The Sixth Juzʾ of the Commentary on Khalʿ al-Naʿlayn
[The sixth part of the Commentary on the Book of the Removal of the Two Sandals and the Derivation of Light from the Place of the Two Feet]
In the Name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate The Shaykh Ibn Qasī—may God have mercy on him—said:
upon an image of life», {The Imām, the firmly-rooted exegete, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn al-ʿArabī—may God be pleased with him and may He please him—said:} His saying is not sound; rather it is in what is represented for Him, for God represents matters to whomever He wills among His servants according to whatever He wills, or He gives him a state of the time. And others have said that it is upon other than that form, and He restricted it to a form of another [thing] as well upon the measure of what is represented for Him. So the conjecture concerning it is that it is verified in the representation, not in the thing represented, because the matter in his self is as it is represented for him, and I do not suppose this man except [in] all that he mentioned among the resemblances and provocations—that he believes them in his self as it is represented for him, and he attains for it a number of cognitions of the Real from two aspects. The first: his belief that the thing represented is upon the form of this belief in the representation, and he does not know that it is a representation—he does not know what is intended by that representation for him, so the aspect is hidden from him, and the Real which was sought from him in that representation—and this is difficult indeed—and perhaps he believes in every one who opposes him in that—that he is in the theophanic self-disclosure of the representation, and that He alone is the one who apprehended the matter as it is in his self, then he takes up speaking about the existence of that representation which is represented for him and its details and its layers from where a form of the representation [appears], and he believes that it is the very thing represented, ·184 and the likeness that the Real manifests to His creation [138b] is not from any matter—rather, that is for a specific aspect by which the Real intends its definition so that one might pay attention, or consider, or come to know, and thus what is intended from it may escape him. So let him be careful, the one who unveils, from this discourse, for it is utterly perilous, and many of creation have perished in it.
Among them is this man, for everything he mentioned in this discourse, most of it is not sound, for it is what describes these levels and details in Hell only insofar as they are in his view in the form of a living being, just as if it were in the form of a cow as it is according to someone else, and the form of a fig, had he described it with other matters.
Its reality is the reality of the cow, and likewise other than it and other than it, and the matter in his soul in most of its aspects is contrary to that. For had the divine presence that he saw in it what was severed known to be the form of a living being, and had he known that the Real has a likeness in this form for any matter that He takes from it, as the Truthful One did— the Greatest, it is said of him in his expression together with his gnosis of it that it is a matter represented, not a reality: "I was right and I erred." This is said of him in some of its aspects when what is intended for him by that likeness—so how if one claimed that the matter in his soul is the same as that likeness, and the source of that likeness were absent from him that it is a likeness? And God guides us and you, and let us not be veiled from the gnosis of what is intended by it as law, not as intellect, for it is the patron of that, and the one capable of it.
Then he took to mentioning levels of Hell and what God prepared in it from what that likeness gives from all of its aspects, upon the basis that the matter in his soul is that, with speech that is clear, manifesting a meaning that does not need explanation. But it narrates what is unsound in a sound manner and other than that, so we left the speech upon it [139a] because we are not people of verification who narrate from it from the aspect of what is attributed to it. For perhaps we would explain nothing, and its likeness would be what expresses the lack of existence, so the speech upon it would be left; because it is what he claimed as a spiritual question that is obscure, the observer needs its elucidation, so we left the discourse with his speech upon what is between him and the individual specificities.
The Firdawsiyyāt: And it is the Second Ṣaḥīfa Al-Firdaws: the garden. There is not in the sermon of this ṣaḥīfa a secret (sirr) that speaks upon it. He said: "And these Firdawsiyyāt, all of them are Suryāniyyāt" (Syriac matters), so he made them gnoses (maʿārif) specified by what he attributed to them, so it is not fitting that one place in them anything of what he gives other than this Syriac lineage, from the Hebrew, the Nabataean, the Arabic, and other than that, except that he contradicted what he pointed to, that these Firdawsiyyāt are all Suryāniyyāt, and he has made Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace — among them the foremost of their group, and he is the possessor of the tongue of gathering and elucidation, then he said: "and ascensions (maʿārij) are luminosities" (nūrāniyyāt) with what is in them of degrees unto the ʿilliyyīn, and he made them luminosities, meaning that they are manifestations in hearts and subtleties.
Commentary He said: "And know that the Garden is of eight gates, the realities of the lights of the eight messengers: Ādam, Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsā, Dāwūd, Sulaymān, ʿĪsā, and Muḥammad, upon them all be prayers and peace," {the Imām the commentator said:} [139b] If he intended by the Garden the one known to us, the one mentioned in the Qurʾān — that it has eight gates, the one mentioned in the authentic reports — then he did not hit the mark in that the eight gates are the realities of their lights, nor the messengers, and if he intended his Garden which was assigned to him, then it is possible that there is assigned to him in the gates of the Garden the realities of what he mentioned among the messengers, then he made Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace — from their totality, and he admitted him into the Firdawsiyyāt, and since all of them were Suryāniyyāt, he has made Muḥammad — upon him be peace — a follower, and he says — upon him be peace —: ·186 "Had Moses been alive, he would have had no capacity but to follow me," and he said regarding Jesus — peace be upon him —: "He rules, when he descends, by our sharīʿa," so Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace — does not enter into the spiritual station of one who was a follower not followed, a ruler not ruled, nor especially in the hereafter, for he is the master, and he is the one foremost in the resurrection, just as Adam was the foremost in this world. So from every aspect he would not be a follower.
And he made this man a follower in this place, for he said: "All of them are courses," and "all" requires encompassment and universality, except that there be conjoined with it a state that excludes it from that. So it was that the first is that they be all Arab courses of Muḥammad's bringing-into-being — peace be upon him — within them, and the totality of them is his likeness to him. So what is correct from the standpoint of the known paradise, and from the standpoint of his paradise, his likeness to him — so what is correct in this, and not in this, and he mentioned others that the eight gates are the realities of Adam, Noah, and Abraham.
And Aaron and Joseph and Idrīs and Moses and Jesus — peace be upon them —, and he is nearer to the Real than him, [140a] and that Jesus — peace be upon him — appears in gates from among these gates in times. The master of this discourse, when he made them courses, was more fitting; because he did not enter therein Muḥammad, nor Shuʿayb, nor Ṣāliḥ, nor Hūd, and the return to this discourse is more fitting inasmuch as what is unveiled for him from the paradises is only what is special to him, for he speaks about his state, not about what the command is.
Upon him in his self, the likeness of what it is — may God's good pleasure be upon it — for the paradise, not by looking to the state of anyone. And the possessor of the treasury of the fire, in the self of the command, not by looking to anyone, and the truthful, the lawgiver, called the gate of repentance the gate of the fasters, and what he mentioned in the gates of paradise is that they are for one of the realities of the prophets, ·187 For God knows best what He considered in that regarding the right of His own self. It is not fitting for the rational person to occupy himself with the states of creation in their souls, for the rational one only hastens to explain what the matters are in regard to him in their selves, for this is the fortune of the scholars, the firmly-rooted, the people of tasting and others among them, for it is a matter that encompasses all—its benefit and standing upon it. And with this came the books sent down and the messengers.
Text Then he said: "And the gates of the divine presence of the Holy are eight gates, the realities of the lights of the retinue of the eight, upon them be peace," then he said: and the gates of the divine presence are the realities of the gates of the Garden, just as the retinue of the eight are "the realities of the messengers, the eight," for this man has made the gates of the divine presence the realities of the gates of the Garden, and the realities of eight gates of the Garden the realities of the lights of the eight retinue of the messengers, and he made the gates of the divine presence the realities of the lights of the retinue, and others who are [↓140] of his path and greater than him have said so, and he is Ibn Masarra al-Jabalī (d. 319 AH/931 CE), and he is
Commentary greater than him in spiritual state and knowledge, and he possesses the great tongue in letters and other than them—may God have mercy on him—for he said regarding the retinue of the eight: they are Ādam, Ibrāhīm, Muḥammad, Isrāfīl, Mīkāʾīl, Jibrāʾīl, Mālik, and Riḍwān, and he made the Throne an expression for sovereignty, not for the couch. Then he divided the kingdom into the division of a divine presence, and he said: Ādam and Isrāfīl for the forms, Jibrīl and Muḥammad for the spirits, Mīkāʾīl and Ibrāhīm for the provisions, Mālik and Riḍwān for the promise and the threat.
And what is in the dominion of God Most High is of a rank additional to this, and since Ādam and Ibrāhīm and Muḥammad—upon them be peace—are from among the retinue of the eight, then how would they be among them while they are the retinue, the realities of their selves from the standpoint that they are messengers, and a thing is not added to its own self. And the recourse is to Ibn Masarra as more worthy, for he is more in accord; for he spoke about what the matter is in his own self, ·188 If the Throne was in the sense of dominion, and if it was in the sense of the throne, then it is another matter, and he may apply it. The legislator uses the two senses, and neither goes far, and upon both usages what Ibn Qasī said is not what is as a whole, a single one, and rather he considered regarding these prophets matters that, by looking at them, do not necessitate for us inquiry about them, for they do not yield knowledge at all.
Text Then he said: , one imagined that this man thought that Sulaymān was singled out with the jinn, and it is the first of his special qualities, given what he said: [38:35], and rather Sulaymān – peace be upon him – [141a] was favored in the totality, not in the singular, and by the subjugation of the command, not the subjugation of the origin, for indeed God Most High says: [45:13]. He intended the world of the human being, and Sulaymān was singled out – peace be upon him – with the subjugation of the command, in what was subjected to him from the natural world as Sulaymān was singled out with. No one other than Sulaymān from among that took one of this world, nor indeed the names, for indeed the names govern over them, and many among people who has knowledge of the names, by which is subjected from them whatever he wills, and likewise the companions of aspiration in the rest of the beings. He said, Most High: [38:36], and He said regarding the jinn: [34:12], and He did not make their subjugation the subjugation of the wind, for indeed whoever whose life is firm, there is no strength in the avoidance, the strength of one whose life appeared, ·189 Do you not see that the animal disobeys you when you demand something of it and it is not accompanied by the divine permission, whereas plants, minerals, air, water, fire, and earth are not like that? The reason for that is that the confrontation of wills requires the divine permission, and this is not so for any category other than the animal one. If there is volition in something, no image of obedience can be conceived from it unless it has a life that faith knows and perceives.
The unveiling that is specific to the sensory faculty of sight and hearing, in the manner that is other than the customary for humankind—this consideration made it so that Sulaymān had the garden of the jinn, not because he had knowledge or unveiling, and this is not far-fetched in possibility.
Then in his discourse on this there is a contradiction of what he originally established, for he placed Sulaymān over a gate [141b] among the gates of the eight gates that are a subset of all the gates and the gardens.
On the contrary, upon their variation, the garden of the jinn is a portion of a garden among these gardens. Rather, they have in every garden among these gardens a share and a portion, so it is not correct to say that he is at the gate of the garden of the jinn. It is not theirs that the gate is the more general one; rather, among the gates there are gates for the jinn, among which is a gate from among the gates of the gates—so it is not that he is at the general gate. For he had indeed said this—the Shaykh—after this: "The Garden is eightfold, of walls, upon eight gardens," and this in his view is as though it were a method of consideration and analogy, not a method of verification, for he said following this: "Just as there are among the laws subsidiary laws, and among the prophetic dispositions prophetic dispositions," pointing by all of this to the interpenetration of works and the interpenetration of rulings. If the later Sharīʿa establishes the rulings of the earlier Sharīʿa, and it is known ·190 that the revealed laws are mutually interpenetrating, so He made the gardens analogous to them, and the matter is not like that, nor does he have knowledge of the ordering of the Garden at all, but he has knowledge of the image of its bliss—a knowledge of a verifying one pure of any admixture therein according to the people of tasting (dhawq). As for the ordering of the waystation and the degrees, he has no knowledge of that at all.
Then it is among what indicates that he spoke in the language of analogy and consideration, his saying after this:
the first entering of the Garden is a vision of the reality of the fear of the two prostrations of the tahiyyah prayer, the two of them, as the Messenger of God—may God bless him and grant him peace—used to perform them at his departure from his journey before entering his house and his settling therein» to the end of the section. There is no doubt [142a] that he indeed intended for us to speak about the states of the prophets among us, and that we do not know of their states with their Lord except what reports reach us about them, and what came regarding that concerning him—upon him be peace—is from a Book, not a sound report, and not a sound chain, then the shaykh mentioned that the bliss of the Garden is not about need nor harm, and that is in the extreme of correctness. Then he mentioned at the end of the section only the seeking of the vision, and he made it about need.
Then he said:
is connected to relationship by the ruling of volition», so know first that it is not for the firmly established in that abode, which is the locus of divine courtesy and the unveiling (kashf) of realities, to seek the vision from his own soul, but rather by the permission of his Lord. However, does that occur in that by permission or not? This is another question. The second: that they remember the promise by the vision that the report came about in the Book and the Sunnah, and so perhaps they seek the promise out of longing for the vision, because the human being was created hasty, and especially for the likes of this noble the most exalted, for the seeking of increase of bliss in the state is an occupation and a turning away from the bliss of the state, ·191 and the realities there are deficiencies, and their attachment to things for their coming-into-being is the attachment of "kun," and the attachment of "kun" is not from compulsion, but rather from prior determination, and the knowledge of the time of the vision for them is known, so it is not imagined from them that there is a prior attainment to that through seeking, and the vision does not enter under "kun," and for them is the more complete knowledge, so they await the truthful promise, the generous one, [33:4].
Text Then he said: "And indeed we have known by necessity that our appetites in it are sanctified from where they are not
in need," and he mentioned speech up to the end of the section on the description [142b] of the bliss of the Garden in every what is needed, and he mentioned it among it with speech that it is not possible for me nor for anyone else to explain it more beautifully than that, nor to describe it with the loftiest of what he described it with—of beauty of expression, gentleness of allusion, and verification of report about the matter—with what is established upon it as verified, which no one among the people of tasting from the predecessors nor those who came later contests, and there is no proof for the scholars of formal learning against rejecting anything of it except whoever opposed or denied it.
As for what he said from other than evidence for its falsification, and nor proof—so it suffices us as the weight of speech upon it; since we do not come in that with anything better than what he brought, with its length and prolixity, but it is good and pleasant of taste, and if we were capable of abbreviating it, we would not; for there is no benefit in it, since we are concise, [16:9].
Section The Shaykh said: "And know that the one who hears of the falling of jealousy in that abode and the rising of envy between the neighbors is only from where the celestial spheres and the horizons."
He says: The undoing of every noble quality and its counterpart is the distillation of what he mentioned in this chapter regarding what leads to the removal of envy and jealousy. For the origination of the afterlife, even if it were natural, there is nothing between it and the origination of this world except the name. The origination of the worldly is in the ruling toward the power of the origination of the otherworldly in the predominance of the spiritual over the corporeal. And that has become manifest in al-Khaḍir, and Qaḍīb al-Bān (d. 573 AH/1177 CE), and others. So know that the origination of the afterlife overcomes it; upon it is the spiritual power, for it has subtle veils, and it is with every fine thing [143a] among them, by its very essence, along with its formation upon the course of its dominion. Its distinction spreads and is made manifest upon the individuals of whoever is in his dominion, from every noble woman, child, servant, and likewise it spreads to every father, mother, relative, and companion, and beloved. So all who desire to be blessed by it, to see it and speak to it—every noble quality in his dominion, you do not see any obstacle or impediment, and likewise his neighbor, his intimate friend, his father, his mother, his child, and his kin.
Then indeed every noble quality—in its essence, the dominion becomes entirely hers, a mirror for her. So you do not see in it except her image and her beauty and her perfection. It is not from her master, and it rises above the jealousy from the hearts of the noble ones, and envy rises between the ignoble ones. This is the pure essence of its cause having already been indicated to it. And the man has laid out the speech in it simply and well, needing nothing with it toward an explanation. Rather, it is a distillation of the expression with fulfillment of meaning.
Then indeed he included in this chapter that the Garden is one hundred degrees, one hundred degrees of mercy, and one hundred of a divine name, and one hundred degrees of power in totality. Then each individual part from the individuals of this one hundred is parts, and he verified precisely unto what none knows except God, and everything he spoke about therein is excellent except the one hundred of the name, ·193 For indeed he verified speech concerning them as is fitting, then he mentioned speech that is clarifying, detailed, not needing any explanation, from which some is accepted and some is not accepted. And likewise he spoke regarding the rulings of the divine names in the creation of the human world and other than it, and what each divine name grants of the divine aspect in it, and that each name is comprehensive of the names. And the explanation thereof has preceded in the opening of the Book, and that each name has no alternative in its state from a messenger who sends it, [143b] and a law he lays down. Then he expanded speech regarding the name that engendered Muḥammad — upon him be peace — and what He gave it of rulings, and made for each divine name a manifest ruling, and it is an inner lordly name. And the explanation of our speech has preceded regarding this concerning the names of the names, and that for this inner name there is a ruling in the world of the celestial dominion, the spiritual and the angelic realm, just as for the manifest name there is a ruling in the manifest kingdom.
Then he mentioned speech regarding the superiority between creation, and made Jibrīl a creature from the name of God the inward, and that there is no creature in the world of the angelic realm and the unseen more virtuous in God's sight, nor mightier, nor more exalted than Jibrīl, and he made Muḥammad — upon him be peace — a creature from the name of God the manifest, and that Jibrīl was created for the sake of Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace —, and that everything in his world is more virtuous. This shaykh spoke according to what occurred to him, not according to what the matter is in itself.
And he indicated also that there is no differentiation except in genus, then he indicated the superiority of Muḥammad over Jibrīl — upon them both be peace —, and it is not of genus, then he judged regarding the differentiation when he said: ·194 "There is not in the horizon of the name by which He brought Adam into existence one more excellent than Adam," and likewise in the Nūḥ of Muḥammad – upon them be peace –, then when He made it that there is not in outward existence one more excellent than Muḥammad – upon him be peace –, he said: "and in it is an outward aspect of sovereignty that is not dispensed with," and when He made it that there is not in inward existence one more excellent than Gabriel – upon him be peace – he said: "and in it is an inward aspect of the secret that is not dispensed with in anything."
Then he said: "Indeed, just as the angels prostrated to the Adamic form on account of the outward name, so they were not of its kind, for the Adamic form is not of the kind of the angels on account of the inward name, and its knowledge, for it is not of their kind," [144a] and this is a man who distinguished between the creation of the human being and did not know the ranks of spirits, and his aspiration made him place the differential advantage before God in resemblances. He placed in it regarding the reality of persons and names that each of the two has an outward and an inward, and so when the authority was for the outward, the inward served it, and when the authority was for the inward, the outward served it, and the person is one, and likewise regarding the names.
Then he said: "And by what it is — the Garden has eight gates in eight walls upon eight gardens of eight names," then he mentioned speech regarding the kind of what preceded regarding the bliss of the Garden, which is understood as the meaning, and the individual particularities have come to an end.
The Third Epistle: The Muḥammadiyyāt
In the name of God, the All-Merciful, the Most Merciful Then he mentioned that he had previously presented discourse on such and such and did not mention it, for it was repeated, until he said: And the mutually varying. He intends that by which creation stood and was governed upon it through lineage—not lineage and not creation—because if he had intended that it would lead to the overturning of realities, and realities do not overturn. And for this reason he said: , for he has informed that every essence, from what he mentioned, in its domain is adjacent to other than it, as he said: [39:5], and there is no doubt nor hidden matter that the inward is not the very same as the outward, and that the outward is a covering over the inward, and the veil is not the very same as the veiled.
Then he said: , [144b] but if he intended from the standpoint that the subtlety of such and such is itself a subtlety of such and such, then it is not correct. And if the subtlety is personal—of an individual—and if its gathering is the human gathering, Then he said: like the heavens and other than them in the virtue of some of them over some through the one upon whom it was in the state of the subtlety, ·196 Then he said: "and the extraction of a contrary from a contrary," he means: [30:19], so this is from lineage; because he has indeed said: "and lower by a thing and higher by a thing," so this is from lineage; because a thing is higher in relation to what is beneath it, and lower in relation to what is above it, "and darker by a thing," he means the world of humans and jinn and what resembles that, and if the two arkān were gathered between them, ٥ for humans, the earthly element predominated over them, and if there was in them something remaining of the elements, they were attributed to the predominant over their origination, and that is earth, so they were as if darker, and likewise the jinn predominated over their origination the element of fire, and they were attributed to it, and if there was in them something of all the elements, then when fire was attributed to the jinn to what is in humans of fire, the jinn was more luminous, and when earth was attributed to the jinn to what is in humans of fire, the jinn was ١٠ "and more luminous by a thing," and the like of this is measured upon it with regard to accidental and essential matters, so whatever was from that by accident, its removal is possible along with the subsistence of the station from which it is removed, and if it was by the essence, its removal is the removal of the station from it, this is the verification regarding things according the knowers.
Then he said, when he mentioned the distinction and the extraction and other than it, he said: "and the root is one," if he intended that the root is found for every single one, that is: from it issued the totality, then it is correct, and if [145a] he intended that the root ١٥ is one, he means from the perspective that the totality before its differentiation is the reality and the unity of gathering, then it is also correct, and if he intended that the very contrary is itself its contrary, then it is precluded as a single proposition, ·197 And if he intended by "the origin" (al-aṣl) the single thing posited, then it has indeed been said of it, and concerning it there is disagreement, as they said that the origin of the elements (usṭuqussāt) is the air, and whatever was subtilized from it was fire, and whatever was condensed from it was water, then a condensation of the water made it earth. So the origin was the air, and it has been said regarding each one of these elements that it is the origin by the ruling of what we have mentioned, and a statement of a sixth person that there is a fifth thing that gathers them, and a statement of a seventh person that none of them is an origin in the existence of the other, nor is there a fifth reality, and if he intended this, then the man's statement: "the origin is one" is like what some of these people also intended, and it is possible that if it were the man's intention to make clear after this what he intended, he would have stated it.
So this man said after his statement regarding the divergent views on extraction, creative origination (al-fatq), and other than that:
Text "And the origin is one, arrived at in the unseen, and differentiated in the witnessed." There is no doubt and no concealment that the posited thing is not except between two things, and they are two conjoined things in their realities regarding their locus, like color and the scent and taste in a single locus, and if they were two conjoined things, like an apple, then each one of these realities has been distinguished from its companion, and if what gathers them is the locus, the one that does not divide, or they are two conjoined things by the ruling of the relation that pertains to the genus and its resemblance, [145b] and his statement: "arrived at" (waṣala) suffices him for this, for the one (al-wāḥid) that is most specific does not have the sense annulled from the separation between them, and knowledge testifies that one of the two components of what is conjoined is not the other, and likewise in knowledge the two conjoined things are not one, so it would be ignorance, except for the absolute unity (aḥadiyya) of genus and its resemblance. It is said that it has arrived, but for our gnosis of it through tasting (dhawq), we needed to mention what we have mentioned.
And his saying: may mean the witnessing of every thing for its essence in the state of its excess and its arrival, for he has established entities that are diverse, and if he meant in what we witness, and he meant by the arrival that it is a specific entity, he does not mean the unity of genus nor the addition to what issued from it, for it is impossible.
Then he said after that: , and this is a matter of addition, for it is necessary to distinguish the nearness of someone and the distance of someone, and if he meant by nearness the spiritual realities that belong to these outward manifestations due to their departure in some schools from spatial distance, then it has been said of it. And as for distance, he does not mean by it the meaning originally, because he said in the outward, so he does not mean except the distance of spatial distance, and it is as if he is saying: the matter is split in the outward, joined in the inner.
Then he said regarding these things: , he means that it is 10 present. He said: , and he made wisdom a ruling wisdom, not the ruling, and in it in the way of the law is what is in it, and the ruling was more fitting in this matter from the perspective of wisdom, because it is nearer to faith, and to the ruling he returned at the end of the matter, but after the passing of spirits in great number.
Then he said: , he is saying: the matter returns [146a] as it was to its origin.
He said: , Then he said: meaning: without any claimant; because that abode is not a place of claim, and so for this he said: , and his saying: means that it does not cease — this is its form without alteration, and his saying: He means the judgment of the attribute, not the judgment of the essence; because the judgment of the essence which is absolute unity has no trace in engendered being, nor does it obtain in it. Rather, theophanic self-disclosure appears in it not at all, but singularity is the governing principle, for the first of the individual units of the three is not the one. And since the judgment was everlasting, and it is the continuance of the numbers of times, the extension is proportionate to the number of the everlasting. So the singular was the singular and the pair was not, the first being its limit; because it requires — and it is only from three realities, and the three are the rank of the singular. For this reason he said: , and he did not say: the one. He said, exalted is He: [16:40], so it came with three in number, and it is His essence and His command and His will; because they are two attributions that necessarily belong to them from what is attributed to Him — His essence. So all existents were from His command and His will, the two things attributed to Him.
That is why scholars in the composition of proofs for the attainment of knowledge of the sought employ their premises, those that refer back to three, and on this condition the conclusion is valid. And we had been observing what was indicated by it in verification and congruence at the opening of the lock, when this divine reality was unveiled to us in a year of some-and-eighty and five hundred, and we said: [→146] ·200 When the reality of the one who is exalted appeared before the visitor of the abode for the two eyes, And the lowest joins with the highest, and it swallows the distances with nearness, You saw the whole individually, not to be excluded, and as a letter encompassing, comprising the meanings.
And after the visiting, every letter returns to its meaning in the abode of the two gardens.
For this he said, "the one who has faith" in the meanings, because the servant in the verification is a second.
God Most High said: "I have divided the prayer between Myself and My servant; half of it is for Me and half of it is for My servant." The ḥadīth, and it is sound. Then this man mentioned speech that had preceded and its meaning—from that, that the spirit of holiness (rūḥ al-quds), the one standing by the reality of the spirits, the outgoing of the flowing one with the extension of life in the tablets of the spirits—it is only the Muḥammadan spirit, and the existent being, the first with him—exalted is His majesty—upon the carpet of holiness (al-sarīr al-qudsī). What occurred in this speech is one of two things: either it is represented as an isthmus (barzakh) as he sees it, the sleeper in sleep, and so Muḥammad—peace be upon him—saw, sitting with the Real upon the Throne, or the report: the subject placed in some narrations of the Night Journey, that God Most High seated Muḥammad—peace be upon him— with Him upon the Throne. For the predominant concerning the speech of this shaykh is that he heard a report.
It has been narrated: one should not know its soundness from its corruption, so he makes it a command that is verified and builds upon it what he wills from the considerations and measurements, and the foundation is corrupt and it is weak, so all that he builds upon it is invalidated.
And we have paused from his speech upon the like of this abundantly.
Then he said after this: Know that whenever the mention of the spirit of holiness (al-rūḥ al-qudsī) comes, wherever it comes from the books [147a] of God the sent down, and the surroundings of the sanctified Real, what is intended by it is this primordial Aḥmadic reality, and the lofty Aḥmadic reality.
This man intends by this authority the report that is narrated: "I am the first of the prophets in creation, and the last of them in mission, and I was a prophet while Adam was between water and clay," so he made what he mentioned to be the interpretation of this report, and his saying: "al-Aḥmadiyya" is an ascription to [61:6].
Then this man said: "and by the lordly wisdom what the circle revolves and meets at two ends of a ring" ⁵ of this world and the hereafter," he intends that God, exalted be He, made for Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace — the authority in the spiritual realm before everything and placed him with Him upon His throne for the merit of things, then He created the world and separated him and ranked him until he found the body of Muḥammad — upon him be peace — and sent him, and he was the last in mission and the body of earth, and this — all of it — is from the circumference of the circle before the meeting of its two ends, so when it is in the hereafter, the authority will be his on the Day of the Rising, then the Real, exalted be He, will seat him with Him upon His Throne for the merit ¹⁰ of the cosmic realm — bodies and spirits — just as He placed him with Him for the merit of things, first as spirits, and this is his saying: "and it meets"
at two ends of the ring of the circle," because he said after this discourse: "so everything returns to its reality, and every first returns to the state of his authority, and He seats him with Him, exalted be His countenance, upon the holy throne on the Day of the Rising for the merit of the cosmic realm just as he was with Him by His name the treasured for the merit of things," and for this we explained it in existence, the first being in the spiritual realm; because it is by His name the treasured.
¹⁵ Then he said: " [7:29], and by what you were, you shall be, a sunna and custom, [3:147]
and a wisdom, a testimony to a wisdom, and if you differentiate, there is no god but God, Muḥammad is the Messenger of God, in my beginning and my concluding."
{The Imām, the commentator — may God be pleased with him — said:} What is the difference between "there is no god but God, Muḥammad is the Messenger of God," and between "there is no god but God, Nūḥ is the Messenger of God," and "Mūsā is the Messenger of God," and "ʿĪsā is the Messenger of God," when every one who was sent is a Messenger of God? And from where is he from His saying, exalted be He, when He mentioned the prophets and the messengers: [6:90], and we were commanded to follow the creed of our father Ibrāhīm
Commentary the one who named us Muslims from before, just as the messengers that preceded bore witness, and the prophethood of Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace —, and his going forth likewise. Muḥammad — upon him be peace — witnessed the message of the messengers before him, and we were commanded to have faith in them in the Book and the Sunna, for it has been reported as a narration that God will seat Muḥammad — upon him be peace — with Him upon His Throne on the Day of Resurrection, and upon this report he spoke, and the sovereignty that he mentioned on the Day of Resurrection, he made clear its loci, and it is the opening of the gate of intercession therein. He was the master of people on the Day of Resurrection, because he said in the authentic ḥadīth when he mentioned his sovereignty: "Do you not know by what that is?", and he mentioned the ḥadīth of intercession, and he did not say: for gathering between the first and the last, and when the legislator or the speaker erred, that is, his speech was as his speech, then he made clear what he intended. For just as the spirit of holiness, the real Muḥammadan reality, and its color is likewise the supreme pen, the Adamic reality, and the preserved tablet is its color, and for that reason they said that it does not learn from the pen, nor memorize from the tablet, and by it the firmly-grounded said [148a] from the standpoint that it derives from that Nūric reality and the Sūryānic reality and the hidden reality, and to this Adamic reality the indication is by his saying — may God bless him and grant him peace —: "The first thing God created is the pen" — the ḥadīth, ·203 and "the first thing God created is the intellect," and we say: these reports established for each one of them primacy from an aspect that does not contradict the other, meaning between Adam and Muḥammad — peace be upon them both.
Then he said: "The traditions do not contradict in the view of those firmly rooted, and if they contradict in the understandings of those who fall short," and there is no doubt and no concealment in the view of every human being who falls short or is not falling short, that the traditions, when they are rulings, may contradict, and when they are reports they do not contradict in their totality as a single whole, and no one among people has said that the reports contradict; because the report of God Most High is truthful in its entirety, and if the rulings, even if they were reports, have contradicted, then some of them abrogate others for the sake of veracity of the particular ruling. For indeed it is ruled upon the thing by detailed analysis up to the time when then it is ruled upon it with abrogation, and contradiction does not occur in the view of the scholars except in the two reports when the date is unknown. The temporal [factor] together with equality in the soundness of the chains of transmission and the meanings and the principles — so that no preponderance occurs — is for one of the two reports originally by virtue of what is other than the date. So this man does not need this matter of commanding, and it is mighty, and none grasps it except those firmly rooted, rather that is from the beginnings of the jurists who are veiled from the realities in his view.
Then he mentioned speech all of which had preceded as clarified, not needing explanation, except that he mentioned in its context ·204 That God, exalted is He, when He created the Trustworthy Spirit—meaning Jibrīl—He said:
Text "He separated¹ from him Ṭūbā" like what separated [148b] as a counterpart from Ādam—peace be upon them both— and He made this Ṭūbā "the mother of the angels and the houris," females; and males like the two sons from counterparts according to that sunna.
Commentary As for what I perceive of what he intended by the angels, did he intend angels from among those below him down to the lowest of the low? And that is what is apparent from his indication, and God knows best. Or did he intend by the angels those specifically associated with the Garden and its causes, and those who abide in what pertains to it of treasure, veils, travel, and their likenesses? And this is what went to him; none other than him among the gnostics went to it, nor did it come in a report that is Quranic or a sunna that is sound, nor is it weak. And he did not say it as a possessor of unveiling, but rather Ṭūbā, which is mentioned in the Qurʾān, is an action.
From (it was good), meaning: good for them and beautiful as a reward. And it is a word that is well-known. And Ṭūbā in the specific sense is the name of the Garden. And it has come in some reports that did not stand upon a reliable basis that Ṭūbā is a tree in the Garden. And it has come in some reports that did not stand upon a reliable basis that in the Garden the people of the Garden will take shade beneath it like the caravan station and other than it; the rider travels in its shade for five hundred years of travel. He, exalted is He, said: [56:30]. Thus did some of the exegetes go to it.
And that is—and God knows best—His saying: [56:30], nothing but the mercy, the perpetual one that is never cut off, it is said: that is in the shade of so-and-so, meaning: under his care and kindness. And if he wishes the shade that is well-known, then it is for delight and adornment, not to repel the heat of a light that dazzles the eyes and bodies.
For it is not a dwelling of harm, nor of pain, nor a dwelling of veils, so nothing at all is veiled in it, ·205 Rather, the sight of the believer therein discerns all of his dominion — no door conceals it, nor wall, nor leaves of trees. For it is nothing but a shadow of a veil, like the shadow of this [149a] worldly abode. So the one who said this — this man — that God created from the clay of the angels and the houris, then do not affirm him nor deny him, except that we have not stopped at that regarding anything other than him, and he is empowered, even though we know from which thing God created the angels, and we have submitted to Him his state.
Then he mentioned after that speech that is understood and appropriate to this, repeating it in what preceded. Then he added regarding this chapter what is not speech of a chapter nor a section. He made it known when he reasoned it, and he said — and would that he had said what he said —: — which are the Supreme Pen and the Preserved Tablet — and the Holy Spirit and the realities of Adam and his progeny in the origin of the beginning and bringing-into-being have not been commanded to prostrate to him in the angelic realm that was commanded and the celestial realm that prostrated; for it is not in the wisdom of the everlasting self-sufficiency the prostration of the self to the self, nor the following of some of the hatred of the essential to the some," and he knew that God, exalted is He, had arranged His creation in His bringing-into-being upon the precedence of causes, even if they were not effectual among the people of the Real. But thus God linked wisdom, and He created the dew at [the time of] drinking, and the satiation at eating, and the growth of crops at watering, and the spreading of the sun with heat, and He made the natural world an effect from the movements of the higher world through what He deposited in it of a subtle secret, ·206 So the objection of some of the angels—the one who mentioned them—against prostration: by what proof, or by what illness did he mention them against prostration? For as for its justification, it is a sickness and a disease, for we know definitively that we are created from dust, and that the origin of our creation is corporeal, and despite this we have been commanded to prostrate to a house built from dust. So how is it that we were commanded to prostrate to our origin, and how did some of us follow others? For we are creatures [149←] from among the affairs of the differing elements—dust being one of them, and water also, and air, and fire. So dust is some of us, the one whom we were commanded to prostrate to—the prostration of emulation of a divine command, not the prostration of servanthood to Him. And how, when God has said— Exalted is He: that He commanded the angels with the alif and the lām, then He confirmed their prostration altogether. So if He intended God with the angels from the perspective of their origination, then the whole has entered into that. And if He intended with the angels the ambassadors, then the spirits that are trusted among them—there is no escape for Him from prostration, and He has forbidden that, so upon the two aspects His speech is not valid.
Then he said: Text
Commentary united with the light, the most luminous, before the reception, the pre-eternal, the name, the treasured was», meaning: the veil, the most holy, which is the Muḥammadan reality in his view. He has made clear in his saying "connected" and "united" what the most holy, which is the Muḥammadan reality, is not hidden from the possessor of tasting. And as for his saying: , then it is an expression about the negation of priority, and when he affirmed a matter before the pre-eternal reception, he has affirmed priority for the pre-eternal, and that its above is what is prior to it.
He said: "And when it separated" — meaning: the spirit of Muḥammad — peace be upon him — said: "from the light of the blazing sublimities it separated by those life-giving, self-subsisting, everlasting, eternal attributes and knowledges of the eternal," he says: He gave the life-giving, self-subsisting life, His saying, exalted is He: [13:33], and He made Muḥammad ever-standing with every living being besides Him, for he is the extender of the life of every living being in the highest realm and the lowest and what is between them of the realms, and he went to this precedence as a collective [150] matter, as he pointed to it in the verification, for if he intended what is intended by causes, it is near.
And as for his saying: "and the everlasting, eternal mirror" — that is the lineage of the divine. The Jews said to Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace —: "Attribute lineage to your Lord for us," so God, exalted is He, sent down: [112:1-2], the sūrah in its entirety, saying: and it separated from Him also by a mirror — this is the noble lineage, until one sees in it His face, that is: His reality, and it does not cease to be annihilated in the oneness of His being-found; for oneness does not accept a second, and it is as if it is separation in the very connection, and with this, what proceeded upon the verification.
And as for his saying: "and the lordly, eternal knowledges" — he says: it separated also by them, meaning the receptive preparedness for these knowledges — there is no attainment of them; because entry into what has no end is impossible, and we have been brought out from the bellies of our mothers knowing nothing, then indeed he — peace be upon him — mentioned that he knew the knowledge of the first ones and the last ones only after the striking with the two hands of his kneading, and by the subtle senses between his nurturing, and it was said to him: [20:114], and knowledge was attached to what has no end, so it is speech also of what proceeded upon the verification.
Then he said: "And that was a grace for Him and a manifestation of the lineage of the event therein," meaning that God, exalted is He, wanted to make known that it is an event by this grace which was, then he said: "And there was not the like of the veil, anything before the grace," meaning by the veil the spirit of Muḥammad — may God bless him and grant him peace —, and this epithet for him has preceded, that is: there was not there anything resembling him in the state of his arrival.
He said: "And the life of that life does not represent the state of arrival," meaning the being of his arrival, not at [150v] the first of whoever preceded the grace, and from it appeared the separations, their heights and their lowlands, and this is also an expression that is not correct intellectually or in the Sharīʿa, and how what 10 is most holy, most exalted, and most magnificent in etiquette with God, and with that, what the people of etiquette with the Divine have conceded to him from the aspect of verbal expression, except from the aspect of meaning; because arrival is not except from being arrived at, and there is no being arrived at, for it is as if it were a technical term specific to him, and upon every state it is better than the expression of the grace through which this man attained.
Then he said: "And when the grace was separated, it was a veil higher, connected to the divine presence of the Most High," he says: it is 15 the veil of the veil, then he said: "The Lord, exalted is He, addresses this veil, the one severed from behind it," he says: this veil, when it was severed, He made its face toward what it was severed from of the veils, which come into being from it toward what has no end for it, and the Real was from behind it, that is: extending it and preserving it, ·209 [2:255], and when he was separated by the mirror of oneness in striking the parable, he would see by it what is behind him, and He is the Real, for he had, through the image of the vision in the mirror, the likeness of what he encounters, so that he would not lose his witnessing by the turning of his face toward that which is formed from him, for the Real from behind him is from a direction, and his orientation is from a direction.
Commentary Then he said: , he means by his bounty that the manifestation of his body is through birth, and the bringing-about of his command and his prophecy, and his glad tidings. Then he said: , he says: Upon these forms, every severance from that which was severed shall be the thing severed from it, and the thing severed from it shall be from behind it, and the discourse between them is like discourse, for the world of spirits is the highest—it does not go astray and does not forget—and it is not from the world of natural composition, and these spirits, the human ones, do not become devoid of natural forms, where they were never stripped ever and perpetually, so there is no doubt that they are in mutual exchange, and it is forgotten except that God preserves it and grants it the virtue of specialization by providence—not that this is within its reach—He, exalted be He, said: [6:76],
Text As if he said "this is my Lord" the verses, [37:99], ·210 And He, exalted is He, said: ﴾You did not know what the Book was, nor faith, but We made it a light by which We guide whom We will among Our servants﴿ [42:52], and this is all addressed to one whom it requires—his essence and his reality—to follow the commands therein, and it is only addressed to one for whom it is permissible that his contravention of it be possible, upon him the movement is incumbent upon the body by this specificity; movement necessitates for the body motion, and the assured reliance upon the body in the creation of the movement in it, not the assured reliance upon the movement by the obtainment of motion from it, but the assured reliance upon it is in the existence of its ruling, not in the existence of its very self. And God has tested the one this man claimed, that he—based on what he mentioned of likeness—then mentioned speech whose meaning does not require explanation, rather he also spoke concerning the rank of Adam—upon him be peace—and his being upon the form of the All-Merciful, and his overcoming of the Names with comprehensible speech.
Then he mentioned speech in which he says: Adam is the outward manifestation of Muḥammad—upon them both be peace—, and Muḥammad is his reality with which this outward manifestation stood, and the angels were subordinate to the Adamic nature, so they prostrated to it and learned from it. So it was most befitting and most appropriate that Muḥammad—upon him be peace— [151b] precede, and his leadership over the entirety, and that Adam in the world of bodies is the imām, and Muḥammad in the world of spirits is the imām who takes precedence, and when we saw that for Muḥammad—upon him be peace—the leadership and precedence of in the Hereafter, our knowledge is that the otherworldly genesis overcomes the Adamic in the Hereafter, so the Adamic is in the inner dimension of the Muḥammadan, and the Muḥammadan is the outward manifestation of its inner dimension. Thus he claimed, and what necessarily follows him is the contradiction of what he established in this book before this—that the inner is where he posited it to extend the outward, and that the outward stands by it. So Muḥammad—upon him be peace—according to this other claim, what the Adamic governs over would be his reality, and he would be its truth, then he made clear his intent with speech all of which is understood from the precedence of Muḥammad over Adam and the angels—upon them be peace—as he determined, and that he is the origin.
[Shaʿīra] Then he said: "Shaʿīra" — since the matter was as this man mentioned, revolving upon the outward of an inner, and Adam and an angel, and a prostrator and one prostrated to for him, and since for each one there was a name that is in his horizon — a lord, and when Adam appeared as a likeness in his horizon, he was a master, and the angel prostrated to him, and the angel was his companion and inner. Likewise the angel, when it appeared in the horizon of its name which was the inner in the presence of the appearance of the Adamic entity, and it is now the outward, and the name of Adam which was the outward became inner, and the Adamic entity prostrated to the angelic entity. For the angels, it had a companion and an inner lining, and likewise this matter is current in the divine names.
In His presence, and in the celestial spirits, each one of them is outward by a face, inner by a face, followed by a prostrator. By his face, that which is prostrated to for him is by his face, and every prostrator — he is a companion inseparably bound to the one who prostrated to him, and his knowledge of him.
[153a] This is the content of this shaʿīra, and its meaning has already preceded, and the Muḥammadan praises of God concluded with the praise of God, exalted, free from the benefit — and its bestowal was a bestowal in these Muḥammadan praises and others, informing us that He does not know.
The sixth part is concluded. The Raḥmāniyyāt follow it — Raḥmāniyyāt of detailed exposition in particular.