The Confessions of Dolgoruki was a product of its time. An apprehension about the perceived superiority of contemporary Europe, and preoccupation with the threat of imperialism characterized much of the socio-political discourse in the decades that immediately followed the Iranian Constitutional Revolution. These concerns gave rise to two divergent responses among Iranians: one idealized ancient pre-Islamic Iran, while the other advocated a return to pristine Islam as a means of achieving unity in the Islamic world. These responses led to the construction of two in-consonant modes of identity: one race-based and nationalistic, with strong Arianist and anti-Arab overtones, and the other religion-based with Islam at its core.

In such a socio-political milieu three texts, each characterized by a certain mode of thought, provided the context for the creation of The Confessions of Dolgoruki. The first one, consisting of an imaginary conversation, was Siyasat-i Talebi. It reflected an apprehension and preoccupation with imperialist designs for Iran. The other two, both forgeries, were The Testament of Peter the Great, which represented Russophobia, and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which exploited ethno-religious prejudice. The Confessions of Dolgoruki reflected a crisis of identity between the Islamist and Arianist modes of identity. It sought to negotiate the crisis through casting Baha’is as an internal ‘Other’ engaged in a clandestine conspiracy with the external ‘Other.’ By Othering Baha’is, The Confessions fused the two inconsonant modes of national identity.

Read the article in Persian at:  http://www.fis-iran.org/fa/irannameh/volxxiv/iss4-mixed/yazdani

In Iran, state-sponsored hate propaganda and conspiracy theories against the Bahai are never-ending. Now, “crypto-Jews” – also called “Anusim” – are said to have been responsible for the spread of the Babi and Bahai religions in Iran.

Farsnews is not just any Iranian news agency. It is a state-sponsored news agency and mouthpiece of the Iranian military. An example of state-inspired hate speech appeared on 1 March 2009.

State-inspired lies: crypto-Jews are guilty of spreading the Bahai religion

Abdollah Shahbazi, the author of the article that appeared in Farsnews, is not unknown in Iran. He was an active member of the pro-Moscow communist Tudeh party in the days of the Soviet Union. At the end of the 1980s he founded a research institute that openly and closely cooperated with the secret service of the “Islamic Republic of Iran”.  And he was one of the prominent figures who supported the election of Ahmadinejad in the ninth presidential elections in 2005. Shahbazi – old communist and new Islamist, anti-Semite and anti-Bahai – seriously claims to have discovered in his researches that “crypto-Jews” have played “an important role in bringing about and spreading Babism and Bahaism in Iran’s recent history”.

Of course the Jews are to blame

Shahbazi is one of the Iranian authors who have been agitating against the Bahai for years. His conspiracy theories consist of half-truths whose ultimate purpose is to defame the Bahai and of course the Jews.   He claims that when the Babi religion began in the 19th century, it was not Muslims who converted to the Babi and Bahai religions but crypto-Jews who had merely assumed Muslim names.   What is true is that the Babi religion has been stifled in Iran at the insistence of the Shiite clergy and that the Bahai have been persecuted since their religion appeared in Iran. It is also true that a number of Jews became Bahai, but so did many Zoroastrians and Muslims.   In various writings, Shahbazi, the “Islamic Republic of Iran” ’s increasingly influential hate speech propagandist, claims that Jewish Zionists had first decided to invent a new faith some 150 years ago. But, he said, they had been unsuccessful. For this reason some of them had converted to Islam so that they could then assume the Babi faith as Muslims. They had failed as Jews, so they wanted to support the Babi and Bahai as Muslims. The logic of Ahmadinejad’s supporter is plain and simply wrong: he believes that a good Muslim cannot become a Babi or a Bahai, so it must have been Jews that became Babi and later Bahai.   This corresponds to the fact that many Jews assumed the new faith when the Bahai religion first appeared. Likewise, it is also true that, despite persecution by the Muslim clergy and hate speech, many Zoroastrians and Muslims became Bahai.   It is a historical fact that most Babi actually converted from Islam. It is also a historical fact that more than the 20,000 Babi who were murdered in the 19th century under pressure from the clergy and state authorities were all converted Muslims. But this is precisely what the ideologues of today’s terror cannot admit; therefore they feel forced to invent anti-Semitic stories.  

Comte de Gobineau

Shahbazi even quotes from reports compiled by the then French ambassador to Iran, the famous racial theorist Comte de Gobineau, whom Napoleon III sent to Iran in 1855. As it happens, French ambassador Gobineau, who divided humanity into different races and was one of the founders of European racial theory, also wrote about the Babi movement. But Gobineau wrote positively about the Babi movement, this time not for racist reasons but probably because he admired the revolutionary spirit of the Babi. The Babi staunchly supported improved social conditions in Iran. They even abolished a number of Islamic laws that would now be regarded as reactionary, for example they espoused greater rights for women.   Napoleon III’s ambassador in Tehran therefore admired the Babi movement, irrespective of his racial teachings.   Shahbazi, the old communist and present-day Islamist supporter of Ahmadinejad, is not in the least interested in the reasons why, for example, Gobineau gave his time and attention to a Mullah Yazdi, who was said to have been very learned and to have played an important role at the beginning of the Babi movement.   For Shahbazi, it is only important that this Mullah Yazdi must have been a crypto-Jew and have spread the new faith in Khorassan province in order to destroy Islam.   For Gobineau, it was entirely irrelevant whether Mullah Yazdi was a convert – presumably Gobineau had no idea. But Shahbazi, who has obviously read Gobineau, makes this great discovery, as if Iranian Jews actually have brought about a religious movement that now, as the Bahai religion, has at least five million followers worldwide.   It would be an understatement to describe this stance of Shahbazi’s as paranoid, since this propaganda is not state-inspired “rhetoric” but is instead used for the real persecution of Iran’s Bahai.   For Shahbazi, it is important that a crypto-Jew (Anusim) can never become a real Muslim and therefore remains a “covert” Jew and, as a “covert” Jew, he therefore becomes at best a Babi or Bahai in order to fight Islam. Indeed, according to him, the Jewish Bahai in particular are notorious for their hostility to Islam.   Yet the truth is that the Bahai respect Islam as a historical religion even though Baha’u'llah, the founder of the Bahai religion, abolished the Islamic criminal code and many other Islamic laws. In fact, the Bahai do not believe that Mohammed was the “seal of the prophets”.   Ultimately, it is true that the “Islamic Republic of Iran”aims to enforce anachronistic laws by totalitarian means against the will of the people. In doing so, the totalitarian dictatorship is inhibiting the development and advancement of Iranian society. Anti-Bahaism and anti-Semitism are not “rhetorical” formulas in Iran, as many journalists and academics claim, but fixed components of the prevailing ideology and practice of the religiously legitimised dictatorship.

Freedom of opinion vs. freedom of expression

It is a historical fact that in the “Islamic Republic of Iran” people are free to have opinions but not to express them, as Iran’s senior prosecutor Ayatollah Dori Najafabadi recently confirmed. The Bahai have been eliminated as subjects in society for 30 years. At present, seven leading Bahai are in detention, allegedly for spying for Israel, and it is feared that they will be executed.   The Bahai are in fact persecuted and executed solely for open-minded faith. The Bahai International Community has written an open letter to Ayatollah Najafabadi, which is well worth reading. This letter makes it clear that not only is there no freedom of opinion in Iran but that the freedom of conscience of the entire Iranian nation and not just that of the Iranian Bahai is at stake.  

Wahied Wahdat-Hagh is a Senior Fellow with the European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels.

In order to confront these allegations, 18 year old Adib Masumian wrote a book titled, “Debunking the Myths” in which he analyzes and refutes the accusations made against the Baha’i Faith. Adib kindly consented to an interview with the Mideast Youth Network on the claims made against Baha’is, and how he addresses them in his book.

What sparked you into writing “Debunking the Myths”?

I had been noticing an increasing number of Muslims on the Internet stating that the Bahá’í Faith was a creation of the Russians and, more than anything else, that we were Zionists. This was about a year ago and I hadn’t done research on this subject, but I still knew that these claims were totally false. I wanted to refute those errors with evidence because the idea that we were a secretly Israeli or Russian movement came across as absolutely ridiculous to me.

So the first thing I did was look for a paper on the subject by a Bahá’í scholar. I ended up finding a 6-page essay by Dr. Moojan Momen, a great scholar and historian, through a friend. It’s entitled Conspiracies and Forgeries: the attack upon the Baha’i community in Iran and it originally appeared in a journal known as Persian Heritage. It was very concise and did a great job analyzing the inconsistencies of the claims, but I really wanted something bigger than 6 pages so that I could educate myself further and then share whatever I glean from my studies with others. But to my surprise, I couldn’t find anything bigger than Dr. Momen’s paper.

That’s what inspired me to use elements of his paper as well as conduct some research on my own and create a Wikipedia article that eventually became my book, Debunking the Myths. I wanted there to be a work that assessed the historical nature of the most prevalent claims leveled against the Baha’is, and that’s basically why I wrote it.

When it comes to discourse against the Baha’i Faith within Muslim circles, much of the criticism is not directed towards its core tenets, but rather to its supposed ties to foreign powers. How effective has that argument been in causing fear and mistrust of Baha’is?

Well, not as effective as one would think given the degree of emphasis the Iranian government places on our alleged historical ties. A significant majority might have believed these supposed ties prior to the Iranian Revolution in 1979, but the advent of the Islamic republic led to over a couple million people fleeing Iran to this day. Those expatriates have generally discovered the truth for themselves since they no longer had the falsehoods of the influential mullahs on their backs. I am also sure that many people currently living in Iran don’t believe these theories either as a lot of Iranians have grown tired of and even angry with their government over the years and this has led to widespread mistrust between the government and the people they govern. But of course, there are always the uneducated ones who continue to believe the words of the mullahs, and they are generally poor and don’t have the means to receive news through any other source but the clerics.

In the West, however, I’m positive that this nonsense has more or less lost its value, but it is still held valid by some Iranians. I think that’s why Bahá’ís and non-Bahá’ís alike should know the full background behind their charges.

The accusations that Baha’is engage in espionage activities did not spring out of a vacuum. What factors led to their coming into being and being so widely believed?

Well we are a post-Islamic religion that was conceived in an Islamic society, so I would think that these accusations were one way to dehumanize us and eliminate a perceived “threat” to national security and stability. Just stating that we were infidels might not have been sufficient; influential clerics in Iran would need some more substance to their claims. As a result, I think this drove them to pursue something more tangible than theology, and that’s history. By fabricating their own history and using it against us in this light, the mullahs created claims that could appeal to those who weren’t even attached to a conservative Islamic ideology.

So now that this method had been devised, they began preaching these lies from their pulpits and newspapers to the masses all across Iran. One notable incident involves a cleric by the name of Falsafi. During Ramadan of 1955, Falsafi held “radio sermons” which were filled with slander against the Bahá’ís. Allegations of involvement with foreign powers also became a part of his sermons. I think these sermons became hammered into peoples’ heads and they were passed on for a couple of generations; but as I said earlier, I think this tactic is thankfully beginning to fade away due to an increase in independent investigation of truth. I’m hopeful that my book will also contribute to that process.

Baha’is are mainly accused of serving the interests of three groups: the Russians, the British and the Zionists. Let’s start with Russians. The accusations are built on a book titled “Memoirs of Prince Dolgorukov”. Tell us more about this book.

The Memoirs of Prince Dolgorukov are supposed to be the recollections of a certain Prince Dolgorukov, who served as the Russian ambassador to Persia from 1846 to 1854. But from the very beginning, it is painfully obvious that this was a poorly-crafted forgery done by mullahs. It is filled to the brim with historical inaccuracies. For example, it states that Dolgorukov first came to Persia in 1834 as a translator for the Russian embassy. Dr. Moojan Momen has proven that Dolgorukov did not arrive at Persia until 1846, and he did this by perusing the actual Russian archives and reading up on almanacs about him. Elsewhere, the memoirs state that Dolgorukov intimately knew the Báb – founder of the Bábi Faith, precursor to the Bahá’í Faith – and that Dolgorukov would write his texts for him and have the Báb sign them to make them look authentic. But this is impossible because even as late as 1847, three years after the Báb’s proclamation of prophethood, Dolgorukov had no idea what the Bábis were all about. He actually compared their mission to those of early European communists!

It also has other grave errors as well, like stating that certain people were doing certain things when the people in question were either young children or dead. The most eminent Iranian historians, such as Abbas Iqbal Ashtiani, have denounced the memoirs as an absolute forgery. Even one historian who was publicly opposed to the Faith, Ahmad Kasravi, admitted this.

If this book has been proven to be a work of forgery, why is it still touted as authentic?

Actually, I don’t hear very many people these days refer to the Dolgorukov memoirs unless they want to compare it to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in terms of historical accuracy. I’m not even sure if very many people living in Iran still take their contents seriously because they’re just so absurd. Like I said, credible historians have denounced the memoirs over the decades as totallhoy fake and that has substantially helped dissipate many rumors related to it. Of the three accusations you enumerated earlier – Russians, British, and Zionists – you will probably hear “Russians” the least of the three. The memoirs might have been hot almost 70 years ago when they were first forged, but as of now they’re really nothing more than a laughingstock. But nonetheless, I do analyze many of the claims put forth by the memoirs in my book individually and assess their veracity using Dr. Momen’s extensive research, and that should pretty much clear up anything in the air on the subject.

Another popular conspiracy theory is that the earliest disciples of the faith were British spies. On what grounds are these claims based?

The claims specifically about the earliest disciples being tied to the British are bogus. They’re not historically accurate in the least. That rumor largely comes from an alleged meeting between a follower of the Báb and a certain British general named Arthur Conolly. The objective of this meeting was apparently to forge a conspiracy to undermine Shi’a Islam. The evidence for all of this is supposed to be located in one of Conolly’s books, according to a Persian historian. However, someone discovered that no such event is to be found in that book as well as the fact that this meeting never actually took place. As a result, that rumor quickly lost credibility in academic circles.

But since we’re on the subject of Britain, it should be noted that people usually refer to the knighthood of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, second leader of the Bahá’í Faith, as “evidence” that we have political ties to the British. This knighthood took place in 1920 and was actually bestowed upon ‘Abdu’l-Bahá because he helped alleviate a famine around the then Palestinian cities of Haifa and Akká during World War I. He did this by teaching people in the area how to cultivate grain, and they would then distribute it across the region. However, your average Iranian who has been told of the knighthood story doesn’t know about this history, and that’s why the allegations of British ties are still rampant in their thinking when it comes to the Bahá’í Faith.

Of course, Russia and Britain are no longer the great big nemeses; that position is now held by Zionists. What evidence do they rely on in making such accusations?

You’re very right about that, and the answer can be summed up in three words: location, location, location.

I think the thought process here goes something like this: “The Bahá’í holy sites are in Israel, therefore they must be Zionists.” Well our holy sites are indeed in today’s Israel, but we are by no means Zionists. The truth of the matter is that the founder of the Bahá’í Faith, Baha’u’llah, was exiled to successive regions of the Middle East by the Persian Shah and the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire until he finally arrived at the Palestinian city of Akká, where he died in 1892. His passing at that location, as well as the fact that Baha’u’llah pitched a tent on Mount Carmel and even revealed a tablet to his followers there, explains why we chose today’s Israel as our religion’s center.

But what the uneducated Iranians don’t realize is that having our shrines there doesn’t necessarily make us Zionists, because that would in fact make Muslims Zionists as well since holy sites such as the Dome of the Rock are located there! In reality, when Baha’u’llah died in Akká in 1892, there was no Israel. That land was Palestine, and it remained as such until Israel was partitioned in 1947. Since there was no Israel when significant Bahá’í events took place in that area, that automatically renders all Israel-related issues, including Zionism, irrelevant.

Attacks against Baha’is are not limited to their supposed ties to foreign powers, but it’s also alleged that they held close ties with the regime of the former Shah, and that they actively collaborated with the Shah’s notorious secret police. How would you respond to such accusations?

People are beginning to allege that members of the Shah’s cabinet more and more nowadays, and because of that I’m really glad you raised this question. There are a few Iranian politicians that have always been rumored to be Bahá’ís who never actually declared themselves as such. One example is the late Prime Minister, Amir Abbas Hoveida. Hoveida’s grandfather was an early Bahá’í in the time of Baha’u’llah. Hoveida’s father was also a Bahá’í up until the early 1920s when he became detached from the Faith and instead became increasingly interested in politics. From that point onward he had nothing to do with the Bahá’í Faith, and since his son was an infant at the time, he never received any Bahá’í education. Hoveida’s brother even stated that he had not heard of the word “Bahá’í” until he was 14, and even then he learned of its meaning from a friend. In reality, Hoveida was actually a Freemason, never a Bahá’í. There are a few other individuals who worked in the Shah’s cabinet that were always rumored Bahá’ís during their terms, but almost all of them actually came from Bahá’í families and never declared themselves as Bahá’ís. Bahá’ís are not even allowed to accept political positions, and this makes these accusations look even more ridiculous.

There are also a few who say that Bahá’ís worked in the Shah’s secret police, known as SAVAK, but SAVAK was actually influenced by multiple anti-Bahá’í groups, one of them being the infamous Hojattiyeh. For this reason, SAVAK also targeted many Bahá’í individuals. When one reflects on that, the notion of Bahá’ís persecuting other Bahá’ís – an already harassed minority – becomes absolutely absurd.

What steps can be taken to counter these claims?

People can counter the claims by educating themselves about their historical nature and sharing this new knowledge with others. Everything has a history to it. I’ve given most of the answers to these common discrepancies here in this interview, but I go in further detail and extensively reference all of my research in Debunking the Myths. This is obviously a biased opinion, but I really think it’s a $10 well-spent. If Bahá’ís and non-Bahá’ís can properly arm themselves against these charges, then I strongly feel that they will be dissipated in due time. Who knows? Maybe Iranians will read the book and share it with their relatives in Iran. They could then spread it among themselves and the Iranians masses could became aware of the reality of these claims soon enough.

You can purchase “Debunking the Myths” online and for only $9.95!

[Source: http://mideastyouth.com/2009/03/18/debunking-the-myths-on-bahais/]

Several baseless claims have been put forth as truth in various public forums and media. Over time, these have been accepted as “truth” due to repetition and a general apathy by the Iranian masses towards independent investigation of such claims. Gradually, most of us have simply come to accept a variety of often conflicting claims about the Bahá’ís. For instance, the Bahá’ís were created by the British AND Russians in the 19th-century (while both were actually competing for influence in Persia!). Or that the Baha’is held positions of power in the Pahlavi regime and were also agents of Israel, international Zionism, and American Imperialism. During the Iran-Iraqi war, some Bahá’ís were even labeled as Iraqi agents!

Adib Masumian puts forth a challenge to these theories in his new book “Debunking the Myths: Conspiracy Theories on the Genesis and Mission of the Bahá’í Faith.” In 89 pages, this work provides an analysis of the most widespread anti-Bahá’í allegations raised by clerics and Iranian polemicists over the past century or so. These include such myths as Prince Dolgorukov of Russia acting as the prime motivator of the Báb, the British General, Arthur Conolly, as the one who persuaded Mulla Husayn to push the Báb into starting his religion, or considering `Abdu’l-Bahá’s knighthood in 1920 as irrefutable evidence of Bahá’í ties to British imperialism.

The book also discusses whether any of the influential members of the Sháh’s regime were Baha’is from Amir Abbas Hoveida to General Nassiri or Parviz Sabeti of SAVAK to Farrokhroo Pársá and others. And unlike anti-Baha’i polemicists who hardly ever provide credible sources for their claims, this book offers about 140 citations with a bibliography of over 50 different books and credible websites (both Baha’i and non-Baha’i) to substantiate its assertions.

Iran Press Watch highly recommends this book to their readers. It is available for purchase in two versions. It has been reviewed and accepted by the NSA of the United States.

Black and White ($9.95):
http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback_book/debunking_the_myths/6430166

Full-color ($22.30):
http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback_book/debunking_the_myths/5483633

“I hope those who have always wondered about the credibility of claims against the Baha’is take a look at this book and decide for themselves where the truth is. Just as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion has been proven a farce, so must the Dolgorukov Memoirs and other fabrications be exposed, once and for all, for what they are – insults to scholarship. I have attempted to do that, too, in this work.”

[Source: Adib Masumian - "Debunking the Myths: Conspiracy Theories on the Genesis and Mission of the Bahá’í Faith."]

Editor’s Note

Date: March 9th, 2009

To: Ayatollah Dorri Najafabadi, Attorney General of the Islamic Republic of Iran

We wish to respectfully express our astonishment at your recent remarks about the Baha’i community and its administrative bodies.  The 165-year history of the Baha’i Faith attests to the fact that Baha’is, wherever they live, are solely concerned  about the betterment of their world, loyalty to their governments, the welfare of their fellow citizens, and obedience to the just and benevolent laws of their country.  This is especially true in the case of Iran and Iranians, who are regarded with utmost reverence and love. You, and other Iranian officials, are well aware of this fact, and must know perfectly well that your remarks were untrue.

You accused the governing board of the Iranian Baha’i community (the group of Yaran, whose members have now been under incarceration for many months), along with all the local bodies of Khademin that operate under their jurisdiction, of espionage. Are mere words proofs of so explosive a claim?  Do you believe that the public pronouncement of such distorted facts and accusations are sufficient, when those accused are not even allowed to defend themselves?  Do you, indeed, think that your sensible and wise compatriots are likely to accept such claims?

How can one accuse the Baha’is of espionage when they have always refrained, in accordance with their religious beliefs, from partisan politics; when they have continually attested that obedience to their governments is, for them, a religious obligation; and despite the fact that they so fervently adore the country which is not just their home, but also the birthplace of their beloved Baha’u'llah?

These unofficial bodies have simply and minimally been attending to the social functions and the personal needs of Baha’is living in their communities. Their actions have always been plainly visible to government officials and under the close scrutiny of the ministry of intelligence, especially since the early 1990s.  In many instances these officials issued their own rulings and regulations about the details of the functions of these very bodies, which were heeded whenever they were not in conflict with Baha’i beliefs.

You are certainly aware how some years ago Mr. Fallahian, Iran’s former Minister of Intelligence, publicly assured Iranians, through every available medium, that all Baha’i activities were under the complete control and surveillance of the government, asserting that they posed no danger whatsoever to the regime.

During all these years, representatives of these local bodies were constantly in touch with their localities’ intelligence offices, informed them of the functions and activities of their communities, and in many cases interacted with them in an atmosphere of friendship and brotherhood.

How then, suddenly, could they have turned into dangerous foreign agents and spies whose beliefs amount to deviations of thought and manipulation of ideas for the purpose of deception, and their governing bodies have become illegal?  Do you not think that such comments can hardly appear as anything more than a political ploy aimed at distorting the truth and justifying the wave of persecutions that have befallen the Baha’i community of Iran, especially during recent years?  How will you justify your actions in the presence of God on the Day of Reckoning [yawm-i alast, the Islamic equivalent of Judgement Day]?

Anyway, in accordance with longstanding Baha’i beliefs, in order to demonstrate its good will, and in accordance with the agreement voiced by the group of Yaran ["Friends" -- the informal Baha'i national coordinating body] who are in prison, the group of Khademin ["Servants" -- local Baha'i coordinating bodies] of Kerman is now announcing its dissolution and declaring that, from now on, it has no responsibility towards the Baha’i community of Kerman.

However, as you have asserted, the Iranian constitution confers civil rights and freedom of belief on all individuals.  Thus, every individual Baha’i, including the members of the dissolved governing bodies, now reserve themselves the obligation to serve their people, as Baha’i citizens of Iran, in accordance with their spiritual duties and beliefs and guided by utmost truthfulness and loyalty to their beloved country and people.

May through God’s confirmation, and the good will of the justice system, the dark clouds of prejudice be torn apart, the hearts of all mankind be cleansed, and the light of truth and justice shine above the sacred soil of Iran.

Members of the group of Khademin of Kerman,

Jina Javidnia,

Shahram Fallah,

Nima Rajabzadeh

cc: Minister of Intelligence, Mr. Muhseni-Ezheh’i

[Source: http://negahedigar1.blogfa.com/post-132.aspx. Translation contributed by a learned reader of Iran Press Watch.]

[Translator’s Note: Akhtar Arjmandi maintains a blog dedicated to the defense of Iran’s Baha’i Community where she refutes attacks made against Baha’is in the Iranian press and in Persian anti-Baha’i polemical works. The following report was published on her blog on Monday, 12 January 2009]

Anti-Baha’ism is beginning to take on new dimensions! Until now, Baha’is were accused of being cohorts of the Pahlavi regime and held responsible for every offense and setback that occurred in Iran before the Islamic revolution. More recently, every Mulla in Iran has been blaming the Baha’is for everything that fails to conform with his vision of the Islamic Republic.

In the past few days, I came across two astonishing reports. First, the Isfahan branch of the Iranian Qur’an News Agency (IQNA) announced that Ayatollah Tabataba’i, the Friday prayer leader in Isfahan, declared in a speech following Friday prayers at Imam Khomeini Square last week, “This year, in the ceremonies mourning the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (peace be upon him), many of the inappropriate behaviors that called these ceremonies into question were less visible and many of the customs that were innovated in the Qajar period, after the creation of the Baha’i sect, were less noticeable.” Two days later, the Iran Student Correspondents Association (ISCA) published comments from a discussion with mid-level cleric Mojtaba Kashani, a member of the central parliamentary organization Ansar-e Hezbollah, during which Mr. Kashani, introduced by ISCA as “a specialist in religious affairs,” stated, “The best way to eliminate the religious values associated with an event like ‘Ashura – an event that is part and parcel of an exalted Islamic foundation and the principles of religious knowledge – is to make these rituals and ceremonies of mourning completely meaningless and empty.” He then confidently declared, “A large measure of the harm that has befell some of the eulogies and mourning ceremonies in the last ten years has been deliberate and premeditated, and without a doubt, Baha’ism and the CIA have had a major influence in this regard.”

I can only say [in the words of Rumi], “amazement upon amazement came with such tales.” On the one hand, hearing this new idea repeated by two men two days apart from one another suggests that there is some level of centralized planning or collaboration taking place in the area of anti-Baha’ism in Iran which suits what is happening on a given day. On the other hand, this collaboration is not very careful when it comes to details: One cleric connects “the inappropriate behaviors” during ‘Ashura with the birth of the Baha’i religion in Qajar Iran, while the other states that “the harm” Baha’is have perpetrated against ‘Ashura occurred in the last ten years. What is more, all of these statements are being made when two Baha’is imprisoned in northern Iran are being punished for refusing to participate in ‘Ashura mourning rituals! (for more on this recent development, see here)

The Friday prayer leader in Isfahan did not explain just how Baha’is introduced new “innovations” in the ‘Ashura ceremonies during the Qajar period. Nor did the Iran Student Correspondents Association (ISCA) seek an answer to the question of precisely what role the Baha’is have had in recent decades “to render meaningless” the mourning rituals of millions of Shi’a in Iran. One did not ask and the other did not say since they are both well aware that their reports are absurd and utterly baseless. They know well that what they seek to destroy is the Baha’i name. How this is to be done or how fatuous and inconsistent their means may be matters not.

Perhaps these gentlemen are aware that the Baha’i Writings speak of all of the Shi’i Imams, and in particular Imam Husayn, with deep love and respect, and that Baha’is have a special Tablet of Visitation for Imam Husayn that is profoundly beautiful. In my opinion, these strange lies may have been fabricated as a result of a certain trepidation on the part of the clerics about the effect that the same Tablet of Visitation can have on the hearts of the Shi’a, together with a fear on their part that Iranians will realize that in contrast to what their religious leaders have shown them, Baha’is are in full harmony with the values of true Islam.

Such accusations about ‘Ashura mourning rituals are slung despite the fact that Baha’is each year mourn and commemorate peacefully and quietly the observance of the passing of their faith’s Founder and the martyrdom of His forerunner. Moreover, in accordance with their religious precepts, Baha’is abstain from uncontrollable outbursts at the passing of family members or friends. The memorial gatherings held by Baha’is to commemorate someone’s passing testify to this. These gatherings are dedicated to prayer and meditation – meditation on the fact that we too will one day die just as the person whose death we are today mourning. If there is one thing Baha’is are eager to spread among their countrymen, it is this spirit of thoughtful reflection. Don’t accuse them of promoting self-flagellation!

Tehran University was the host for a conference held on Tuesday, 14 October 2008, on the subject, “Iran and British Colonialism”. This conference was organized by the Institute for Political Studies and Research, a Tehran-based organization with strong ties to Iran’s theocracy. A number of well-known figures spoke at this gathering. Iranian Students News Agency has provided a synopsis of the conference and extracts from various talks at:


http://www.isna.ir/ISNA/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-1215518&Lang=P

http://www.isna.ir/ISNA/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-1215105&Lang=P

http://www.isna.ir/ISNA/NewsView.aspx?ID=News-1215463&Lang=P

The subject of colonialism and imperialism is a highly-charged topic in Iran’s modern political discourse, and often facts and a great deal of fiction are intertwined for political gain by various factions.

While much was covered during this conference on Iran’s view of the attempts by “western” powers such as England and Russia to subjugate the Middle East in general and Iran in particular, for the purpose of this report I will confine the discussion to remarks about the Babi and Baha’i Faiths, which essentially rehashed the age-old accusation that these religious communities were created by the British and Russian powers in order to advance their colonial designs.

The second speaker at the Conference was Hujjatu’l-Islam Va’iz-Zadeh Khurasani, whose talk was titled, “The role of Britain in creating religious sects in Islamic countries”. He stated that the first portion of his talk would focus on British interference in Iran, while the remaining part of his presentation would be to analyze the role of British and Russian colonialism in the formation of Babism and Baha’ism.

As part of his presentation, Va’iz-Zadeh stated, “In the 18th century, England had an agency called the Colonial Ministry, which was charged with promotion of universal ignorance and illiteracy, spread of orthodoxy and prejudice, proliferation of hopelessness and insecurity, and much more. … From another direction, England had a hand in creating various sects, such as the Babis and the Baha’is, and advanced the interests of Wahhabis as well.” He continued, “The role of Britain and Russia in creating Babism and Wahhabism was very strong.”

In continuing his discourse on the history of the Babi and the Baha’i movements, the speaker added, “These two sects emerged from the Shaykhi school of thought, which was led by Shaykh Ahmad Ahsa’i. Siyyid Ali-Muhammad the Bab, who presented himself as the ‘Bab’ within this movement, first stated that he had the station of being ‘the gate of knowledge’, then claimed that he was ‘the gate of the Lord of the Age’, and eventually claimed divinity for himself.”

The speaker added, “The initial role in the formation of these sects resided with Russia; it was then assumed by the Britain, and the connection of Russia and Britain with these religious creeds in Iran and other Islamic countries from the time of exile of Mirza Husayn-Ali [Baha’u’llah] to Baghdad should be a topic of further research.”

The same News Agency reports on another speaker, Hujjatu’l-Islam Hamed Qara’iti, who examined the role of Britain in the political development of Iran during the last century. This speaker suggested, “British colonialism advanced its interests in Islamic countries through the Babi and the Baha’i sects.” He added, “During the Qajar era, England advanced its plans in Islamic regions through Babism and Baha’ism, so that by the use of these sects she could attain her objectives.”

Part 2: A Response

The preposterous suggestion that the Babi and Baha’i Faiths are the creation of British and Russian imperialism is the tool of choice of Iran’s mullahs and has been repeated for many decades without an iota of credible evidence. To better understand the issue, let us examine its historical backdrop:

The growth and diffusion of the Baha’i Faith in Iran (and globally) has been a source of considerable concern to Iran’s ecclesiastical orthodoxy, who have historically viewed this expansion as a competition and a threat to their authority and power. This perceived threat stems from a number of the teachings of the Baha’i movement which challenge traditional Islamic belief, including principles that call into question the need for a ministry or priesthood. This bold assertion by Baha’u’llah, prophet-founder of the Baha’i Faith, has been treated by the Shiite clergy with hostility, as it is a threat to their doctrinal legitimacy and social prestige – not to mention their financial well-being.

By the end of the 19th century, there was a growing dissension within the Qajar state, and thus charges of subversion and conspiracy against the Baha’is increased in the hope of drawing public attention away from the government and its problems, and instead toward the evils of the “wayward sect”. In the early 20th century, the Baha’is were seen as being non-conformists in a society seeking for uniformity and fearful of losing its perceived unique Shiite culture due to outside threats. By the 1940s, the clerical and the state agencies were stating broadly that the Baha’i Faith was entirely manufactured by colonialists and imperialists in order to destroy the “unity of the Muslim nation” and that those who did not share the beliefs of the Muslim nation were agents of foreign powers.

By the 1960s the cynical disdain for the Baha’i social message among pro-religious intellectuals had increased, and charges of spying and connections to foreign powers were added to the previous charge of Baha’is being heretics. This new attitude towards the Baha’is by this time had passed beyond the circle of mullahs and had become rampant among the secular Iranian middle class.

Some observers have noted that while Iran’s sovereignty was recognized in the 19th century, Britain and Russia meddled in the country’s affairs to further their own interests, and that groups that have trans-national ties like the Jews and the Baha’is are viewed with great suspicion by Iranian nationalists.

It is true that the Russian and British governments had a formidable presence in the 19th-century Iran and competed for political, economic and territorial influence. The support of Britain during the Constitutional Revolution of 1905-11, the Anglo-Russian convention which allowed Russia and England to partition Iran into spheres of influence, the occupation of Iranian territory during the First World War by the British, Russia and the Ottoman forces, as well as the coup d’état of 1921 which was backed by Britain, all encouraged the development of conspiracy ideas related to foreign powers. Opponents of the Baha’i Faith, particularly Shiite clerics, used this atmosphere to allege that the Baha’i religion was also a product of Russian and British governments who were striving to weaken Islam and create divisions in the Iranian nation.

The basis of many of the conspiracy theories relating the Baha’i Faith to Russian influence is a fictitious memoir attributed to Dimitri Ivanovich Dolgorukov (also known as Dolgoruki), who was the Russian ambassador to Iran from 1846 to 1854. The memoir states that Dolgorukov created the Babi and Baha’i religions in order to weaken Iran and Shiite Islam. This document in many ways is the functional equivalent of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which was a fraudulent anti-Semitic tract alleging a Jewish plot to achieve world domination. The fictional memoir was first published in 1943 in Mashhad, Iran, and shortly thereafter published again in Tehran with some of the most glaring historical errors corrected. The book still contains many historical errors and has been refuted by many non-Baha’i scholars (e.g. see http://www.iranian.com/main/2008/sacrificing-innocent).

This memoir states that Dolgorukov used to attend gatherings of Hakim Ahmad Gilani, where he would meet with Baha’u’llah. However, Gilani had died in 1835, three years before Dolgorukov’s arrival in the country. There are numerous other errors relating to the dates and timing of events that the memoir describes, including descriptions of events after the deaths of those who supposedly took part or when the people involved were young children, or when they were in different parts of the world.

Actually, Dolgorukov’s interaction with Baha’i history was very limited. In 1852, when the entire Babi community fell under suspicion, many Babis, including Baha’u’llah, were arrested in a sweep. When Baha’u’llah was jailed by the Shah, his family went to Mirza Majid Ahi, who was married to Baha’u’llah’s sister and was working as a secretary in the Russian Legation in Tehran, and asked him to go to Dolgorukov and request him to intercede on Baha’u’llah’s behalf – and Dolgorukov agreed.

After Dolgorukov and Iran’s Prime Minister pressured the Shah to either produce evidence against Baha’u’llah or to release him, the Shah agreed to free Baha’u’llah, but decreed that he be banished from Iran. Dolgorukov offered Baha’u’llah and his family the opportunity to migrate to Russia, but the latter refused. Instead, Baha’u’llah chose to go to Iraq and settle in Baghdad.

The memoirs, however, extend this assistance to all facets of Baha’u’llah’s life. In one edition of these fictitious memories, Dolgorukov is said to have provided money for Baha’u’llah to build a house in Akka; however Dolgorukov died in 1867, before Baha’u’llah arrived in Akka. Thus newer editions of the memoir state that Dolgorukov sent money for a house to be built in Edirne, where Baha’u’llah lived prior to being exiled to Akka. As Dolgorukov had left the Russian diplomatic service in 1854 and died in 1867, he was unable to interact with Baha’u’llah in ways described by the fictitious memoir.

The suggestion of British ties is even more preposterous, and is based completely on false evidence. In a biography of Iran’s famous Prime Minster, Amir Kabir, the well-know Iranian intellectual Firaydun Adamiyat (recently deceased) stated that Mulla Husayn, the Bab’s first disciple, was in fact a British agent who was recruited by Arthur Conolly, a British intelligence officer, explorer and writer. Adamiyat states that the evidence for this allegation appears in Conolly’s book, “Journey to the North of India Overland from England through Russia, Persia, and Affghaunistaun”. However, no mention of Mulla Husayn or the Bab appears in the book. In later editions of Adamiyat’s biography on Amir Kabir, this fabrication has been removed.

The accusations of ties to the British also were made because of the knighting in 1920 of Abdu’l-Baha Abbas, Baha’u'llah’s son, by the British Mandate of Palestine – an act that antagonists claim to be a reward for the political relations between the Baha’i Faith and Great Britain. Abdu’l-Baha was, however, awarded this knighthood for his humanitarian efforts shortly after World War I. During the War years, Palestine suffered an intense famine caused by the Ottoman government’s mismanagement as well as a major infestation of locusts (for details see the diary of Dr. Habib Mu’ayyad at http://ahang.rabbani.googlepages.com). In response, Abdu’l-Baha encouraged his followers in the region to cultivate, store, and distribute grain to the famine-stricken people after the war.

Baha’is have also been accused of ties to global Zionism, an international political movement formed in the 19th century in support of the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine. A common way in which this claim is advanced is by pointing out that the shrines and holy places of the Baha’is are located in Israel. However, Baha’u’llah was banished from Iran to Baghdad in the Ottoman Empire, and later exiled by the Sultan of the Ottomans, at the Shah’s behest, to territories further away from Iran and finally to Akka in Syria, which only a century later was incorporated into the state of Israel. Baha’u’llah died in 1892 near Akka and was buried in that vicinity. Following his death, Abdu’l-Baha assumed the leadership of the religion until his passing in 1921, and was buried in Haifa, then in Palestine. Another important figure for Baha’is buried in current-day Israel is the Bab, whose remains were transferred to Palestine and buried in Haifa in 1909. Israel was not formed until 1948, almost 60 years after Baha’u’llah’s death, 40 years after the Bab’s remains were brought to the region, and 27 years after Abdu’l-Baha’s death.

Baha’is have also been accused of supporting the state of Israel because they send financial support to their international headquarters, located in Haifa, Israel. These financial contributions, however, are sent for the maintenance and upkeep of the Baha’i shrines and historical sites and for attending to the humanitarian affairs of the Faith’s global community. Much the same way that Shiite Muslims of Iran are praised for sending money out of the country to Iraq and Jerusalem for the upkeep of their religious shrines, the Baha’is contribute financially to the upkeep of their own shrines, which happen to be located in Israel due to an accident of history.

For further reading on this subject, kindly consult the following on-line article and cited sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_Baha’i_involvement_with_other_powers