Baha’is believe that the Bab, Bahā’u’llāh, and `Abdu’l-Bahā were divinely inspired and received knowledge directly from God. For instance this is how Bahā’u’llāh claims he received divine knowledge:

Whenever We desire to quote the sayings of the learned and of the wise, presently there will appear before the face of thy Lord in the form of a tablet all that which hath appeared in the world and is revealed in the Holy Books and Scriptures.[1]

Likewise, as we already mentioned, `Abdu’l-Bahā claims:

I do not know everything. But when I need to know something, it is pictured before me.[2]

Baha’is claim that these figures never attended school and didn’t receive education like other people. As we will show these claims are baseless.

a- The Bāb’s Education

`Abdu’l-Bahā says:

It was universally admitted by the Shī’is that He had never studied in any school and had not acquired knowledge from any teacher; all the people of Shīrāz bear witness to this.[3]

`Abdu’l-Bahā’s claims that “it was universally admitted by the Shi’is that He had never studied in any school,” this universal admittance has not been verified to date and there exists no document that we know of that can even partially show this admission. On the contrary, it is nearly universally admitted by Baha’is and non-Baha’is alike that the Bāb had studied in school. We will present here only a few samples from the many recorded documents on this matter.

Fāḍil Māzandarānī mentions that he was taught both reading and writing at the school of Shaykh Abid.[4] He also mentions that he had attended Sayyid Kāẓim Rashtī’s classes in Karbalā and had taught from him the works of Suyūṭī and Ḥāshiyyi Mullā `Abdullāh.[5] This is further verified by two documents in which the Bāb refers to Sayyid Kāẓim as his teacher.[6]

In another document it is narrated from Ḥājī Sayyid Jawād that:

One day I was in the Khāl’s (the Bāb’s uncle) house when I saw that his highness (the Bāb) returned from school while he was holding some papers. I asked him, “What are these?” He replied with a weak whisper, “These are my homework (or calligraphy practices).”[7]

Esslemont too admits that the Bāb had received education at school:

In childhood He learned to read, and received the elementary education customary for children.[8]

He then continues in the footnote:

On this point a historian remarks: “The belief of many people in the East, especially the believers in the Bāb (now Baha’is) was this: that the Bāb received no education, but that the Mullās, in order to lower him in the eyes of the people, declared that such knowledge and wisdom as he possessed were accounted for by the education he had received. After deep search into the truth of this matter we have found evidence to show that in childhood for a short time he used to go to the house of Shaykh Muḥammad (also known as Abid) where he was taught to read and write in Persian. It was this to which the Bāb referred when he wrote in the book of Bayān: ‘O Muḥammad, O my teacher! . . . ’”

The last sentence which Esslemont has replaced with three periods refers to what the Bāb had written in the Arabic Bayān. We have previously cited a section of this quote:

Say O Muḥammad, my teacher. Do not hit me before my age finishes five even for a moment for my heart is very very soft. After that discipline me but not more than I can bear. If you want to hit me do not [hit me] more than five times. And do not hit me on my flesh (laḥm) unless there is a covering over it. If you exceed [these guidelines] your wife will be illegal for you for nineteen days. If you forget and if you don’t have a companion, then you must give in charity for every beating nineteen mithqāls[9] of gold if you want to be faithful. And do not hit but very very softly. And you must place the children on a throne, seat, or stool because [the time they are sitting there] will not be calculated as their age and you must allow them to do what makes them happy. And you must teach me the Shikastih[10] handwriting for that is what God loves and has made the gateway to His soul . . .[11]

Pay attention to the first sentence in which the Bāb refers to that person as his teacher, and to the sentence in which the Bāb is clearly asking the teacher to teach him: “And you must teach me the Shikastih handwriting.” Do these words show anything but the fact that the Bāb was schooled?

Nabīl Zarandī claims that the Bāb studied at school for five years:

The Bāb was six or seven years of age when He entered the school of Shaykh Abid. The school was known by the name of “Qahviyih-Awliya.” The Bāb remained five years at that school where He was taught the rudiments of Persian.[12]

To cover-up this fact, it is claimed in this book that the Bab was forced to go to school and didn’t need to be educated, although the previous examples we mentioned clearly show the contrary. It is even claimed that he had shown super-human wisdom at the school:

“ . . . Day after day He continued to manifest such remarkable evidences of superhuman wisdom as I am powerless to recount.” At last His uncle was induced to take Him away from the school of Shaykh Abid, and to associate Him with himself in his own profession. There, too, He revealed signs of a power and greatness that few could approach and none could rival.[13]

The validity of the claims about the Bāb’s super human knowledge and inspirations can be verified by studying his beliefs and writings mentioned earlier in this book. As usual, Nabil Zarandi’s historical accounts go against established facts. As we previously mentioned, Nabil himself should be looked at with skepticism, because he had falsely claimed that he was the One Who God Would Make Manifest.

Anyway, what is important here is that in contrast to what `Abdu’l-Bahā claimed, the Bab had attended school.

`Abdu’l-Bahā’s challenge is even more interesting: “all the people of Shīrāz bear witness to this.” These words were uttered by `Abdu’l-Bahā between the years 1904–1906 (let us use the average 1905). The Bab was born in the year 1819 and had reached the age of schooling by 1825. What `Abdu’l-Bahā is saying is this: all the people in Shiraz bear witness to what happened 80 (1905-1825 = 80) years ago! Most—if not all—the people who might have witnessed the Bab’s schooling were definitely dead when `Abdu’l-Bahā had put forward this challenge. Now let us read `Abdu’l-Bahās sentence again:

(1) It was universally admitted by the Shī’is that (2) He had never studied in any school and (3) had not acquired knowledge from any teacher; (4) all the people of Shīrāz bear witness to this.[14]

Is it an exaggeration to say that `Abdu’l-Bahā has uttered four lies in a single sentence?

b- Bahā’u’llāh’s Education

`Abdu’l-Bahā says about his father:

As all the people of Persia know, He had never studied in any school, nor had He associated with the `ulamā or the men of learning. The early part of His life was passed in the greatest happiness. His companions and associates were Persians of the highest rank, but not learned men.[15]

In the Bāb’s case, the witness to `Abdu’l-Bahā’s claims were all the people of Shiraz, in Bahā’u’llāh’s case the matter is taken to a whole new level: all the people of Iran! The falsity of this claim is obvious.

`Abdu’l-Bahā claims his father had not associated with the `Ulamā. Apparently he has forgotten that when he was exaggerating his father’s knowledge elsewhere, he had mentioned that his father had in fact associated with the `Ulamā:

When He was only thirteen or fourteen years old He became renowned for His learning. He would converse on any subject and solve any problem presented to Him. In large gatherings He would discuss matters with the `Ulamā (leading mullās) and would explain intricate religious questions. All of them used to listen to Him with the greatest interest.[16]

In whatever meeting, scientific assembly or theological discussion He was found, He became the authority of explanation upon intricate and abstruse questions presented.[17]

The claims about Bahā’u’llāh’s superior knowledge in these gatherings, are merely `Abdu’l-Bahā’s claims and have not been verified to date by any external source. In these talks, the `Ulamā are basically displayed as a group of unlearned foolish men who were begging Bahā’u’llāh to answer their questions. Once again, what is important here is that in contrary to what `Abdu’l-Bahā had claimed, these quotes clearly show that Bahā’u’llāh would socialize and associate with the `Ulamā and scholars.

Yet `Abdu’l-Bahā repeatedly insists that his father had not attended school. Here is another instance:

During the period of youth the Blessed Perfection did not enter school. He was not willing to be taught. This fact is well established among the Persians of Ṭihrān.[18]

This time the people of Tehran are used as witnesses. These hundreds and thousands of witnesses (!) too like the people of Shiraz were all probably dead when `Abdu’l-Bahā made this claim.

In a similar quote `Abdu’l-Bahā says:

He never attended school or college, and what little teaching He received was given at home.[19]

In this quote, `Abdu’l-Bahā admits that his father received education at home. We will allow Adib Taherzadeh, a member of the Universal House of Justice from 1988–2000, to tell us how Bahā’u’llāh was educated:

In Persia in the nineteenth century . . . There were two educated classes, divines and government officials, plus a small number of others . . . The second class included government officials, clerks and some merchants, who received a certain elementary education in their childhood. This consisted of reading, writing, calligraphy, the study of the Qur’ān and the works of some famous Persian poets. All this was usually accomplished within the span of a few years, after which many of them would marry, as was customary, in their late teens.

It was to this class that Bahā’u’llāh belonged. His father was a senior dignitary at the court of the Shāh and famous as a calligrapher–an art which carried with it great prestige in royal circles. Bahā’u’llāh as a child received a simple education for a brief period of time. Like His father, He excelled in calligraphy. Some specimens of His exquisite handwriting are kept in the International Bahā’ī Archives on Mount Carmel.[20]

Adib Taherzadeh gives us further information elsewhere:

Bahā’u’llāh received an elementary education during His childhood in Tihran [sic]. The nobility of those days usually employed the services of a teacher at home to tutor their children. The main subjects were calligraphy, the study of the Qur’an and the works of the Persian poets. This type of schooling ended after only a few years when the child was in his early teens. Bahā’u’llāh’s education did not go further than this.[21]

According to these words, the reason Bahā’u’llāh didn’t go to school was because he was born in a noble family and it was customary in these families to not send their children to school. Rather they would employ a private teacher to teach their children. It is well known that the quality of teaching received from a private tutor usually far exceeds the education that one might attain in a public school.

The final witness to how Bahā’u’llāh was educated is someone who knew him from childhood and as `Abdu’l-Bahā claims, apparently reared him. This person is no one but his sister, Khānum Buzurg (also known as Shāh Sultan Khānum and `Izziye Khānum). Although she became a follower of Mīrzā Yahyā, nonetheless, she was held with high esteem and was greatly respected by `Abdu’l-Bahā. The bond between `Abdu’l-Bahā and his aunt was so strong that `Abdu’l-Bahā used these words to address her:

Do you not remember that during my childhood and infancy what devotion I had to you, and now, for the sake of the Blessed Dust (Turbat Mubāraki) and the Encircling Place of the Most High Ones (Maṭāf Mala’ A`lā), I still have the utmost love (for you).[22]

O intelligent aunt! I swear by the Encircling Place of the Most High Ones (Maṭāf Mala’ A`lā) that in intelligence, cognition, reason, and understanding you have distinction and superiority over those who claim they are the pole/axis of the Merciful (Lord’s) world. The child that you had nurtured in your lap of love and affection had no similarity with his other brothers in any aspect and he wouldn’t accept any position.[23]

These words show that Khānum Buzurg had very close ties to Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā until they split up over the Bab’s successorship. The words also clearly show that Khānum Buzurg possessed a very high degree of intelligence. Furthermore, the child that `Abdu’l-Bahā is referring to who she had nurtured, is most probably Bahā’u’llāh himself because he is the one that “wouldn’t accept any positions.”[24] These statement show that the Aunt knew a fair amount about the internal affairs of Bahā’u’llāh and how he had been schooled.

There are at least five tablets from `Abdu’l-Bahā that have been addressed to her in a bid to persuade her to become a follower of Bahā’u’llāh.[25] In the longest tablet,[26] `Abdu’l-Bahā refers to her as kind (mihrabān), pure (ṭayyiba), honored (mukrama). It is in this tablet that he asks her to “awaken those who are asleep.”[27] In a response to this request, she sends him a letter with the title Ṭanbīh al-na’imīn[28] (Awakening the asleep) to refute his claims. It is in this letter that she explains how Bahā’u’llāh—her brother—was tutored:

The Mirzā (meaning Bahā’u’llāh), who was your father, from the beginning of his life to when he came of age—because the means were at hand and because of the gathering of the companions—was engrossed in studying and endeavored in homework[29]. He wouldn’t disengage from learning the rudiments for a moment. After studying the rudiments of Arabic and literature he inclined towards the science of philosophy (ḥikmat) and mysticism (`irfān) so that he might benefit from these. It was such that he would spend most of the day and night socializing with high statured philosophers and the gatherings of mystics and Sufis. When it was blown in Seraph’s Trumpet of Appearance (meaning when the Bāb made his claims), he (meaning Bahā’u’llāh) was a man who had seen most of the words and phrases of the mystics and philosophers and had heard and understood most of the signs of the appearance (of the Mahdi) . . . after returning from Badasht and after the Shaykh Ṭabarsī Fort war was over, he was engaged day and night in socializing with great Islamic scholars and followers of mysticism . . .[30]  

Both friend and foe, admit that Bahā’u’llāh received education and was engaged in studying and socializing with the scholars in his youth. The story doesn’t end here, even Bahā’u’llāh himself admits that he used to read Islamic books when he was a child:

This oppressed one in his childhood (ṭufūliyyat) saw the war of the tribe of Qurayẓa in a book that belonged to (was authored by) Mullā Bāqir Majlisī, and has been sad and sorrowful ever-since.[31] 

Bahā’u’llāh also says that he “has been sad and sorrowful ever-since” whilst `Abdul’-Bahā had claimed the exact opposite:

As all the people of Persia know, He had never studied in any school, nor had He associated with the `ulamā or the men of learning. The early part of His life was passed in the greatest happiness. His companions and associates were Persians of the highest rank, but not learned men.[32]

Bahā’u’llāh also unwittingly admits in the Īqān that he would read the books of other people:

For instance, a certain man,[33] reputed for his learning and attainments, and accounting himself as one of the pre-eminent leaders of his people, hath in his book denounced and vilified all the exponents of true learning. This is made abundantly clear by his explicit statements as well as by his allusions throughout his book. As We had frequently heard about him, We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples’ writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available, . . . We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice. The second time, We accidentally came upon the story of the “Mi’ráj”[34] . . . We noticed that he had enumerated some twenty or more sciences, the knowledge of which he considered to be essential for the comprehension of the mystery of the “Mi’ráj”.

These words clearly show that Bahā’u’llāh would read books to attain knowledge and would even refer to them to answer questions. This is while `Abdu’l-Bahā says the knowledge of divine figures is divine not acquired:

Since the Sanctified Realities, the supreme Manifestations of God, surround the essence and qualities of the creatures, transcend and contain existing realities and understand all things, therefore, Their knowledge is divine knowledge, and not acquired—that is to say, it is a holy bounty; it is a divine revelation.[35]

Furthermore, why would Bahā’u’llāh lie elsewhere and claim he had not read any books:

You know that we did not read the books of the people and were unaware of the sciences that they possessed.[36]

And why would the Baha’i administration distort these words when translating them to English:

Thou knowest full well that We perused not the books which men possess and We acquired not the learning current amongst them.[37]

Why would the word qara’a which simply means read be translated to peruse which means read or examine thoroughly or carefully?[38] Why would we “were unaware of the sciences that they possessed” be translated to “We acquired not the learning current amongst them”? Why does the Baha’i administration insist on presenting to the World a Bahā’u’llāh that isn’t the real Bahā’u’llāh?

When friend and foe and even Bahā’u’llāh himself admit that he had received education, had read the books, and had socialized with learned people, then why is there insistence by Baha’is that he was not schooled and his knowledge was Divine? The answer can be found in the Quran:

And before this you had not read any book and you do not write it by your right hand, for if it was so, the slanderers would have defamed you.[39]

Prophet Muḥammad, prior to becoming a Prophet, had received no schooling or education. It was for this fact that when he became Divinely Inspired by knowledge and wisdom he was not refuted as a liar who had learned the knowledge that he was uttering in school or had read it in books. It is because of this verse, that Baha’is try to display an illiterate Bāb and Bahā’u’llāh who had only attained knowledge through divine inspirations, whilst all evidence shows the contrary.

c- `Abdu’l-Bahā’s Education

`Abdu’l-Bahā himself had received schooling in Tehran and had then been educated at home by his father and family members. We will not delve into this matter. We will only present two sources that clearly show an alternative source for many of his political views and superhuman knowledge:

Today I was reading the events in Italy and Turkey. Another war has started and the blood of wretched people is spilled for the lowliest causes.[40]

I read in the newspaper that even in Italy people are protesting and shouting.[41]

As it has been made obvious, the source of the knowledge of these figures is rooted in many places:

1- Education they received from school and their teachers (publicly and privately).

2- What they were taught by family members.

3- Socializing with scholars, philosophers, and mystics and Sufis[42].

4- Reading the Quran, Islamic books, philosophical works, history[43] books, newspapers etc.

5- Reading books of literature and poetry.

Out of these five sources, we have already provided documents for four of them. The Baha’is have kindly provided us with enough documents regarding the fifth source. In a Farsi book titled Source of Poems in Baha’i Works[44]  Dr Vahid Rafati—former director of the Research Department of the Baha’i World Center—has provided many documents in three volumes and about a thousand pages on this topic. This is what he says in the introduction of the third volume:

In the holy Baha’i works there are numerous quotes from the verses of the previous Holy Books, hadiths, sayings of the Prophets and Imams, poems from Turk, Arab, and Persian poets, and Persian and Arabic proverbs. The reality is that for the first time in the history of Divine Religions, not only the sayings of the Prophets, but the desirable thoughts and exalted emotions and expressive opinions and beliefs of prominent Arab and Persian litterateurs and mystics and even slangy mottos peculiar to the common folk have been given the honor of becoming a part of the Words of God in this Godly cycle and become widely manifest in the works of the Interpreter (`Abdu’l-Bahā) of this great manifestation.[45]  

With all the errors and contradictions that we mentioned, which conclusion must we reach: that the poems and sayings of all the different groups of people that exist in the Baha’i corpus have been given the honor of becoming a part of the words of God; or the founders of this religion copied these words and presented them as words from God? Should we believe that this act is something performed for the first time in the history of Divine Religions or maybe divine religions are mostly devoid of quotations of this form? Dr. Rafati continues:

Whatever has been narrated from the works of the former people—whether concepts or exact quotes—in the Baha’i scripture, has made the [scripture] impressive and elegant and has phenomenally extended the meanings and concepts inscribed in the Baha’i scripture.[46]

If this is not a confession to the fact that the claimed elegance and the concepts found in Baha’i works have virtually been taken from other non-divine and divine sources, then what is it?

Dr Rafati continues:

Poetry can literarily decorate the words, make them more attractive and cause rapture, make the tone more appealing, creates a charming rhythm, and creates a sweeter echo in the perception of the soul.[47]

This is another confession that the claimed elegance and rhythm in Baha’i scripture is due to the borrowed poetry and literature therein. Rafati further admits that the poetry quoted in Baha’i literature—just like the verses of the Quran and hadith that we showed—have in many instances been quoted incorrectly. In some instances, the quoted verses have been reported in not one, but multiple incorrect forms![48]

Not only these, but apparently these figures were engrossed in obtaining knowledge from all worldly means possible. This is how one Baha’i author puts it:

There are many stories in the Bahá’í community about the supernatural access to information that Bahá’u’lláh, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, and Shoghi Effendi had. My point here is not to dispute these stories; merely to say these superhuman mechanisms do not seem to have been working at every instant. If they had, Bahā’u’llāh would not have read newspapers, as He suggests He may have done; ‘Abdu’l-Bahā and Shoghi Effendi would not have constantly written the friends asking for news; they would not have pumped visiting pilgrims for their knowledge and evaluation of places, peoples, cultures, and individuals; and Shoghi Effendi would not have had to do massive, monumental research in order to edit The Dawn-breakers or write God Passes By.[49]

He makes another point which further confirms that the knowledge possessed by these figures was not divine:

Further, when one examines the historical and cultural information contained in Bahā’u’llāh’s writings one notes that the knowledge to which He customarily refers is information that would have been available to Him via ordinary nineteenth-century means. Bahā’u’llāh never reveals a commentary on Confucian ethics or Buddhist cosmology, neither of which would have been readily available in nineteenth-century Persian or Arabic. He does not discuss Olmec hymns or Indo-European myths, none of which are available to even twentieth-century scholars, but which must have existed and which must have contained profound statements worthy of discussion, commentary, and praise by a Manifestation of God. Bahā’u’llāh revealed in pure Persian — much to the astonishment of the Zoroastrians — but never revealed in ancient Avestan, Iran’s ancestral tongue.[50]

If these figures had divine knowledge then why were all their talks and speeches based on sciences known in those days and information availalable to them? Amazingly, they didn’t even bother to double check these sciences with the divine tablets that they claimed they had and as we showed, they commited multiple mistakes in their scientific claims and citations of Holy scripture.

Pay attention to another quote from Adib Taherzadeh:

In Persia in the nineteenth century most people were illiterate, under the domination of the clergy whom they blindly obeyed. There were two educated classes, divines and government officials, plus a small number of others. Only the religious leaders and divines, however, could be called learned. They used to spend decades of their lives applying themselves to theology, Islamic law, jurisprudence, philosophy, medicine, astronomy and, above all, the Arabic language and its literature.[51]

Do these sciences ring a bell: theology, Islamic law, jurisprudence, philosophy, medicine, astronomy, and Arabic literature? These are mostly the same sciences that we showed Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā had made errors in. Why did they only speak about these sciences? Was it because the Holy Spirit had taught them these sciences and these sciences were revealed to them; or in contrary to their claim of not being schooled and not learning the sciences of those times, they had been schooled and tutored on the exact same customary sciences of Iran in the nineteenth century?

It will not be far-fetched if we claim that Bahā’u’llāh was referring to his own self and his own methods when he uttered these words:

Never trust narrations and news from anybody for it has been observed that a soul[52] that associated others with God and drank the blood of His loved ones—in the few years that we saw him—listened to all sciences and methods and then wrote all those down and presented them to the people and claimed to have virtues.[53]

And a final confession from Bahā’u’llāh as to where he obtained his divine knowledge from:

There is many an utterance of the mystic seers and doctors of former times which I have not mentioned here, since I mislike the copious citation from sayings of the past; for quotation from the words of others proveth acquired learning, not the divine bestowal. Even so much as We have quoted here is out of deference to the wont of men and after the manner of the friends. Further, such matters are beyond the scope of this epistle. Our unwillingness to recount their sayings is not from pride, rather is it a manifestation of wisdom and a demonstration of grace.[54]

Bahā’u’llāh confesses that quotation from the words of others proves acquired learning not divine bestowal. Ponder on the following:

• Why would Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā cite hundreds of lines of poetry in their writings without acknowledging the original composers?[55]
• Why would Bahā’u’llāh quote verbatim[56] many passages about philosophers from Muslim historians in the Tablet of Wisdom whilst claiming the tablet is a divine revelation from God?[57]
• Why would Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā refer countless times to the sayings of the learned men,[58] scientists,[59] and what has been written in the books?[60]
• Why would Bahā’u’llāh refer to books to gain knowledge.[61]

[1] Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 149.

[2] Stanwood Cobb, Memories of `Abdu’l-Bahā in In his Presence: Visits to `Abdu’l-Bahā, p. 60.

[3] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 25.

[4] Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Tārīkh ẓuhūr al-Ḥaqq, vol. 3, p. 263.

[5] Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Tārīkh ẓuhūr al-Ḥaqq, vol. 3, pp. 200 & 437.

[6] See Asad-Allāh Fāḍil Māzandarānī, Asrār al-āthār khuṣūṣī, vol. 1, p. 35 & vol. 2, pp. 61–62.

[7] Mīrzā Abu l-Faḍl Gulpāygānī and Mirza Mihdī Gulpāygānī, Kashf al-ghitā’ (Tashkent, 1919), pp. 56–57.

[8] J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 13.

[9] 3.6 grams.

[10] A form of calligraphy.

[11] Bāb, Arabic Bayān, unit 6, chapter 11.

[12] Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 75 (footnote).

[13] Nabīl Zarandī, The Dawn-Breakers: Nabīl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahā’ī Revelation, p. 76.

[14] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 25.

[15] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 27.

[16] J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 48. The author claims on page 23 that he directly heard these words from `Abdu’l-Bahā: “On one occasion `Abdu’l-Bahā, the eldest son of Bahā’u’llāh, related to the writer the following particulars about His Father’s early day.”

[17] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Bahā’ī World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), (US Bahā’ī Publishing Trust, 1976), p. 220.

[18] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Bahā’ī World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), p. 220.

[19] J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 23.

[20] Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahā’u’llāh, vol. 1, pp. 18–19.

[21] Adib Taherzadeh, The child of the covenant: A Study Guide to the Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Baha (Oxford: George Ronald, 2000), p. 19.

[22] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, p. 180.

[23] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, p. 183.

[24] “This occasioned surprise and comment. It was frequently said: ‘How is it that a young man of such keen intelligence and subtle perception does not seek lucrative appointments? As a matter of fact every position is open to him.’ This is a historical statement fully attested by the people of Īrān. He was most generous, giving abundantly to the poor. None who came to Him were turned away. The doors of His house were open to all. He always had many guests. This unbounded generosity was conducive to greater astonishment from the fact that He sought neither position nor prominence,” `Abdu’l-Bahā, Bahā’ī World Faith—Selected Writings of Bahā’u’llāh and `Abdu’l-Bahā (`Abdu’l-Bahā’s Section Only), pp. 220–221; “When Bahā’u’llāh was twenty-two years old, His father died, and the Government wished Him to succeed to His father’s position in the Ministry, as was customary in Persia, but Bahā’u’llāh did not accept the offer,” J. E. Esslemont, Bahā’u’llāh and the New Era, p. 24.

[25] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, pp. 162–186.

[26] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, pp. 170–186.

[27] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Makātīb (Egypt), vol. 2, p. 172.

[28] This document is the only non-Baha’i source used in this book. The sections that we are citing from this document bear very close resemblance to what we mentioned from Baha’i sources.

[29] The Farsi word used is mashgh which can also mean practicing calligraphy.

[30] `Izziye Khānum (Khānum Buzurg), Tanbīh al-nā’imīn, pp. 4–5.

[31] `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 136.

[32] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, p. 27.

[33] Hājī Mīrzā Karīm Khān.

[34] Ascent.

[35] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Some Answered Questions, pp. 157–158.

[36] Bahā’u’llāh, Majmū`ihī az alwāḥ jamāl aqdas abhā ki ba`d az kitāb Aqdas nāzil shude. (Langenhain [Germany]: Lajniyi Nashr Āthār Amrī Bi Lisān Fārsī wa `Arabī), p. 89.

[37] Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 149.

[38] Concise Oxford English Dictionary

[39] Quran 29:48.

[40] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, p. 87.

[41] `Abdu’l-Bahā, Khaṭābāt (Egypt), vol. 1, p. 205.

[42] This can also be seen in what is narrated from his days in Kurdistan.

[43] The latter can be found from incorrect verbatim quotes which we previously showed that he had claimed were divine revelations. See Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 144 (footnote).

[44] Vahid Rafati, Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī (Canada: Persian Institute for Baha’i Studies, 1990, 1995, and 2000).

[45] Vahid Rafati, Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī, p. 3.

[46] Vahid Rafati, Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī, p. 3.

[47] Vahid Rafati, Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī, p. 4.

[48] Vahid Rafati, Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī, pp. 5–6.

[49] Robert Stockman, Revelation, Interpretation, and Elucidation in the Baha’i Writings in Scripture and Revelation, ed. Moojan Momen (Oxford: George Ronald, 1997): http://bahai-library.com/stockman_revelation_interpretation_elucidation (retrieved 2/12/2014).

[50] Robert Stockman, Revelation, Interpretation, and Elucidation in the Baha’i Writings in Scripture and Revelation, ed. Moojan Momen (Oxford: George Ronald, 1997): http://bahai-library.com/stockman_revelation_interpretation_elucidation (retrieved 2/12/2014).

[51] Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahā’u’llāh, vol. 1, pp. 18–19.

[52] He is probably referring to Mīrzā Yaḥyā.

[53] `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī (Tehran: Mu’assisiyi Millī Maṭbū`āt Amrī, 128 B.), vol. 1, p. 42.

[54] Bahā’u’llāh, The Seven Valleys And the Four Valleys, p. 26.

[55] See Vahid Rafati’s Ma’ākhiz ash`ār dar āthār Bahā’ī.

[56] “In many of the passages that follow concerning the Greek philosophers, Bahā’u’llāh quotes verbatim from the works of such Muslim historians as Abu’l-Fatḥ-i-Shāhristānā (1076–1153 A.D.) and Imādu’d-Dān Abu’l-Fidā (1273–1331 A.D.),” Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 144 (footnote).

[57] Bahā’u’llāh, Tablets of Bahā’u’llāh Revealed After the Kitāb-i-Aqdas, p. 137.

[58] For instance, “The learned men, that have fixed at several thousand years the life of this earth . . .” Bahā’u’llāh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahā’u’llāh, p. 163.

[59] For instance, “For instance copper can transmute into Gold but earth/soil (turab) does not have this possibility in actualness (bil-fi`l). Since the scientists have already mentioned these subjects this servant did not like to mention it comprehensively,” `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 44.

[60] For instance, “Mention hath been made in certain books of a deluge which caused all that existed on earth,” Bahā’u’llāh, Gleanings from the Writings of Bahā’u’llāh, p. 174.

[61] For instance, “This oppressed one in his childhood (ṭufūliyyat) saw the war of the tribe of Qurayẓa in a book that belonged to (was authored by) Mullā Bāqir Majlisī, and has been sad and sorrowful ever-since,” `Abd al-Ḥamīd Ishrāq Khāwarī, Mā’idiy-i āsimānī, vol. 7, p. 136; “We purposed to read some of his works. Although We never felt disposed to peruse other peoples’ writings, yet as some had questioned Us concerning him, We felt it necessary to refer to his books, in order that We might answer Our questioners with knowledge and understanding. His works, in the Arabic tongue, were, however, not available . . . We sent for the book, and kept it with Us a few days. It was probably referred to twice,” Bahā’u’llāh, The Kitāb-i-Īqān, pp. 184–186.