NOTE G.
THE BÁB'S PILGRIMAGE TO MECCA AND RETURN TO
SHÍRÁZ.
As the accounts hitherto
published of the Báb's movements during the earlier period of his mission are
somewhat contradictory, it has seemed to me advisable to embody in the present
note all that I have been able to learn on this matter, together with the
conclusions which may be fairly deduced from the facts at present
available.
First of all let us enumerate
briefly the facts which seem to be sufficiently established by good
evidence.
(1) Mírzá 'Alí Muhammad,
afterwards the Báb, was born at Shíráz either on Muharram 1st A.H. 1236
(Oct. 9th, A.D. 1820), or on Muharram 1st 1235 (Oct. 20th, A.D. 1819),
most probably (for the reasons advanced in Note C, p. 221, supra) the
former.
[page 250]
(2) Whilst he was
still of tender age he lost his father, Seyyid Muhammad Rizá, and
was placed under the care of his maternal uncle, Mírzá Seyyid 'Alí
(supra, p. 2).
(3) On attaining years
of discretion (probably, as Kazem- Beg states at p. 335 of his first article,
when about fourteen or fifteen years old) he was sent to Bushire to help in his
uncle's business (supra, p. 2).
(4)
Disinclined by nature to the calling for which he was destined, he proceeded at
some time antecedent to the year A.H. 1259 (in which year Seyyid Kázim
died, see p. 238, supra) to Kerbelá, where he resided for some time (two
months, according to the Táríkh-i-Jadíd), occasionally attending the
lectures of Hájí Seyyid Kázim of Resht.
(5) In A.H. 1258 (A.D. 1842) when in his twenty-third year he married (B.
ii, p. 993). There is no positive evidence to show whether this marriage took
place at Shíráz or Kerbelá, but the former hypothesis appears more probable. By
this marriage he had (according to a statement made by
Subh-i-Ezel) one son named (if my memory serves me aright)
Ahmad, who died in infancy. The loss of this child is said to be alluded
to in the Commentary on the Súra of Joseph.
(6) On Jamádí-ul-Úlá 5th, A.H. 1260 (May 23rd, A.D. 1844) Mírzá 'Alí
Muhammad - then "twenty-four years of age and entering on his
twenty-fifth year" as Subh-i-Ezel states, or, in his own words,
"at an age which did not exceed five and twenty" (see p. 221, supra) -
first became clearly conscious of the divine mission laid upon him, and
(apparently without much delay) began to announce himself as the Báb. If by the
'manifestation' (~~~) we are to understand that period at which the views of the
young Seer first became definitely formulated rather than that at which they
were first made known to others, it is of course possible that some little while
elapsed between the 'manifestation' and its disclosure. This hypothesis is
supported by the narrative of the Táríkh-i-Jadíd, according to which
Mullá Huseyn of Bushraweyh (who was, as is unanimously admitted, and as
his titles 'the first Letter' and the 'First who believed' imply, the earliest
convert) came to Shíráz shortly after the death of Seyyid Kázim, visited
Mírzá 'Alí
[page 251]
Muhammad (with whom he had been
previously acquainted at Kerbelá), and, during this first visit, was surprised
by his former fellow-student demanding of him 'whether he saw in him the signs
which must characterize Seyyid Kázim's successor?' (see B. ii, pp.
902-903). On the other hand it is clear that not more than a month or two can
have elapsed between the time of the 'manifestation' and its disclosure,
firstly, because the beginning of the Bábí propaganda is placed by both
of the Musulmán historians in this same year of A.H. 1260; secondly,
because seven months after the 'manifestation' (as will be shown immediately)
the Báb, having laid the foundations of his religion at Shíráz, was away
performing the pilgrimage to Mecca.
We have
now reached the point to which this note specially refers - the Báb's pilgrimage
to Mecca. Concerning this Gobineau says simply (pp. 144-145), "Il fit trčs-jeune
le pčlerinage de la Mecque...Il est bien probable que ce fut dans la ville
sainte elle-męme qu'il se détacha absolument et définitivement de la foi du
Prophčte, et qu'il concut la pensée de ruiner cette foi pour mettre ŕ sa place
tout autre chose." Kazem-Beg says (i, p. 344), "Aprčs avoir semé bon gré mal gré
quelques mauvais grains dans cette terre de Chiraz si fertile en préjugés et en
superstitions, le Kerbčlaď Seďd Ali-Mohammed se rendit en pčlerinage ŕ la
Mecque." In this instance Kazem-Beg is undoubtedly right; it was after,
not before, the manifestation that the Báb went to Mecca. The
Násikhu't-Tawáríkh is clear on this point. "To proceed with the
narrative," it says, "when the Báb had laid the foundations of such an edifice,
he, according to his promise, set out for Mecca the venerable." The promise
alluded to in this passage is thus noticed on the preceding page: "Since
tradition affirms that His Highness the Ká'im (i.e. the Imám Mahdí) shall come
forth from Mecca the venerable, he (the Báb) used to tell his disciples that
next year he would announce his claim in Mecca and come forth with the
sword" A statement of Subh-i-Ezel's to the effect that the
manifestation was in Shíráz (not in Kerbelá, as stated in the Násikhu't-
Tawáríkh), that Mullá Huseyn first believed, and that soon after this
the Báb set out on the pilgrimage to Mecca, taken in conjunction with the above
testimony, seems to prove conclusively that the
[page 252]
pilgrimage-journey took place shortly after the
'manifestation.'
Now since, as we have seen,
the 'manifestation' was on Jamádí-ul-Úlá 5th A.H. 1260, and since the pilgrimage
must be performed in the month of Zi'l-Hijjé (the last month of
the Muhammadan year), it follows that Kazem-Beg's statement (i, p. 346) that "at
the end of the year 1260 (1844) he (i.e. the Báb) returned from Mecca to
Bandar-Bushire, where he was arrested in the month of October, by order of the
Nizámu'd- Dawla Huseyn Khán, governor of Shíráz," is
erroneous. For, according to the Násikhu't-Tawáríkh, the horsemen sent to
Bushire to arrest the Báb set out from Shíráz on Sha'bán 16th, and returned,
bringing with them their prisoner, on Ramazán 19th. The latter of these
dates is confirmed by the Rawzatu's- Safá; while the
Táríkh-i-Jadíd, after mentioning that the Báb's return to Bushire
occurred in A.H. 1261, says that he was brought before Huseyn Khán on the
eve of Ramazán 21st. Though neither of the Musulmán historians mentions
the year1, it is evident that A.H. 1261 is intended,
for in Ramazán A.H. 1260 the Báb had not yet started for Mecca. We may
therefore add to the facts previously stated about the Báb's earlier movements-
(7) That towards the end of the year A.H.
1260, and presumably in the month Zi'l-Ka'da of that year
(November, A.D. 1844), he set out from Shíráz for Mecca.
(8) That he remained at Mecca at any rate till Zi'l-
Hijjé 13th A.H. 1260 (December 24th, A.D. 1844) for the completion of the
rites incumbent on pilgrims.
(9) That he
returned by sea some time during the first half of the year A.H. 1261 (A.D.
1845) to Bushire, whence he sent missionaries to Shíráz, he himself remaining at
the former place. (See supra, p. 5.)
(10) That on Sha'bán 2nd A.H. 1261 (August 6th, A.D. 1845) strong measures were
adopted by Huseyn Khán against these missionaries. (See supra, pp.
5-6.)
(11) That on Sha'bán 16th A.H. 1261
(August 20th, 1845) horsemen were sent from Shíráz to arrest the Báb at
Bushire.
1 Compare the remarks on pp. 186-187,
supra.
[page 253]
(12) That these
horsemen re-entered Shíráz with their prisoner on Ramazán 19th A.H. 1261
(September 21st, A.D. 1845), and that on that same day (according to the
Rawzatu's- Safá), or on the evening of the following
day (according to the Táríkh-i-Jadíd), the Báb was brought before
Huseyn Khán.
There is not at present
sufficient evidence to determine definitely the following points:-
(1) At what age the Báb lost his father.
(2) At what age he first left Shíráz and went to
Bushire.
(3) How long he remained at Bushire
engaged in commerce.
(4) When he went to
Kerbelá, how long he remained there, and whether he married before, during, or
after his sojourn there.
(5) Whether he
returned directly to Bushire after performing the rites of the pilgrimage at
Mecca and visiting Medína, or whether he remained some few months in
Arabia.
The Báb was accompanied on the
pilgrimage by Hájí Muhammad 'Alí Bárfurúshí (Kazem-Beg, i, p. 344, note;
confirmed by Subh-i-Ezel), and was (according to
Subh-i-Ezel) joined later by Hájí Suleymán Khán.
Back to Index