan) or Hajji Mīrzā Aqāsi (1784‑l849) the notorious grand vizier of Muammad Shāh whose accession to the throne he is said to have predicted.  Both his manipulation of the sovereign and his marked hostility to the Bābī s are well-known Eugene Flandin's description of him calls to mind the physiognomic characteristics of the Dajjāl though this theme, as we shall see, is more important in connoction with the Shaykhā leader Karīm Khān-i Kirmānī,

"Haji Mirsa Aqasi... Imagine a nose, very long and curved, ovor an edentulous mouth and surmounted by badly dyed hair, bloodshot but lively eyes, a brusque gesture, a subtle or rather sly appearance, and one  has the exact portrait of this singular personago. This little old man, still vigorous, was like all Persians, vain to excess.. his conversation was scarcely of a nature to destroy the prejudices, little favourable to his person, which had been in our minds before this presentation.." (Flandin, 1851:989 cited Momen 198X:155).

Bābī and Bahā’ī sources have it that aji Mīrzā Āqāsī constantly incited the fears of Muhammad Sāh in terms of the Bābīs. He is said to have provented teo Bāb from communicating directly with or meeting him (Refer, Balyuzi, The Bāb:118ff). As early as the first year of his mission the Bāb had, in his Qayyūm al-asmā’ (commentary on the Qur'ānic sūrah of Joseph, mid-1844), called upon Hajji Mīrzā Āqāsī to relinquish his position and in a subsequent letter to Muhammad Sāh referred to him in the following terms:

Dost thou [Muhammad Shāh] imagine him whom thou hast appointed Chancellor in thy kingdom to be the best leader and the best supporter? Nay, I swear by thy Lord. He will bring thee into grevious trouble by reason of that which Satan instilleth into his heart, and verily he himself is Satan.. He comprehendeth not a single letter of the Book of God.. Indeed, in the estimation of the people he is naught but manifest darkness.."  (The Bāb, extract from a letter to Muammad Shāh, trans. Taherzadeh in SWB: 25‑6. cf. GPB.:23). .

Hajji Mīrzā Āqāsī was responsible for the Bāb's incarceration in Ādhirbayjān at a time when he might have been able to meet Muhammad Sāh. He engineered the examination of the Bāb at Tabriz in 1848 at which the now self‑confessed Qā'im was condemned and bastinadoed. (Balyuzi, The Bāb, 121ff. Momen, op. cit. 154). From Chihrīq shortly after the latter humiliation the Bāb sternly admonished Haji Mīrzā Āqāsī in a letter known as the Khutba-yi Qahriyya.  A year or so later he, having fallen from grace in the estimation of the notables of Tihran and the young Nāṣir al‑Dīn Sāh, died in Karbalā (in 1849 before the Bāb's execution in July 1850; cf. GPB:27; Momen, 198X:156).

We have seen that Hajjā Mīrzā Āqāsī was mentioned by `Abdu'l‑Bahā in connection with the beast imagery of the Apocalypse and that Shoghi Effendi has referred to him as the Antichrist of the Bābī  period. It will therefore come as no suprise to learn that certain early Bābī s thought of him as a manifestation of the Dajjāl. Mīrzā Muammad `Alī Zunuzī for example, in a dialogue with a learned Saykī written before his martyrdom (along with the Bāb) in 1850, not only identified Karīm Khān Kirmānī (see below) as the manifestation of Sufyān (zuhūr‑i Sufyān)  but saw Haji Mīrzā Āqāsī  as the evil Dajjāl. (Refer, Mīrzā Muhammad `Alī Zunuzi cited in Fāil-i Māzandarānā, Kitāb‑i zuhār al‑haqq, III:35). Calling to mind Shoghi Effendi's identification of Haji Mīrzā Āqāsī as the "Antichrist of the Bābī  Revelation" the author of the Nuqat al‑kāf  (c.1852?) expressed the opinion that,  "The point of unbelief of the age and the Antichrist of the dispensation is [Hajji Mīrzā] Āqāsī."­  (refer, also Hājjī Mirzā Jāni Kāshānī (d. 1852),  Nuqtat al-kāf,  118). `Abdu'l‑Bahā in a talk delivered at Haifa on June 15th 1914 is reported as having stated, it may be noted here, "If from the beginning when His Holiness the Supreme (the Bāb) appeared, Hadji Mirza Aghasee (the prime minister of Persia, who caused the martyrdom of the Bāb, and in the orient is known as Dedjal, meaning anti‑Christ or false Christ) and others, had not resisted this Cause, Persia would now have been the first country in the world and distinguished in every way"  trans. Zia N. Baghdadi in Star of the West Vol. IX/10 (Sept.8th.1918), 116).

Select Bibliography.

See further Abbas Amanat 1986  "ĀQĀSĪ". in Encyc, Iranica, Vol. II, Fasc. 2. pp. 183–188.

• http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/aqasff-ujuli-mnsz-adras-ivxni-ca

ٍ

Haji Mīrzā Muhammad Karīm Khan Kirmānī (d. 1871 CE).

ٍٍٍShaykh Aḥmad Ahsā'ī (d. 1241/1826) the rounder of the Shaykhī school was succeeded by Siyyid Kāzim Rashtī (d. 1259/1843) whose passing precipitated something of a crisis in that h­as to the identity of his successor. Karīm Khān Kirmānī (1810‑1870) who had studied under the second Shaykh in Karbalā and who was the son of a cousin and son‑in law of Fath `Ali Shāh, made a strong bid for the leadership of the Shaykhī community. From Kirmān in the mid 1840's he was able to gradually attract to himself the majority of Persian Shaykās who did not become Bābī s. By the end of his days he had "so consolidated his own position… that the succession passed, after a brief dispute, to his second son aj Muammad Khān.. descending in the same family to the present day" (MacEoin, Tāhirih: 3ff).

Karīm Khān was not only posessed of considerable political influence through his links with the ruling Qājārs but was an influential and prolific writer on most aspects of the religious sciences of his day. It has been estimated that he wrote some 278 books in Arabic and Persian which cover, "not only the field of philosophy and Shā'ite theosophy, the spiritual hermeneutics of the Qur'ān and the hadāth but also an encyclopedia of the sciences: medicine, physics, optics, astronomy, theory of light, of colour, of music, including alchemy, and related sciences.." (Corbin,1977:116).­

The polymathic erudition of Karīm Khān made him a formidable opponent of the Bāb and his disciples many of whom came from a Shaykhā background. As early as July 1845 he had penned the first of a number of weighty refutations of Bābism entitled Ihāq al-­Bāil  ("The Crushing of Falsehood"). This polemical treatise was followed less than a year later by his Tir‑i Shihāb.. ("The Shooting Star", March 1846) and subsequently supplemented by such anti‑Bābī  works as his al‑Shihāb al‑Thāqib  ("Piercing Star"; January 1849). To the end of his life KarIm Khān remained a bitter enemy of both the Bāb and Bahā'u'llāh who not only had him formally acquainted with their claims but vehemently denounced him (Refer Kirmāni, Izhāq al‑Bātil; Tir‑Shihāb.; al-Shihāb al‑Thāqib, etc). 

In his article `The Babis of Persia (II)' the great British Persianist Edward G Browne (d.1926) records a tradition to the effect that the Bāb, on receiving a treatise written in refutation of his claims by Karīm Khān, identified its author with the athīm  ("sinful one") mentioned in the 44th sūrah of the Qur'ān, the sūrat‑al dukhān (The Surah of Smoke). He wrote the isolated letters Ḥā' Mīm   (Sūrah 44 is the 5th of 7 Qur'ānic sūrahs which begin with those detached letters ) on its opening page in which Karīm Khān had written: "Thus says the sinful (athim) servent, Muhammad Karīm, son of Ibrahim". This for the Bāb evidently called to mind Qur'ān 44:43/8, "Verily (the fruit) of the tree of al‑Zaqqūm ["the infernal tree"] shall be the food of the impious (athīm)..  Taste (this); for thou art that mighty (and) honourable (karīm)  person".  (Browne, 1889b:910-911).  Karīm Khān had unwittingly condemned himself. In a letter of the Bāb cited Ishraq Khavari, Qāmus-i iqan vol. 1:42).

"Eat ye your punishment for your unbelief. This is the tree of Zaqqām.. And we have warned the sinful (athīm)  of a painful punishment, of the burning and the flames, and the fires of Hell. Now hath the decree come to pass. Eat then, O thou mighty and honourable one (al‑karīm)". (trans. MacEoin in "Tāhirih" (ms) fn.23 (p.vi) to chapter Karbila 1844). 

E.G. Browne it may also be noted here recorded the tradition that the Bāb stigmatized Karīm Khan as "the Quintessence of Hell‑fire" (jawhar jawāhir kull nār). (TN. II (Note E), 242).     

APPENDIX I

Mirza Yahya Nuri (c. 1830-1912 CE) as the Satanic Antichrist in the Lawh-i Istintaq, the `Tablet of the Interrogation' of Mirza Khadim Allah - Baha'-Allah.

Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī ( c. 1831- d. Famagusta, Ottoman now Cyprus, April 29th 1912) was born in about 1831 to Kuchak Khanum Karmanshahi and Mírza Buzurg Nūrī (d. 1839). He was a half-brother of Baha'-Allah

Also of interest in this connection is a passage cited within a scriptural Tablet of Baha'-Allah ‑ Khadim‑Allāh known as the Lawḥ‑i isṭintāq  (Tablet of the Interrogation,  probably dating to the 1880s; Má'idih, IV: 220‑261) which appears to be an Arabic translation of a Greek text within the `Apocalypse of Elijah cycle' It contains a physiognomic dexcription of the Islamic anti‑Christ, the Dajjāl who is identified as Baha'-A'llah's half‑brother  Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī  Baha'-Allah dwells on the fact that "all the Holy books" of the past evidence the inability of effective opposition to the Manifestation of God. He then states that  "a while ago, one of the friends who belonged to a different community (milād ?? [millet]‑i mukhtalifih)  [Greek Orthodox?] raised an issue and put forth two passages (riwayat)  contained in "ancient books" (kutub‑i qadīmih)  which had been translated from Greek into Arabic. This may indicate  a Greek recension of a text within the complex Judaeo‑Christian `Apocalypse of Elijah cycle' (cf. ADD) in Arabic translation. The text cited has it that al‑shayṭān  ("Satan") will be manifested in the isle of Qāf  (jazīrat al‑qāf)  and  withold the people from [identifying with]  God, the All‑Merciful (al‑raḥmān). The central physiognomic passage relating to this Satanic figure is as follows. Possibly related to a Greek recension of a text within the complex Judaeo‑Christian `Apocalypse of Elijah cycle' (cf. ) in Arabic translation the text cited has it that al‑shayṭān ("Satan") will be manifested in the isle of Qāf ( jazīrat al‑qāf) and withold the people from [identifying with] the God (the All‑Merciful, al‑raḥmān). The central physiognomic passage is as follows:

"He is characterized by being,

• [1] short of stature (qaṣīr al‑qāmat);
• [2] thick [bushy] of beard (kathīr al‑liḥayah);
• [3] narrow of forehead and breast (dayyiq al‑jabḥat wa'l‑sadr);
• [4] yellow of eye and hair (asfar al‑`ayn wa'l‑sha`ar);
• [5] On his back (li‑zahrihi) is [abundant] hair [`fur', `wool'] (wab[a]r)  like [that of] wild goats (reading, ka‑l‑ayá'il ?). The translation  ‑‑ "like a wild goats" or "stag"  (ka‑l‑ayyil or ka‑l‑ayá'il )  ‑‑ is somewhat uncertain. It presupposes that the printed  text is corrupt and that the (dots of a) letter yá' have been omitted. Thus   ayá'il  (pl.) = "stags" (wild goats) ‑‑ plural of ayyil/iyyal/uyyal = "wild goat", "stag"  (see Wehr, 45; Steingass, 131).
•  [6] And on his breast (®adr) is reddish‑[brown] hair (sha`ar ka'l‑maghar).

These Arabic lines express a physiognomic depiction a Dajjāl‑like figure. This aberrant  physiognomic depiction of  "Satan", the Dajjāl (Syr. `Deceiver’, the Muslim Antichrist)  is cited and interpreted from an Arabic rendering  of an ancient Greek text applied to  Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nurī (c. 1830‑1914) a half‑brother of Baha'-Allah who became his bitter enemey through the goading of a certain Sayyid Muhammad Isfahānī (d. 1873?). In his Persian paraphrase of this text  Baha'-Allah identifies "Qáf" with Cyprus (qubrus) which is known among the Turks as an evil, isle of Satan.  The Greek‑Arabic prophecy continues to state that people should consequently orient themselves towards "the Holy Land" (ard‑ i muqaddas) which is the `Seat of the [Divine] Throne' (maqqar al‑`arsh) from whence will waft the Breeze of God (nasmat Allāh).  This ancient Greek prophecy also predicts that "The Serpent (al‑ḥubāb = "a name of Satan") will be manifested in the Isle which is associated with him" undestood as Cyprus, the "Island of Satan" (jazírih‑yi shayṭān); there Mīrzā Yaḥyā had lived in exile for many years (between 1868‑1914).  A Dajjálesque physiognomic description of his "satanic" being is given in the prophecy.

Bahá’u’lláh further comments that to the clear sighted these lines describe Mīrzā  Yaḥyā When this "Satan" appears an escape to Carmel, to the Haifa‑Akká region, is recommended even if it be in very difficult circumstances. Such indeed is the predicted "Holy Vale (al‑wādi al‑muqaddas),  the "Land of the [Eschatological] Gathering" (for the final Judgement; ard  li‑mashar) and the "Snow‑White Spot" (buq`at al‑baydá').

 One might have expected Shoghi Effendi to have labelled Mīrzā Yaḥyā  the supreme incarnation of the "Antichrist" rather than Sayyid Muhammad (see above),  especially since Mīrzā Yaḥyā is said to have disguised himself as a Jew (refer, GPB:165), claimed identify with God (ibid., 165 but cf. II. Thess 2:1ff) where the "Son of Perdition" [= Yaḥyā] claims Divinity) and worked  mischief "right and left" (loosely speaking) - between Syria and Iraq. His position as nominee of the Bāb and his close relationship with Baha'-Allah perhaps saved him from this notoreity, though here (see above) Baha'-Allah himself all but identifies  him with the Dajjál.

 Bahā’ īs thus recognize a number of Antichrist‑Dajjál figures. The basic teaching is summed up by Shoghi Effendi as follows: "We [Bahá’ís] do not believe in Anti‑Christ in the sense the Christians do. Anyone who vehemently and determinidly sought to oppose the Manifestation [of God] could be called an "anti‑Christ", such as the Vazír in the Bab’s days, Hájí  Mírzá Aqásí." (Cited, High Endeavours, 69 No. 85).

Select Biographical and Bibliographical Sources on Mīrzā Yaḥyā Nūrī include :

Ediitors of the Encyclopedia Brittannica - The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1989. 15th ed. Vol. 1. Edited by Philip W. Goetz. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 753-754.

• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mirza-Yahya-Sobh-e-Azal

On the Azali Babis or followers of  Mīrzā Yaḥyā.

Iran: Information on the Babis (also known as Azalis) and their treatment in Iran

• http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6ad006f.html

♦

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

See further :  
 

Abel. A.

• `Dadidial' EI² vol 2 Leiden: Brill,1965), pp. 76-7

Bell, R.

• 1926 The Origin of Islam in its Christian Environment. Edinburgh:

Brady, D

• 1978 `The Book of Revelation and the Qur'ān: Is there a possible literary relationship', in Journal of Semitic Studies. Vol. XXIII (1978) 216-225.

Browne, E.G.

• 1891 A Traveller's Narrative .. Vol II. Cambridge:

Gätje, H.

• 1971 The Qur'ān and its Exegesis (trans. A.T. Welch, London

HDI = T.P. Hughes Dictionary of Islam. London 1885.
 

Majlisī, Muhammad Baqir

• Bihār = Bihār al-anwār ²

MM = Mishkāt al-Ma.sabī.h. trans. Robson, ( see Tabrīzī)
Rabin, C

• 1957 Qumran Studies Oxford:

Sachedina, `Abdulaziz Abdulhussein.

• 1981 Islamic Messianism. New York:??

SBE = Sacred Books of the East. (ed.) F. Max Muller. rept. Delhi, 1970
Tabrīzī,

• Mishkat al-Masabih trans Robson, Mishkat al-Masabih. Vol.II. [henceforth MM.II] Lahore: 1975,

Wensinck, A.J.

• SEI= `Al-Dadjdjāl,' EI1 = SEI:67
• 1971 A Handbook of Early Muhammedan Traditions. Leiden: E.J. Brill,

West,

 

♦