diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/64786-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/64786-0.txt | 17135 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 17135 deletions
diff --git a/old/64786-0.txt b/old/64786-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index f7dd284..0000000 --- a/old/64786-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,17135 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Kashf al-mahjúb, by `Ali b. `Uthman -Al-Jullabi Al-Hujwiri - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Kashf al-mahjúb - The oldest Persian treatise on Súfiism - -Author: `Ali b. `Uthman Al-Jullabi Al-Hujwiri - -Translator: Reynold A. Nicholson - -Release Date: March 11, 2021 [eBook #64786] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: KD Weeks, Fritz Ohrenschall and the Online Distributed - Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was - produced from images generously made available by The Internet - Archive/Canadian Libraries) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE KASHF AL-MAHJÚB *** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note: - -This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. -Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. Superscripted -characters are indicated with ‘^’ and, if multiple characters are -raised, they are bracketed with ‘{ }’. Bold fonts are used in the index -entries to indicate the primary entries in the text. - -Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are -referenced. - -There is an editorial list of corrections and additions. These, along -with the errors they mention, are retained in this version. - -Minor errors, deemed attributable to the printer, have been corrected. -Please see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details. - - - - - “_E. J. W. GIBB MEMORIAL_” - _SERIES._ - - _VOL. XVII._ - - THE KASHF AL-MAḤJÚB - - THE OLDEST PERSIAN TREATISE ON - ṢÚFIISM - - BY - - ‘ALÍ B. ‘UTHMÁN AL-JULLÁBÍ AL-HUJWÍRÍ - - TRANSLATED FROM THE TEXT OF THE LAHORE EDITION, - COMPARED WITH MSS. IN THE INDIA OFFICE AND - BRITISH MUSEUM. - - BY - - REYNOLD A. NICHOLSON, LITT.D. - - LECTURER IN PERSIAN IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE; - FORMERLY FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE. - - AND - - PRINTED FOR THE TRUSTEES OF THE - “E. J. W. GIBB MEMORIAL”. - - VOLUME XVII. - - LEYDEN: E. J. BRILL, IMPRIMERIE ORIENTALE. - LONDON: LUZAC & CO., 46 GREAT RUSSELL STREET. - - 1911. - - - - - PRINTED BY - STEPHEN AUSTIN AND SONS, LTD. - HERTFORD. - - _“E. J. W. GIBB MEMORIAL” SERIES._ - - - PUBLISHED, - -1. _The_ Bábar-náma, _reproduced in facsimile from a MS. belonging to - the late Sir Sálár Jang of Ḥaydarábád, and edited with Preface and - Indexes, by Mrs. Beveridge, 1905. (Out of print.)_ - -2. _An abridged translation of Ibn Isfandiyár’s_ History of Ṭabaristán, - _by Edward G. Browne, 1905. Price 8s._ - -3. _Translation of al-Khazrají’s_ History of the Rasúlí Dynasty of - Yaman, _with introduction by the late Sir J. Redhouse, now edited by - E. G. Browne, R. A. Nicholson, and A. Rogers. Vols. I and II of the - Translation, 1906, 1907. Price 7s. each. Vol. III, containing the - Annotations, 1908. Price 5s. (Vol. IV, containing the Text, in the - Press.)_ - -4. Umayyads and `Abbásids: _being the Fourth Part of Jurjí Zaydán’s_ - History of Islamic Civilisation, _translated by Professor D. S. - Margoliouth, D.Litt., 1907. Price 5s._ - -5. _The Travels of_ Ibn Jubayr, _the late Dr. William Wright’s edition - of the Arabic text, revised by the late Professor M. J. de Goeje, - 1907. Price 6s._ - -6. _Yáqút’s Dictionary of Learned Men, entitled_ Irshádu’l-aríb ilá - ma‘rifati’l-adíb, _or_ Mu‘jamu’l-Udabá: _edited from the Bodleian MS. - by Professor D. S. Margoliouth, D.Litt. Vols. I, II, 1907, ’09. Price - 8s. each. Vol. III, part 1, 1910. Price 5s. (Further volumes in - preparation.)_ - -7. _The_ Tajáribu´l-Umam _of Ibn Miskawayh: reproduced in facsimile from - MSS. Nos. 3116-3121 of Áyâ Sofia, with Preface and Summary by the - Principe di Teano. Vol. I (to A.H. 37), 1909. Price 7s. (Further - volumes in preparation.)_ - -8. _The_ Marzubán-náma _of Sa`du´d-Dín-i-Waráwíní, edited by Mírzá - Muḥammad of Qazwín, 1909. Price 8s._ - -9. _Textes persans relatifs à la_ secte des Ḥouroûfîs _publiés, - traduits, et annotés par Clément Huart, suivis d’une étude sur la - religion des Ḥouroûfîs par “Feylesouf Rizá”, 1909. Price 8s._ - -10. _The_ Mu`jam fí Ma`áyíri Ash`ári´l-`Ajam _of Shams-i-Qays, edited - from the British Museum MS. (Or. 2814) by Edward G. Browne and Mírzá - Muḥammad of Qazwín, 1909. Price 8s._ - -11. _The_ Chahár Maqála _of Niḏẖámí-i-`Arúḍí-i-Samarqandí, - edited, with notes in Persian, by Mírzá Muḥammad of Qazwín, 1910. - Price 8s._ - -12. Introduction à l’Histoire des Mongols _de Fadl Allah Rashid ed-Din - par E. Blochet, 1910. Price 8s._ - -13. _The_ Díwán _of Ḥassán b. Thábit (d. A.H. 54), edited by Hartwig - Hirschfeld, Ph.D., 1910. Price 5s._ - -14. _The_ Ta´ríkh-i-Guzída _of Ḥamdu´lláh Mustawfí of Qazwín, reproduced - in facsimile from an old MS., with Introduction, Indices, etc., by - Edward G. Browne. Vol. I. Text._ 1910. _Price 15s._ - -15. _The_ Earliest History of the Bábís, _composed before 1852, by Ḥájji - Mírzá Jání of Káshán, edited from the unique Paris MS. (Suppl. - Persan, 1071) by Edward G. Browne. Price 8s._ - -16. _The_ Ta´ríkh-i-Jabán-gushá _of `Alá´u´d-Dín `Aṭá Malik-i-Juwayní, - edited from seven MSS. by Mírzá Muḥammad of Qazwín. Price 8s._ - -17. _A translation of the_ Kashf al-Maḥjúb _of `Alí b. `Uthmán - al-Jullábí al-Hujwírí, the oldest Persian manual of Ṣúfiism, by R. A. - Nicholson. Price 8s._ - - IN PREPARATION. - -_The History of the Mongols, from the_ Jámi`u´t-Tawáríkh _of - Rashídu´d-Din Faḍlu´lláh, beginning with the account of Ogotáy, - edited by E. Blochet, comprising:—_ - - _Tome I: Histoire des tribus turques et mongoles, des ancêtres de - Tchinkkiz-Khan depuis Along-Goa, et de Tchinkkiz-Khan._ - - _Tome II: Histoire des successeurs de Tchinkkiz-Khan, d’Ougédeï à - Témour-Kaan, des fils apanagés de Tchinkkiz-Khan, et des - gouverneurs Mongols de Perse d’Houlagou à Ghazan. (Sous presse.)_ - - _Tome III: Histoire de Ghazan, d’Oldjaïtou, et de Abou-Saïd._ - -_An abridged translation of the_ Iḥyá´u´l-Mulúk, _a Persian History of - Sístán by Sháh Ḥusayn, from the British Museum MS. (Or. 2779), by A. - G. Ellis._ - -_The geographical part of the_ Nuzhatu´l-Qulúb _of Ḥamdu´lláh Mustawfí - of Qazwín, with a translation, by G. Le Strange._ - -_The_ Futúḥu Miṣr wa´l-Maghrib wa´l-Andalus _of Abu´l-Qásim - `Abdu´r-Raḥmán b. `Abdu´lláh b. Abdu´l-Ḥakam al-Qurashí al-Miṣrí (d. - A.H. 257), edited by Professor C. C. Torrey._ - -_The_ Qábús-náma, _edited in the original Persian by E. Edwards._ - -Ta´ríkhu Miṣr, _the History of Egypt, by Abú `Umar Muḥammad b. Yúsuf - al-Kindí (d. A.H. 350), edited from the unique MS. in the British - Museum (Add. 23,324) by A. Rhuvon Guest. (In the Press.)_ - -_The_ Ansáb _of as-Sam`ání, reproduced in facsimile from the British - Museum MS. (Or. 23,355), with Indices by H. Loewe. (In the Press.)_ - -_The poems of four early Arabic poets. In two parts:—(1) The_ Díwáns _of - `Ámir b. aṭ-Ṭufayl and `Abíd b. al-Abraṣ, edited by Sir Charles J. - Lyall, K.C.S.I.; (2) The_ Díwáns _of aṭ-Ṭufayl b. `Awf and Ṭirimmáḥ - b. Ḥakím, edited by F. Krenkow._ - -_The_ Kitábu´l-Raddi `alá ahli ´l-bida`i wal-ahwá´i _of Makḥúl b. - al-Mufaḍḍal al-Nasafí (d. A.H. 318), edited from the Bodleian MS. - Pocock 271, with introductory Essay on the Sects of Islam, by G. W. - Thatcher, M.A._ - -_A_ monograph on the Southern Dialects of Kurdish, _by E. B. Soane._ - - - - - _This Volume is one - of a Series - published by the Trustees of the - “E. J. W. GIBB MEMORIAL”._ - -_The Funds of this Memorial are derived from the interest accruing from -a sum of money given by the late MRS. GIBB of Glasgow, to perpetuate the -Memory of her beloved son_ - - _ELIAS JOHN WILKINSON GIBB,_ - -_and to promote those researches into the History, Literature, -Philosophy, and Religion of the Turks, Persians, and Arabs to which, -from his youth upwards, until his premature and deeply lamented death in -his 45th year on December 5, 1901, his life was devoted._ - - تِلْكَ آثَارُنَا تَدُلُّ عَلَيْنَا * فَٱنْظُرُوا بَعْدَنَا الي ٱلاَثَارِ - - “_The worker pays his debt to Death; - His work lives on, nay, quickeneth._” - -_The following memorial verse is contributed by `Abdu´l-Ḥaqq Ḥámid Bey -of the Imperial Ottoman Embassy in London, one of the Founders of the -New School of Turkish Literature, and for many years an intimate friend -of the deceased._ - - جمله يارانى وفاسيله ايدركن نطييب - کندی عمرنده وفاگورمدی اول ذاتِ اديب - گنج ايکن اولمش ايدی اوجِ کماله واصل - نه اولوردی ياشامش اولسه ايدی مستر گيب - - - - - “_E. J. W. GIBB MEMORIAL._” - - _ORIGINAL TRUSTEES._ - -[_JANE GIBB, died November 26, 1904_], - -_E. G. BROWNE_, - -_G. LE STRANGE_, - -_H. F. AMEDROZ_, - -_A. G. ELLIS_, - -_R. A. NICHOLSON_, - -_E. DENISON ROSS_, - - _AND_ - -_IDA W. E. OGILVY GREGORY (formerly GIBB), appointed 1905._ - - _CLERK OF THE TRUST._ - -_JULIUS BERTRAM, - 14 Suffolk Street, Pall Mall, - LONDON, S.W._ - - _PUBLISHERS FOR THE TRUSTEES._ - -_E. J. BRILL, LEYDEN. -LUZAC & CO., LONDON._ - - - - - CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS. - -Page 2, penult. _For_ (p. 3) _read_ (p. 1). - -p. 3, line 14 and l. 30. _For_ (p. 3) _read_ (p. 1). - -p. 4, l. 18. _For_ (p. 3) _read_ (p. 1). - -p. 4, l. 26. _For_ just as the veil destroys revelation _(mukáshafat) - read_ just as veiling destroys the unveiled object (_mukáshaf_). - -p. 6, l. 4 and l. 16. _For_ (p. 3) _read_ (p. 1). - -p. 51, l. 6. _For_ Parg _read_ Burk _or_ Purg, and correct the note - accordingly. See Guy Le Strange, _The Lands of the Eastern - Caliphate_, p. 292. - -p. 54, l. 28. _For_ the infectious cankers of the age _read_ the cankers - which infect age after age. - -p. 85, l. 19. For (_sáḥib al-qulúb_) read (_ṣáḥi´l-qulúb_). _Ṣáḥí_, - “sober,” is the antithesis of _maghlúb_, “enraptured.” - -p. 127, l. 17. _For_ AL-INṬÁKÍ _read_ AL-ANṬÁKÍ. - -p. 130, l. 27. Although some writers give “Abu ´l-Ḥasan” as the _kunya_ - of Núrí, the balance of authority is in favour of “Abu ´l-Ḥusayn”. - -p. 131, n. 2. _Add_, See Goldziher in _ZDMG._, 61, 75 ff., and a passage - in Yáqút’s _Irshád al-Aríb_, ed. by Margoliouth, vol. iii, pt. i, - 153, 3 ff.; cited by Goldziher in _JRAS._ for 1910, p. 888. - -p. 140, l. 19. _For_ ABÚ MUḤAMMAD `ABDALLÁH _read_ ABÚ `ABDALLÁH. - -p. 155, l. 26. _Omit_ B. _before_ DULAF. - -p. 169, l. 1. _Omit_ B. _before_ `ALÍ. - -p. 173, l. 11. _For_ Pádsháh-i _read_ Pádisháh-i. - -p. 182, l. 26. _Sháhmurghí_ is probably a mistake for _siyáh murghí_, “a - blackbird.” Cf. my edition of the _Tadhkirat al-Awliyá_, ii, 259, - 23. - -p. 257, l. 1. For _t`aṭíl_ read _ta`ṭíl_. - -p. 323, l. 10. _For_ Miṣṣíṣí _read_ Maṣṣíṣí. - - CONTENTS. - - CHAPTER. PAGES. - - Translator’s Preface xvii-xxiv - - Author’s Introduction 1-9 - - I. On the Affirmation of Knowledge 11-18 - - II. On Poverty 19-29 - - III. On Ṣúfiism 30-44 - - IV. On the Wearing of Patched Frocks 45-57 - - V. On the Different Opinions held concerning Poverty 58-61 - and Purity - - VI. On Blame (_Malámat_) 62-9 - - VII. Concerning their Imáms who belonged to the 70-4 - Companions - - VIII. Concerning their Imáms who belonged to the House 75-80 - of the Prophet - - IX. Concerning the People of the Veranda (_Ahl-i 81-2 - Ṣuffa_) - - X. Concerning their Imáms who belonged to the 83-7 - Followers (_al-Tábi`ún_) - - XI. Concerning their Imáms who lived subsequently to 88-160 - the Followers down to our day - - XII. Concerning the principal Ṣúfís of recent times 161-71 - - XIII. A brief account of the modern Ṣúfís in different 172-5 - countries - - XIV. Concerning the Doctrines held by the different 176-266 - sects of Ṣúfís - - XV. The Uncovering of the First Veil: Concerning the 267-77 - Gnosis of God (_ma`rifat Allah_) - - XVI. The Uncovering of the Second Veil: Concerning 278-85 - Unification (_tawḥíd_) - - XVII. The Uncovering of the Third Veil: Concerning Faith 286-90 - - XVIII. The Uncovering of the Fourth Veil: Concerning 291-9 - Purification from Foulness - - XIX. The Uncovering of the Fifth Veil: Concerning 300-13 - Prayer (_al-ṣalát_) - - XX. The Uncovering of the Sixth Veil: Concerning Alms 314-19 - (_al-zakát_) - - XXI. The Uncovering of the Seventh Veil: On Fasting 320-5 - (_al-ṣawm_) - - XXII. The Uncovering of the Eighth Veil: Concerning the 326-33 - Pilgrimage - - XXIII. The Uncovering of the Ninth Veil: Concerning 334-66 - Companionship, together with its Rules and - Principles - - XXIV. The Uncovering of the Tenth Veil: explaining their 367-92 - phraseology and the definitions of their terms and - the verities of the ideas which are signified - - XXV. The Uncovering of the Eleventh Veil: Concerning 393-420 - Audition (_samá`_) - - - - - PREFACE. - - -This translation of the most ancient and celebrated Persian treatise on -Ṣúfiism will, I hope, be found useful not only by the small number of -students familiar with the subject at first hand, but also by many -readers who, without being Orientalists themselves, are interested in -the general history of mysticism and may wish to compare or contrast the -diverse yet similar manifestations of the mystical spirit in -Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam. The origin of Ṣúfiism and its -relation to these great religions cannot properly be considered here, -and I dismiss such questions the more readily because I intend to deal -with them on another occasion. It is now my duty to give some account of -the author of the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_, and to indicate the character of -his work. - -Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. `Uthmán b. `Alí al-Ghaznawí al-Jullábí -al-Hujwírí[1] was a native of Ghazna in Afghanistan.[2] Of his life very -little is known beyond what he relates incidentally in the _Kashf -al-Maḥjúb_. He studied Ṣúfiism under Abu ´l-Faḍl Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan -al-Khuttalí[3] (p. 166), who was a pupil of Abu ´l-Ḥasan al-Ḥuṣrí (ob. -371 A.H.), and under Abu ´l-`Abbás Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Ashqání or -al-Shaqání[4] (p. 168). He also received instruction from Abu ´l-Qásim -Gurgání[5] (p. 169) and Khwája Muẕaffar[6] (p. 170), and he mentions a -great number of Shaykhs whom he had met and conversed with in the course -of his wanderings. He travelled far and wide through the Muḥammadan -empire from Syria to Turkistán and from the Indus to the Caspian Sea. -Among the countries and places which he visited were Ádharbáyaján (pp. -57 and 410), the tomb of Báyazíd at Bisṭám (p. 68), Damascus, Ramla, and -Bayt al-Jinn in Syria (pp. 94, 167, 343), Ṭús and Uzkand (p. 234), the -tomb of Abú Sa`íd b. Abi ´l-Khayr at Mihna (p. 235), Merv (p. 401), and -the Jabal al-Buttam to the east of Samarcand (p. 407). He seems to have -settled for a time in `Iráq, where he ran deeply into debt (p. 345). It -may be inferred from a passage on p. 364 that he had a short and -unpleasant experience of married life. Finally, according to the _Riyáḍ -al-Awliyá_, he went to reside at Lahore and ended his days in that city. -His own statement, however, shows that he was taken there as a prisoner -against his will (p. 91), and that in composing the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ he -was inconvenienced by the loss of the books which he had left at Ghazna. -The date of his death is given as 456 A.H. (1063-4 A.D.) or 464 A.H. -(1071-2 A.D.), but it is likely that he survived Abu ´l-Qásim -al-Qushayrí, who died in 465 A.H. (1072 A.D.). Rieu’s observation (_Cat. -of the Persian MSS. in the British Museum_, i, 343) that the author -classes Qushayrí with the Ṣúfís who had passed away before the time at -which he was writing, is not quite accurate. The author says (p. 161): -“Some of those whom I shall mention in this chapter are already -deceased, and some are still living.” But of the ten Ṣúfís in question -only one, namely, Abu ´l-Qásim Gurgání, is referred to in terms which -leave no doubt that he was alive when the author wrote. In the _Safínat -al-Awliyá_, No. 71, it is stated that Abu ´l-Qásim Gurgání died in 450 -A.H. If this date were correct, the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ must have been -written at least fifteen years before Qushayrí’s death. On the other -hand, my MS. of the _Shadharát al-Dhahab_ records the death of Abu -´l-Qásim Gurgání under the year 469 A.H., a date which appears to me -more probable, and in that case the statement that the author survived -Qushayrí may be accepted, although the evidence on which it rests is -mainly negative, for we cannot lay much stress on the fact that -Qushayrí’s name is sometimes followed by the Moslem equivalent for “of -blessed memory”. I conjecture, then, that the author died between 465 -and 469 A.H.[7] His birth may be placed in the last decade of the tenth -or the first decade of the eleventh century of our era, and he must have -been in the prime of youth when Sultan Maḥmúd died in 421 A.H. (1030 -A.D.). The _Risála-i Abdáliyya_,[8] a fifteenth century treatise on the -Muḥammadan saints by Ya`qúb b. `Uthmán al-Ghaznawí, contains an -anecdote, for which it would be hazardous to claim any historical value, -to the effect that al-Hujwírí once argued in Maḥmúd’s presence with an -Indian philosopher and utterly discomfited him by an exhibition of -miraculous powers. Be that as it may, he was venerated as a saint long -after his death, and his tomb at Lahore was being visited by pilgrims -when Bakhtáwar Khán wrote the _Riyáḍ al-Awliyá_ in the latter half of -the seventeenth century. - -Footnote 1: - - Julláb and Hujwír were two suburbs of Ghazna. Evidently he resided for - some time in each of them. - -Footnote 2: - - Notices occur in the _Nafaḥát al-Uns_, No. 377; the _Safínat - al-Awliyá_, No. 298 (Ethé’s _Cat. of the Persian MSS. in the Library - of the India Office_, i, col. 304); the _Riyáḍ al-Awliyá_, Or. 1745, - f. 140_a_ (Rieu’s _Cat. of the Persian MSS. in the British Museum_, - iii, 975). In the _khátimat al-ṭab`_ on the last page of the Lahore - edition of the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ he is called Ḥaḍrat-i Dátá - Ganj-bakhsh `Alí al-Hujwírí. - -Footnote 3: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 376. Through al-Khuttalí, al-Ḥuṣrí, and Abú Bakr - al-Shiblí the author of the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ is spiritually connected - with Junayd of Baghdád (ob. 297 A.H.). - -Footnote 4: - - Ibid., No. 375. The _nisba_ Shaqqání or Shaqání is derived from - Shaqqán, a village near Níshápúr. - -Footnote 5: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 367. - -Footnote 6: - - Ibid., No. 368. - -Footnote 7: - - The date 465 A.H. is given by Ázád in his biographical work on the - famous men of Balgrám, entitled _Ma´áthir al-Kirám_. - -Footnote 8: - - See Ethé’s _Cat. of the Persian MSS. in the India Office Library_, No. - 1774 (2). The author of this treatise does not call al-Hujwírí the - _brother_ of Abú Sa`íd b. Abi ´l-Khayr, as Ethé says, but his - _spiritual_ brother (_birádar-i ḥaqíqat_). - -In the introduction to the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ al-Hujwírí complains that -two of his former works had been given to the public by persons who -erased his name from the title-page, and pretended that they themselves -were the authors. In order to guard against the repetition of this -fraud, he has inserted his own name in many passages of the present -work. His writings, to which he has occasion to refer in the _Kashf -al-Maḥjúb_, are— - -1. A _díwán_ (p. 2). - -2. _Minháj al-dín_, on the method of Ṣúfiism (p. 2). It comprised a -detailed account of the Ahl-i Ṣuffa (p. 80) and a full biography of -Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr al-Ḥalláj (p. 153). - -3. _Asrár al-khiraq wa ´l-ma´únát_, on the patched frocks of the Ṣúfís -(p. 56). - -4. _Kitáb-i faná ú baqá_, composed “in the vanity and rashness of youth” -(p. 60). - -5. A work, of which the title is not mentioned, in explanation of the -sayings of Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr al-Ḥalláj (p. 153). - -6. _Kitáb al-bayán li-ahl al-`iyán_, on union with God (p. 259). - -7. _Baḥr al-qulúb_ (p. 259). - -8. _Al-Ri`áyat li-ḥuqúq Allah_, on the Divine unity (p. 280). - -9. A work, of which the title is not mentioned, on faith (p. 286). - -None of these books has been preserved. - -The _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_,[9] which belongs to the later years of the -author’s life, and, partly at any rate, to the period of his residence -in Lahore, was written in reply to certain questions addressed to him by -a fellow-townsman, Abú Sa`íd al-Hujwírí. Its object is to set forth a -complete system of Ṣúfiism, not to put together a great number of -sayings by different Shaykhs, but to discuss and expound the doctrines -and practices of the Ṣúfís. The author’s attitude throughout is that of -a teacher instructing a pupil. Even the biographical section of the work -(pp. 70-175) is largely expository. Before stating his own view the -author generally examines the current opinions on the same topic and -refutes them if necessary. The discussion of mystical problems and -controversies is enlivened by many illustrations drawn from his personal -experience. In this respect the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ is more interesting -than the _Risála_ of Qushayrí, which is so valuable as a collection of -sayings, anecdotes, and definitions, but which follows a somewhat formal -and academic method on the orthodox lines. No one can read the present -work without detecting, behind the scholastic terminology, a truly -Persian flavour of philosophical speculation. - -Footnote 9: - - Its full title is _Kashf al-maḥjúb li-arbáb al-qulúb_ (Ḥájjí Khalífa, - v, 215). - -Although he was a Sunní and a Ḥanafite, al-Hujwírí, like many Ṣúfís -before and after him, managed to reconcile his theology with an advanced -type of mysticism, in which the theory of “annihilation” (_faná_) holds -a dominant place, but he scarcely goes to such extreme lengths as would -justify us in calling him a pantheist. He strenuously resists and -pronounces heretical the doctrine that human personality can be merged -and extinguished in the being of God. He compares annihilation to -burning by fire, which transmutes the quality of all things to its own -quality, but leaves their essence unchanged. He agrees with his -spiritual director, al-Khuttalí, in adopting the theory of Junayd that -“sobriety” in the mystical acceptation of the term is preferable to -“intoxication”. He warns his readers often and emphatically that no -Ṣúfís, not even those who have attained the highest degree of holiness, -are exempt from the obligation of obeying the religious law. In other -points, such as the excitation of ecstasy by music and singing, and the -use of erotic symbolism in poetry, his judgment is more or less -cautious. He defends al-Ḥalláj from the charge of being a magician, and -asserts that his sayings are pantheistic only in appearance, but -condemns his doctrines as unsound. It is clear that he is anxious to -represent Ṣúfiism as the true interpretation of Islam, and it is equally -certain that the interpretation is incompatible with the text.[10] -Notwithstanding the homage which he pays to the Prophet we cannot -separate al-Hujwírí, as regards the essential principles of his -teaching, from his older and younger contemporaries, Abú Sa`íd b. Abi -´l-Khayr and `Abdalláh Anṣárí.[11] These three mystics developed the -distinctively Persian theosophy which is revealed in full-blown -splendour by Faríd al-dín `Aṭṭár and Jalál al-dín Rúmí. - -Footnote 10: - - The author’s view as to the worthlessness of outward forms of religion - is expressed with striking boldness in his chapter on the Pilgrimage - (pp. 326-9). - -Footnote 11: - - Many passages from the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ are quoted, word for word, in - Jámí’s _Nafaḥát al-Uns_, which is a modernized and enlarged recension - of `Abdalláh Anṣárí’s _Ṭabaqát al-Ṣúfiyya_. - -The most remarkable chapter in the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ is the fourteenth, -“Concerning the Doctrines held by the different sects of Ṣúfís,” in -which the author enumerates twelve mystical schools and explains the -special doctrine of each.[12] So far as I know, he is the first writer -to do this. Only one of the schools mentioned by him, namely, that of -the Malámatís, seems to be noticed in earlier books on Ṣúfiism; such -brief references to the other schools as occur in later books, for -example in the _Tadhkirat al-Awliyá_, are probably made on his -authority. The question may be asked, “Did these schools really exist, -or were they invented by al-Hujwírí in his desire to systematize the -theory of Ṣúfiism?” I see no adequate ground at present for the latter -hypothesis, which involves the assumption that al-Hujwírí made precise -statements that he must have known to be false. It is very likely, -however, that in his account of the special doctrines which he -attributes to the founder of each school he has often expressed his own -views upon the subject at issue and has confused them with the original -doctrine. The existence of these schools and doctrines, though lacking -further corroboration,[13] does not seem to me incredible; on the -contrary, it accords with what happened in the case of the Mu`tazilites -and other Muḥammadan schismatics. Certain doctrines were produced and -elaborated by well-known Shaykhs, who published them in the form of -tracts or were content to lecture on them until, by a familiar process, -the new doctrine became the pre-eminent feature of a particular school. -Other schools might then accept or reject it. In some instances sharp -controversy arose, and the novel teaching gained so little approval that -it was confined to the school of its author or was embraced only by a -small minority of the Ṣúfí brotherhood. More frequently it would, in the -course of time, be drawn into the common stock and reduced to its proper -level. Dr. Goldziher has observed that Ṣúfiism cannot be regarded as a -regularly organized sect within Islam, and that its dogmas cannot be -compiled into a regular system.[14] That is perfectly true, but after -allowing for all divergences there remains a fairly definite body of -doctrine which is held in common by Ṣúfís of many different shades and -is the result of gradual agglomeration from many different minds. - -Footnote 12: - - A summary of these doctrines will be found in the abstract of a paper - on “The Oldest Persian Manual of Ṣúfiism” which I read at Oxford in - 1908 (_Trans. of the Third International Congress for the History of - Religions_, i, 293-7). - -Footnote 13: - - Some of al-Hujwírí’s twelve sects reappear at a later epoch as orders - of dervishes, but the pedigree of those orders which trace their - descent from ancient Ṣúfís is usually fictitious. - -Footnote 14: - - _JRAS._, 1904, p. 130. - -It is probable that oral tradition was the main source from which -al-Hujwírí derived the materials for his work. Of extant treatises on -Ṣúfiism he mentions by name only the _Kitáb al-Luma`_ by Abú Naṣr -al-Sarráj, who died in 377 or 378 A.H. This book is written in Arabic -and is the oldest specimen of its class. Through the kindness of Mr. A. -G. Ellis, who has recently acquired the sole copy that is at present -known to Orientalists, I have been able to verify the reading of a -passage quoted by al-Hujwírí (p. 341), and to assure myself that he was -well acquainted with his predecessor’s work. The arrangement of the -_Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ is partially based on that of the _Kitáb al-Luma`_, -the two books resemble each other in their general plan, and some -details of the former are evidently borrowed from the latter. Al-Hujwírí -refers in his notice of Ma`rúf al-Karkhí (p. 114) to the biographies of -Ṣúfís compiled by Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí and Abu ´l-Qásim -al-Qushayrí. Although he does not give the titles, he is presumably -referring to Sulamí’s _ṭabaqát Al-ṣúfiyya_ and Qushayrí’s _Risála_.[15] -The _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ contains a Persian rendering of some passages in -the _Risála_ of Qushayrí, with whom al-Hujwírí seems to have been -personally acquainted. A citation from `Abdalláh Anṣárí occurs on p. 26. - -Footnote 15: - - Cf., however, p. 114, note. - -Manuscripts of the _Kashf al-Maḥjúb_ are preserved in several European -libraries.[16] It has been lithographed at Lahore, and Professor -Schukovski of St. Petersburg is now, as I understand, engaged in -preparing a critical text. The Lahore edition is inaccurate, especially -in the spelling of names, but most of its mistakes are easy to emend, -and the text agrees closely with two MSS. in the Library of the India -Office (Nos. 1773 and 1774 in Ethé’s _Catalogue_), with which I have -compared it. I have also consulted a good MS. in the British Museum -(Rieu’s _Catalogue_, i, 342). The following abbreviations are used: L. -to denote the Lahore edition, =I.= to denote the India Office MS. 1773 -(early seventeenth century), =J.= to denote the India Office MS. 1774 -(late seventeenth century), and =B.= to denote the British Museum MS. -Or. 219 (early seventeenth century). In my translation I have, of -course, corrected the Lahore text where necessary. While the doubtful -passages are few in number, there are, I confess, many places in which a -considerable effort is required in order to grasp the author’s meaning -and follow his argument. The logic of a Persian Ṣúfí must sometimes -appear to European readers curiously illogical. Other obstacles might -have been removed by means of annotation, but this expedient, if adopted -consistently, would have swollen the volume to a formidable size. - -Footnote 16: - - See Ethé’s _Cat. of the Persian MSS. in the India Office Library_, i, - col. 970, where other MSS. are mentioned, and Blochet, _Cat. des - manuscrits persans de la Bibliothèque Nationale_, i, 261 (No. 401). - -The English version is nearly complete, and nothing of importance has -been omitted, though I have not hesitated to abridge when opportunity -offered. Arabists will remark an occasional discrepancy between the -Arabic sayings printed in italics and the translations accompanying -them: this is due to my having translated, not the original Arabic, but -the Persian paraphrase given by al-Hujwírí. - - REYNOLD A. NICHOLSON. - - - - - KASHF AL-MAḤJÚB. - - - - - INTRODUCTION. - - -IN THE NAME OF GOD, THE MERCIFUL, THE COMPASSIONATE. - -_O Lord, bestow on us mercy from Thyself and provide for us a right - course of action!_ - -_Praise be to God, who hath revealed the secrets of His kingdom to His - Saints, and hath disclosed the mysteries of His power to His - intimates, and hath shed the blood of Lovers with the sword of His - glory, and hath let the hearts of Gnostics taste the joy of His - communion! He it is that bringeth dead hearts to life by the - radiance of the perception of His eternity and His majesty, and - reanimates them with the comforting spirit of knowledge by divulging - His Names._ - -_And peace be upon His Apostle, Muḥammad, and his family and his - companions and his wives!_ - -`Alí b. `Uthmán b. `Alí al-Jullábí al-Ghaznawí al-Hujwírí (may God be -well pleased with him!) says as follows:— - - I have asked God’s blessing, and have cleared my heart of motives - related to self, and have set to work in accordance with your - invitation—may God make you happy!—and have firmly resolved to fulfil - all your wishes by means of this book. I have entitled it “The - Revelation of The Mystery”. Knowing what you desire, I have arranged - the book in divisions suitable to your purpose. Now I pray God to aid - and prosper me in its completion, and I divest myself of my own - strength and ability in word and deed. It is God that gives success. - - - SECTION. - -Two considerations have impelled me to put my name at the beginning of -the book: one particular, the other general.[17] As regards the latter, -when persons ignorant of this science see a new book, in which the -author’s name is not set down in several places, they attribute his work -to themselves, and thus the author’s aim is defeated, since books are -compiled, composed, and written only to the end that the author’s name -may be kept alive and that readers and students may pronounce a blessing -on him. This misfortune has already befallen me twice. A certain -individual borrowed my poetical works, of which there was no other copy, -and retained the manuscript in his possession, and circulated it, and -struck out my name which stood at its head, and caused all my labour to -be lost. May God forgive him! I also composed another book, entitled -“The Highway of Religion” (_Minháj al-Dín_), on the method of -Ṣúfiism—may God make it flourish! A shallow pretender, whose words carry -no weight, erased my name from the title page and gave out to the public -that he was the author, notwithstanding that connoisseurs laughed at his -assertion. God, however, brought home to him the unblessedness of this -act and erased _his_ name from the register of those who seek to enter -the Divine portal. - -Footnote 17: - - The author’s meaning appears to be that one consideration has a - special reference to connoisseurs and competent persons, while the - other has a general reference to the public at large. - -As regards the particular consideration, when people see a book, and -know that its author is skilled in the branch of science of which it -treats, and is thoroughly versed therein, they judge its merits more -fairly and apply themselves more seriously to read and remember it, so -that both author and reader are better satisfied. The truth is best -known to God. - - - SECTION. - -In using the words “I have asked God’s blessing” (p. 3), I wished to -observe the respect due to God, who said to His Apostle: “_When you read -the Koran, take refuge with God from the stoned Devil_” (Kor. xvi, 100). -“To ask blessing” means “to commit all one’s affairs to God and to be -saved from the various sorts of contamination”. The Prophet used to -teach his followers to ask a blessing (_istikhárat_) just as he taught -them the Koran. When a man recognizes that his welfare does not depend -on his own effort and foresight, but that every good and evil that -happens to him is decreed by God, who knows best what is salutary for -him, he cannot do otherwise than surrender himself to Destiny and -implore God to deliver him from the wickedness of his own soul. - - - SECTION. - -As to the words “I have cleared my heart of all motives related to self” -(p. 3), no blessing arises from anything in which selfish interest has a -part. If the selfish man succeeds in his purpose, it brings him to -perdition, for “the accomplishment of a selfish purpose is the key of -Hell”; and if he fails, he will nevertheless have removed from his heart -the means of gaining salvation, for “resistance to selfish promptings is -the key of Paradise”, as God hath said: “_Whoso refrains his soul from -lust, verily Paradise shall be his abode_” (Kor. lxxix, 40-1). People -act from selfish motives when they desire aught except to please God and -to escape from Divine punishment. In fine, the follies of the soul have -no limit and its manœuvres are hidden from sight. If God will, a -chapter on this subject will be found at its proper place in the present -book. - - - SECTION. - -Now as to the words “I have set to work in accordance with your -invitation, and have firmly resolved to fulfil all your wishes by means -of this book” (p. 3), since you thought me worthy of being asked to -write this book for your instruction, it was incumbent on me to comply -with your request. Accordingly it behoved me to make an unconditional -resolution that I would carry out my undertaking completely. When anyone -begins an enterprise with the intention of finishing it, he may be -excused if imperfections appear in his work; and for this reason the -Prophet said: “The believer’s intention is better than his performance.” -Great is the power of intention, through which a man advances from one -category to another without any external change. For example, if anyone -endures hunger for a while without having intended to fast, he gets no -recompense (_thawáb_) for it in the next world; but if he forms in his -heart the intention of fasting, he becomes one of the favourites of God -(_muqarrabán_). Again, a traveller who stays for a time in a city does -not become a resident until he has formed the intention to reside there. -A good intention, therefore, is preliminary to the due performance of -every act. - - - SECTION. - -When I said that I had called this book “The Revelation of the Mystery” -(p. 3), my object was that the title of the book should proclaim its -contents to persons of insight. You must know that all mankind are -veiled from the subtlety of spiritual truth except God’s saints and His -chosen friends; and inasmuch as this book is an elucidation of the Way -of Truth, and an explanation of mystical sayings, and an uplifting of -the veil of mortality, no other title is appropriate to it. Essentially, -unveiling (_kashf_) is destruction of the veiled object, just as the -veil destroys revelation (_mukáshafat_), and just as, for instance, one -who is near cannot bear to be far, and one who is far cannot bear to be -near; or as an animal which is generated from vinegar dies when it falls -into any other substance, while those animals which are generated from -other substances perish if they are put in vinegar. The spiritual path -is hard to travel except for those who were created for that purpose. -The Prophet said: “Everyone finds easy that for which he was created.” -There are two veils: one is the “veil of covering” (_ḥijáb-i rayní_), -which can never be removed, and the other is the “veil of clouding” -(_ḥijáb-i ghayní_), which is quickly removed. The explanation is as -follows: one man is veiled from the Truth by his essence (_dhát_), so -that in his view truth and falsehood are the same. Another man is veiled -from the Truth by his attributes (_ṣifat_), so that his nature and heart -continually seek the Truth and flee from falsehood. Therefore the veil -of essence, which is that of “covering” (_rayní_), is never removed. -_Rayn_ is synonymous with _khatin_ (sealing) and _ṭab`_ (imprinting). -Thus God hath said: “_By no means: but their deeds have spread a -covering_ (rána) _over their hearts_” (Kor. lxxxiii, 14); then He made -the sense of this manifest and said: “_Verily it is all one to the -unbelievers whether thou warnest them or no; they will not believe_” -(Kor. ii, 5); then he explained the cause thereof, saying: “_God hath -sealed up their hearts_” (Kor. ii, 6). But the veil of attributes, which -is that of “clouding” (_ghayní_), may be removed at times, for essence -does not admit of alteration, but the alteration of attributes is -possible. The Ṣúfí Shaykhs have given many subtle hints on the subject -of _rayn_ and _ghayn_. Junayd said: _Al-rayn min jumlat al-waṭanát wa -´l-ghayn min jumlat al-khaṭarát_, “_Rayn_ belongs to the class of -abiding things and _ghayn_ to the class of transient things.” _Waṭan_ is -permanent and _khaṭar_ is adventitious. For example, it is impossible to -make a mirror out of a stone, though many polishers assemble to try -their skill on it, but a rusty mirror can be made bright by polishing; -darkness is innate in the stone, and brightness is innate in the mirror; -since the essence is permanent, the temporary attribute does not endure. - -Accordingly, I have composed this book for polishers of hearts which are -infected by the veil of “clouding” but in which the substance of the -light of the Truth is existent, in order that the veil may be lifted -from them by the blessing of reading it, and that they may find their -way to spiritual reality. Those whose being is compounded of denial of -the truth and perpetration of falsehood will never find their way -thither, and this book will be of no use to them. - - - SECTION. - -Now with reference to my words “knowing what you desire, I have arranged -the book in divisions suitable to your purpose” (p. 3), a questioner -cannot be satisfied until he makes his want known to the person whom he -interrogates. A question presupposes a difficulty, and a difficulty is -insoluble until its nature is ascertained. Furthermore, to answer a -question in general terms is only possible when he who asks it has full -knowledge of its various departments and corollaries, but with a -beginner one needs to go into detail, and offer diverse explanations and -definitions; and in this case especially, seeing that you—God grant you -happiness!—desired me to answer your questions in detail and write a -book on the matter. - - - SECTION. - -I said, “I pray God to aid and prosper me” (p. 3), because God alone can -help a man to do good deeds. When God assists anyone to perform acts -deserving recompense, this is truly “success given by God” (_tawfíq_). -The Koran and the Sunna attest the genuineness of _tawfíq_, and the -whole Moslem community are unanimous therein, except some Mu`tazilites -and Qadarites, who assert that the expression _tawfíq_ is void of -meaning. Certain Ṣúfí Shaykhs have said, _Al-tawfíq huwa ´l-qudrat `ala -´l-ṭá`at `inda ´l-isti`mál_, “When a man is obedient to God he receives -from God increased strength.” In short, all human action and inaction is -the act and creation of God: therefore the strength whereby a man -renders obedience to God is called _tawfíq_. The discussion of this -topic, however, would be out of place here. Please God, I will now -return to the task which you have proposed, but before entering on it I -will set down your question in its exact form. - - - SECTION. - -The questioner, Abú Sa`íd al-Hujwírí, said: “Explain to me the true -meaning of the Path of Ṣúfiism and the nature of the ‘stations’ -(_maqámát_) of the Ṣúfís, and explain their doctrines and sayings, and -make clear to me their mystical allegories, and the nature of Divine -Love and how it is manifested in human hearts, and why the intellect is -unable to reach the essence thereof, and why the soul recoils from the -reality thereof, and why the spirit is lulled in the purity thereof; and -explain the practical aspects of Ṣúfiism which are connected with these -theories.” - - - ANSWER. - -The person questioned, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí al-Hujwírí—may God -have mercy on him!—says:— - -Know that in this our time the science of Ṣúfiism is obsolete, -especially in this country. The whole people is occupied with following -its lusts and has turned its back on the path of quietism (_riḍá_), -while the _`ulamá_ and those who pretend to learning have formed a -conception of Ṣúfiism which is quite contrary to its fundamental -principles. - -High and low alike are content with empty professions: blind conformity -has taken the place of spiritual enthusiasm. The vulgar say, “We know -God,” and the elect, satisfied if they feel in their hearts a longing -for the next world, say, “This desire is vision and ardent love.” -Everyone makes pretensions, none attains to reality. The disciples, -neglecting their ascetic practices, indulge in idle thoughts, which they -call “contemplation”. - -I myself (the author proceeds) have already written several books on -Ṣúfiism, but all to no purpose. Some false pretenders picked out -passages here and there in order to deceive the public, while they -erased and destroyed the rest; others did not mutilate the books, but -left them unread; others read them, but did not comprehend their -meaning, so they copied the text and committed it to memory and said: -“We can discourse on mystical science.” Nowadays true spiritualism is as -rare as the Philosopher’s Stone (_kibrít-i aḥmar_); for it is natural to -seek the medicine that fits the disease, and nobody wants to mix pearls -and coral with common remedies like _shalíthá_[18] and _dawá -al-misk_.[19] In time past the works of eminent _Ṣúfís_, falling into -the hands of those who could not appreciate them, have been used to make -lining for caps or binding for the poems of Abú Nuwás and the -pleasantries of Jáḥiẕ. The royal falcon is sure to get its wings clipped -when it perches on the wall of an old woman’s cottage. Our -contemporaries give the name of “law” to their lusts, pride and ambition -they call “honour and learning”, hypocrisy towards men “fear of God”, -concealment of anger “clemency”, disputation “discussion”, wrangling and -foolishness “dignity”, insincerity “renunciation”, cupidity “devotion to -God”, their own senseless fancies “divine knowledge”, the motions of the -heart and affections of the animal soul “divine love”, heresy “poverty”, -scepticism “purity”, disbelief in positive religion (_zandaqa_) -“self-annihilation”, neglect of the Law of the Prophet “the mystic -Path”, evil communication with time-servers “exercise of piety”. As Abú -Bakr al-Wásiṭí said: “We are afflicted with a time in which there are -neither the religious duties of Islam nor the morals of Paganism nor the -virtues of Chivalry” (_aḥlám-i dhawi ´l-ṃuruwwa_). And Mutanabbí says to -the same effect:—[20] - - “_God curse this world! What a vile place for any camel-rider to alight - in! - For here the man of lofty spirit is always tormented._” - -Footnote 18: - - An electuary used as a remedy for paralysis of the tongue or mouth. - -Footnote 19: - - See Dozy, _Supplément_, under _dawá_. - -Footnote 20: - - Mutanabbí, ed. by Dieterici, p. 662, l. 4 from foot. - - - SECTION. - -Know that I have found this universe an abode of Divine mysteries, which -are deposited in created things. Substances accidents, elements, bodies, -forms, and properties—all these are veils of Divine mysteries. From the -standpoint of Unification (_tawḥíd_) it is polytheism to assert that any -such veils exist, but in this world everything is veiled, by its being, -from Unification, and the spirit is held captive by admixture and -association with phenomenal being. Hence the intellect can hardly -comprehend those Divine mysteries, and the spirit can but dimly perceive -the marvels of nearness to God. Man, enamoured of his gross environment, -remains sunk in ignorance and apathy, making no attempt to cast off the -veil that has fallen upon him. Blind to the beauty of Oneness, he turns -away from God to seek the vanities of this world and allows his -appetites to domineer over his reason, notwithstanding that the animal -soul, which the Koran (xii, 53) describes as “commanding to evil” -(_ammárat^{un} bi ´l-sú´_), is the greatest of all veils between God and -Man. - -Now I will begin and explain to you, fully and lucidly, what you wish to -know concerning the “stations” and the “veils”, and I will interpret the -expressions of the technicologists (_ahl-i ṣaná´i`_), and add thereto -some sayings of the Shaykhs and anecdotes about them, in order that your -object may be accomplished and that any learned doctors of law or others -who look into this work may recognize that the Path of Ṣúfiism has a -firm root and a fruitful branch, since all the Ṣúfí Shaykhs have been -possessed of knowledge and have encouraged their disciples to acquire -knowledge and to persevere in doing so. They have never been addicted to -frivolity and levity. Many of them have composed treatises on the method -of Ṣúfiism which clearly prove that their minds were filled with divine -thoughts. - - - - - CHAPTER I. - ON THE AFFIRMATION OF KNOWLEDGE. - - -God hath said, describing the savants (_`ulamá_): “_Of those who serve -God only the savants fear Him_” (Kor. xxxv, 25). The Prophet said: “To -seek knowledge is obligatory on every Moslem man and woman;” and he said -also: “Seek knowledge even in China.” Knowledge is immense and life is -short: therefore it is not obligatory to learn all the sciences, such as -Astronomy and Medicine, and Arithmetic, etc., but only so much of each -as bears upon the religious law: enough astronomy to know the times (of -prayer) in the night, enough medicine to abstain from what is injurious, -enough arithmetic to understand the division of inheritances and to -calculate the duration of the _`idda_,[21] etc. Knowledge is obligatory -only in so far as is requisite for acting rightly. God condemns those -who learn useless knowledge (Kor. ii, 96), and the Prophet said: “I take -refuge with Thee from knowledge that profiteth naught.” Much may be done -by means of a little knowledge, and knowledge should not be separated -from action. The Prophet said: “The devotee without divinity is like a -donkey turning a mill,” because the donkey goes round and round over its -own tracks and never makes any advance. - -Some regard knowledge as superior to action, while others put action -first, but both parties are wrong. Unless action is combined with -knowledge, it is not deserving of recompense. Prayer, for instance, is -not really prayer, unless performed with knowledge of the principles of -purification and those which concern the _qibla_,[22] and with knowledge -of the nature of intention. Similarly, knowledge without action is not -knowledge. Learning and committing to memory are acts for which a man is -rewarded in the next world; if he gained knowledge without action and -acquisition on his part, he would get no reward. Hence two classes of -men fall into error: firstly, those who claim knowledge for the sake of -public reputation but are unable to practise it, and in reality have not -attained it; and secondly, those who pretend that practice suffices and -that knowledge is unnecessary. It is told of Ibráhím b. Adham that he -saw a stone on which was written, “Turn me over and read!” He obeyed, -and found this inscription: “Thou dost not practise what thou knowest; -why, then, dost thou seek what thou knowest not?” Ánas b. Málik says: -“The wise aspire to know, the foolish to relate.” He who uses his -knowledge as a means of winning power and honour and wealth is no -savant. The highest pinnacle of knowledge is expressed in the fact that -without it none can know God. - -Footnote 21: - - The period within which a woman, who has been divorced or whose - husband has died, may not marry again. - -Footnote 22: - - The point to which a Moslem turns his face when worshipping, viz. the - Ka`ba. - - - SECTION. - -Knowledge is of two kinds: Divine and Human. The latter is worthless in -comparison with the former, because God’s knowledge is an attribute of -Himself, subsisting in Him, whose attributes are infinite; whereas our -knowledge is an attribute of ourselves, subsisting in us, whose -attributes are finite. Knowledge has been defined as “comprehension and -investigation of the object known”, but the best definition of it is -this: “A quality whereby the ignorant are made wise.” God’s knowledge is -that by which He knows all things existent and non-existent: He does not -share it with Man: it is not capable of division nor separable from -Himself. The proof of it lies in the disposition of His actions -(_tartíb-i fi`lash_), since action demands knowledge in the agent as an -indispensable condition. The Divine knowledge penetrates what is hidden -and comprehends what is manifest. It behoves the seeker to Contemplate -God in every act, knowing that God sees him and all that he does. - -_Story._ They relate that a leading man in Baṣra went to his garden. By -chance his eye fell upon the beautiful wife of his gardener. He sent the -fellow away on some business and said to the woman: “Shut the gates.” -She replied: “I have shut them all except one, which I cannot shut.” He -asked: “Which one is that?” “The gate,” said she, “that is between us -and God.” On receiving this answer the man repented and begged to be -forgiven. - -Ḥátim al-Aṣamm said: “I have chosen four things to know, and have -discarded all the knowledge in the world besides.” He was asked: “What -are they?” “One,” he answered, “is this: I know that my daily bread is -apportioned to me, and will neither be increased nor diminished; -consequently I have ceased to seek to augment it. Secondly, I know that -I owe to God a debt which no other person can pay instead of me; -therefore I am occupied with paying it. Thirdly, I know that there is -one pursuing me (i.e. Death) from whom I cannot escape; accordingly I -have prepared myself to meet him. Fourthly, I know that God is observing -me; therefore I am ashamed to do what I ought not.” - - - SECTION. - -The object of human knowledge should be to know God and His -Commandments. Knowledge of “time” (_`ilm-i waqt_)[23], and of all -outward and inward circumstances of which the due effect depends on -“time”, is incumbent upon everyone. This is of two sorts: primary and -secondary. The external division of the primary class consists in making -the Moslem’s profession of faith, the internal division consists in the -attainment of true cognition. The external division of the secondary -class consists in the practice of devotion, the internal division -consists in rendering one’s intention sincere. The outward and inward -aspects cannot be divorced. The exoteric aspect of Truth without the -esoteric is hypocrisy, and the esoteric without the exoteric is heresy. -So, with regard to the Law, mere formality is defective, while mere -spirituality is vain. - -Footnote 23: - - “Time” (_waqt_) is used by Muḥammadan mystics to denote the spiritual - state in which anyone finds himself, and by which he is dominated at - the moment. The expression _`ilm-i waqt_ occurs again in the notice of - Abú Sulaymán al-Dárání (chapter x, No. 17), where _waqt_ is explained - as meaning “the preservation of one’s spiritual state”. According to a - definition given by Sahl b. `Abdallah al-Tustarí, _waqt_ is “search - for knowledge of the state, i.e. the decision (_ḥukm_) of a man’s - state, which exists between him and God in this world and hereafter”. - -The Knowledge of the Truth (_Ḥaqíqat_) has three pillars— - - (1) Knowledge of the Essence and Unity of God. - (2) Knowledge of the Attributes of God. - (3) Knowledge of the Actions and Wisdom of God. - -The Knowledge of the Law (_Sharí`at_) also has three pillars— - - (1) The Koran. - (2) The Sunna. - (3) The Consensus (_ijmá`_) of the Moslem community. - -Knowledge of the Divine Essence involves recognition, on the part of one -who is reasonable and has reached puberty, that God exists externally by -His essence, that He is infinite and not bounded by space, that His -essence is not the cause of evil, that none of His creatures is like -unto Him, that He has neither wife nor child, and that He is the Creator -and Sustainer of all that your imagination and intellect can conceive. - -Knowledge of the Divine Attributes requires you to know that God has -attributes existing in Himself, which are not He nor a part of Him, but -exist in Him and subsist by Him, e.g. Knowledge, Power, Life, Will, -Hearing, Sight, Speech, etc. - -Knowledge of the Divine Actions is your knowledge that God is the -Creator of mankind and of all their actions, that He brought the -non-existent universe into being, that He predestines good and evil and -creates all that is beneficial and injurious. - -Knowledge of the Law involves your knowing that God has sent us Apostles -with miracles of an extraordinary nature; that our Apostle, Muḥammad (on -whom be peace!), is a true Messenger, who performed many miracles, and -that whatever he has told us concerning the Unseen and the Visible is -entirely true. - - - SECTION. - -There is a sect of heretics called Sophists (_Súfisṭá´iyán_), who -believe that nothing can be known and that knowledge itself does not -exist. I say to them: “You think that nothing can be known; is your -opinion correct or not?” If they answer “It is correct”, they thereby -affirm the reality of knowledge; and if they reply “It is not correct”, -then to argue against an avowedly incorrect assertion is absurd. The -same doctrine is held by a sect of heretics who are connected with -Ṣúfiism. They say that, inasmuch as nothing is knowable, their negation -of knowledge is more perfect than the affirmation of it. This statement -proceeds from their folly and stupidity. The negation of knowledge must -be the result either of knowledge or of ignorance. Now it is impossible -for knowledge to deny knowledge; therefore knowledge cannot be denied -except by ignorance, which is nearly akin to infidelity and falsehood; -for there is no connexion between ignorance and truth. The doctrine in -question is opposed to that of all the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, but is commonly -attributed to the Ṣúfís in general by people who have heard it and -embraced it. I commit them to God, with Whom it rests whether they shall -continue in their error. If religion takes hold of them, they will -behave more discreetly and will not misjudge the Friends of God in this -way and will look more anxiously to what concerns themselves. Although -some heretics claim to be Ṣúfís in order to conceal their own foulness -under the beauty of others, why should it be supposed that all Ṣúfis are -like these pretenders, and that it is right to treat them all with -disdain and contumely? An individual who wished to pass for learned and -orthodox, but really was devoid of knowledge and religion, once said to -me in the course of debate: “There are twelve heretical sects, and one -of them flourishes amongst those who profess Ṣúfiism” (_mutaṣawwifa_). I -replied: “If one sect belongs to us, eleven belong to you; and the Ṣúfís -can protect themselves from one better than you can from eleven.” All -this heresy springs from the corruption and degeneracy of the times, but -God has always kept His Saints hidden from the multitude and apart from -the ungodly. Well said that eminent spiritual guide, `Alí b. Bundár -al-Ṣayrafí[24]: “The depravity of men’s hearts is in proportion to the -depravity of the age.” - -Now in the following section I will cite some sayings of the Ṣúfís as an -admonition to those sceptics towards whom God is favourably inclined. - -Footnote 24: - - A famous Ṣúfí of Níshápúr, who died in 359 A.H. (_Nafaḥát_, No. 118). - - - SECTION. - -Muḥammad b. Faḍl al-Balkhí says: “Knowledge is of three kinds—_from_ -God, _with_ God, and _of_ God.” Knowledge _of_ God is the science of -Gnosis (_`ilm-i ma`rifat_), whereby He is known to all His prophets and -saints. It cannot be acquired by ordinary means, but is the result of -Divine guidance and information. Knowledge _from_ God is the science of -the Sacred Law (_`ilm-i sharí`at_), which He has commanded and made -obligatory upon us. Knowledge _with_ God is the science of the -“stations” and the “Path” and the degrees of the saints. Gnosis is -unsound without acceptance of the Law, and the Law is not practised -rightly unless the “stations” are manifested. Abú `Alí Thaqafí[25] says: -_Al-`ilm ḥayát al-qalb min al-jahl wa-núr al-`ayn min al-ẕulmat_, -“Knowledge is the life of the heart, which delivers it from the death of -ignorance: it is the light of the eye of faith, which saves it from the -darkness of infidelity.” The hearts of infidels are dead, because they -are ignorant of God, and the hearts of the heedless are sick, because -they are ignorant of His Commandments. Abú Bakr Warráq of Tirmidh says: -“Those who are satisfied with disputation (_kalám_) about knowledge and -do not practise asceticism (_zuhd_) become _zindíqs_ (heretics); and -those who are satisfied with jurisprudence (_fiqh_) and do not practise -abstinence (_wara`_)become wicked.” This means that Unification -(_tawḥíd_), without works, is predestination (_jabr_), whereas the -assertor of Unification ought to hold the doctrine of predestination but -to act as though he believed in free will, taking a middle course -between free will and predestination. Such is the true sense of another -saying uttered by the same spiritual guide, viz.: “Unification is below -predestination and above free will.” - -Footnote 25: - - Also a native of Níshápúr. He died in 328 A.H. (_Nafaḥát_, No. 248). - -Lack of positive religion and of morality arises from heedlessness -(_ghaflat_). Well said that great master, Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází: -“Avoid the society of three classes of men—heedless savants, -hypocritical Koran-readers, and ignorant pretenders to Ṣúfiism.” The -heedless savants are they who have set their hearts on worldly gain and -paid court to governors and tyrants, and have been seduced by their own -cleverness to spend their time in subtle disputations, and have attacked -the leading authorities on religion. The hypocritical Koran-readers are -they who praise whatever is done in accordance with their desire, even -if it is bad, and blame whatever they dislike, even if it is good: they -seek to ingratiate themselves with the people by acting hypocritically. -The ignorant pretenders to Ṣúfiism are they who have never associated -with a spiritual director (_pír_), nor learned discipline from a shaykh, -but without any experience have thrown themselves among the people, and -have donned a blue mantle (_kabúdí_), and have trodden the path of -unrestraint. - -Abú Yazíd Bisṭámí says: “I strove in the spiritual combat for thirty -years, and I found nothing harder to me than knowledge and its pursuit.” -It is more easy for human nature to walk on fire than to follow the road -of knowledge, and an ignorant heart will more readily cross the Bridge -(_Ṣiráṭ_) a thousand times than learn a single piece of knowledge; and -the wicked man would rather pitch his tent in Hell than put one item of -knowledge into practice. Accordingly you must learn knowledge and seek -perfection therein. The perfection of human knowledge is ignorance of -Divine knowledge. You must know enough to know that you do not know. -That is to say, human knowledge is alone possible to Man, and humanity -is the greatest barrier that separates him from Divinity. As the poet -says:— - - _Al-`ajzu `an daraki ´l-idráki idráku - Wa ´l-waqfu fí ṭuruqi ´l-akhyári ishráku._ - - “True perception is to despair of attaining perception, - But not to advance on the paths of the virtuous is polytheism.” - -He who will not learn and perseveres in his ignorance is a polytheist, -but to the learner, when his knowledge becomes perfect, the reality is -revealed, and he perceives that his knowledge is no more than inability -to know what his end shall be, since realities are not affected by the -names bestowed upon them. - - - - - CHAPTER II. - ON POVERTY. - - -Know that Poverty has a high rank in the Way of Truth, and that the poor -are greatly esteemed, as God said: “(Give alms) _unto the poor, who are -kept fighting in God’s cause and cannot go to and fro on the earth; whom -the ignorant deem rich forasmuch as they refrain_ (from begging).”[26] -And again: “_Their sides are lifted from their beds while they call on -their Lord in fear and hope_” (Kor. xxxii, 16). Moreover, the Prophet -chose poverty and said: “O God, make me live lowly and die lowly and -rise from the dead amongst the lowly!” And he also said: “On the day of -Resurrection God will say, ‘Bring ye My loved ones nigh unto Me;’ then -the angels will say, ‘Who are Thy loved ones?’ and God will answer them, -saying, ‘The poor and destitute.’” There are many verses of the Koran -and Traditions to the same effect, which on account of their celebrity -need not be mentioned here. Among the Refugees (_Muhájirín_) in the -Prophet’s time were poor men (_fuqará_) who sat in his mosque and -devoted themselves to the worship of God, and firmly believed that God -would give them their daily bread, and put their trust (_tawakkul_) in -Him. The Prophet was enjoined to consort with them and take due care of -them; for God said: “_Do not repulse those who call on their Lord in the -morning and in the evening, desiring His favour_” (Kor. vi, 52). Hence, -whenever the Prophet saw one of them, he used to say: “May my father and -mother be your sacrifice! since it was for your sakes that God -reproached me.” - -Footnote 26: - - Kor. ii, 274. - -God, therefore, has exalted Poverty and has made it a special -distinction of the poor, who have renounced all things external and -internal, and have turned entirely to the Causer; whose poverty has -become their pride, so that they lamented its going and rejoiced at its -coming, and embraced it and deemed all else contemptible. - -Now, Poverty has a form (_rasm_) and an essence (_ḥaqíqat_). Its form is -destitution and indigence, but its essence is fortune and free choice. -He who regards the form rests in the form and, failing to attain his -object, flees from the essence; but he who has found the essence averts -his gaze from all created things, and, in complete annihilation, seeing -only the All-One he hastens towards the fullness of eternal life -(_ba-faná-yi kull andar ru´yat-i kull ba-baqá-yi kull shitáft_). The -poor man _(faqír)_ has nothing and can suffer no loss. He does not -become rich by having anything, nor indigent by having nothing: both -these conditions are alike to him in respect of his poverty. It is -permitted that he should be more joyful when he has nothing, for the -Shaykhs have said: “The more straitened one is in circumstances, the -more expansive (cheerful and happy) is one’s (spiritual) state,” because -it is unlucky for a dervish to have property: if he “imprisons” anything -(_dar band kunad_) for his own use, he himself is “imprisoned” in the -same proportion. The friends of God live by means of His secret -bounties. Worldly wealth holds them back from the path of quietism -(_riḍá_). - -_Story._ A dervish met a king. The king said: “Ask a boon of me.” The -dervish replied: “I will not ask a boon from one of my slaves.” “How is -that?” said the king. The dervish said: “I have two slaves who are thy -masters: covetousness and expectation.” - -The Prophet said: “Poverty is glorious to those who are worthy of it.” -Its glory consists in this, that the poor man’s body is divinely -preserved from base and sinful acts, and his heart from evil and -contaminating thoughts, because his outward parts are absorbed in -(contemplation of) the manifest blessings of God, while his inward parts -are protected by invisible grace, so that his body is spiritual -(_rúḥání_) and his heart divine (_rabbání_). Then no relation subsists -between him and mankind: this world and the next weigh less than a -gnat’s wing in the scales of his poverty: he is not contained in the two -worlds for a single moment. - - - SECTION. - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs differ in opinion as to whether poverty or wealth is -superior, both being regarded as human attributes; for true wealth -(_ghiná_) belongs to God, who is perfect in all His attributes. Yaḥyá b. -Mu`ádh al-Rází, Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí, Ḥárith al-Muḥásibí, Abu -´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá, Ruwaym, Abu ´l-Ḥasan b. Sim`ún,[27] and among the -moderns the Grand Shaykh Abú Sa`íd Faḍlallah b. Muḥammad al-Mayhaní, all -hold the view that wealth is superior to poverty. They argue that wealth -is an attribute of God, whereas poverty cannot be ascribed to Him: -therefore an attribute common to God and Man is superior to one that is -not applicable to God. I answer: “This community of designation is -merely nominal, and has no existence in reality: real community involves -mutual resemblance, but the Divine attributes are eternal and the human -attributes are created; hence your proof is false.” I, who am `Alí b. -`Uthmán al-Jullábí, declare that wealth is a term that may fitly be -applied to God, but one to which Man has no right; while poverty is a -term that may properly be applied to Man, but not to God. Metaphorically -a man is called “rich”, but he is not really so. Again, to give a -clearer proof, human wealth is an effect due to various causes, whereas -the wealth of God, who Himself is the Author of all causes, is not due -to any cause. Therefore there is no community in regard to this -attribute. It is not allowable to associate anything with God either in -essence, attribute, or name. The wealth of God consists in His -independence of anyone and in His power to do whatsoever He wills: such -He has always been and such He shall be for ever. Man’s wealth, on the -other hand, is, for example, a means of livelihood, or the presence of -joy, or the being saved from sin, or the solace of contemplation; which -things are all of phenomenal nature and subject to change. - -Footnote 27: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 291, where his “name of honour” is given as Abu - ´l-Ḥusayn. - -Furthermore, some of the vulgar prefer the rich man to the poor, on the -ground that God has made the former blest in both worlds and has -bestowed the benefit of riches on him. Here they mean by “wealth” -abundance of worldly goods and enjoyment of pleasures and pursuit of -lusts. They argue that God has commanded us to be thankful for wealth -and patient in poverty, i.e. patient in adversity and thankful in -prosperity; and that prosperity is essentially better than adversity. To -this I reply that, when God commanded us to be thankful for prosperity -He made thankfulness the means of increasing our prosperity; but when He -commanded us to be patient in adversity He made patience the means of -drawing nigh unto Himself. He said: “_Verily, if ye return thanks, I -will give you an increase_” (Kor. xiv, 7), and also, “_God is with the -patient_” (Kor. ii, 148). - -The Shaykhs who prefer wealth to poverty do not use the term “wealth” in -its popular sense. What they intend is not “acquisition of a benefit” -but “acquisition of the Benefactor”; to gain union (with God) is a -different thing from gaining forgetfulness (of God). Shaykh Abú -Sa`íd[28]—God have mercy on him!—says: “Poverty is wealth in God” -(_al-faqr huwa ´l-ghiná billáh_), i.e. everlasting revelation of the -Truth. I answer to this, that revelation (_mukáshafat_) implies the -possibility of a veil (_ḥijáb_); therefore, if the person who enjoys -revelation is veiled from revelation by the attribute of wealth, he -either becomes in need of revelation or he does not; if he does not, the -conclusion is absurd, and if he does, need is incompatible with wealth; -therefore that term cannot stand. Besides, no one has “wealth in God” -unless his attributes are permanent and his object is invariable; wealth -cannot coincide with the subsistence of an object or with the -affirmation of the attributes of human nature, inasmuch as the essential -characteristics of mortality and phenomenal being are need and -indigence. One whose attributes still survive is not rich, and one whose -attributes are annihilated is not entitled to any name whatever. -Therefore “the rich man is he who is enriched by God” (_al-ghaní man -aghnáhu ´lláh_), because the term “rich in God” refers to the agent -(_fá`il_), whereas the term “enriched by God” denotes the person acted -upon (_maf`úl_); the former is self-subsistent, but the latter subsists -through the agent; accordingly self-subsistence is an attribute of human -nature, while subsistence through God involves the annihilation of -attributes. I, then, who am `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, assert that true -wealth is incompatible with the survival (_baqá_) of any attribute, -since human attributes have already been shown to be defective and -subject to decay; nor, again, does wealth consist in the annihilation of -these attributes, because a name cannot be given to an attribute that no -longer exists, and he whose attributes are annihilated cannot be called -either “poor” or “rich”; therefore the attribute of wealth is not -transferable from God to Man, and the attribute of poverty is not -transferable from Man to God. - -Footnote 28: - - See Chapter XII, No. 5. - -All the Ṣúfí Shaykhs and most of the vulgar prefer poverty to wealth for -the reason that the Koran and the Sunna expressly declare it to be -superior, and herein the majority of Moslems are agreed. I find, among -the anecdotes which I have read, that on one occasion this question was -discussed by Junayd and Ibn `Aṭá. The latter maintained the superiority -of the rich. He argued that at the Resurrection they would be called to -account for their wealth, and that such an account (_ḥisáb_) entails the -hearing of the Divine Word, without any mediation, in the form of -reproach (_`itáb_): and reproach is addressed by the Beloved to the -lover. Junayd answered: “If He will call the rich to account, He will -ask the poor for their excuse; and asking an excuse is better than -calling to account.” This is a very subtle point. In true love excuse is -“otherness” (_bégánagí_) and reproach is contrary to unity (_yagánagí_). -Lovers regard both these things as a blemish, because excuse is made for -some disobedience to the command of the Beloved and reproach is made on -the same score; but both are impossible in true love, for then neither -does the Beloved require an expiation from the lover nor does the lover -neglect to perform the will of the Beloved. - -Every man is “poor”, even though he be a prince. Essentially the wealth -of Solomon and the poverty of Solomon are one. God said to Job in the -extremity of his patience, and likewise to Solomon in the plenitude of -his dominion: “_Good servant that thou art_!”[29] When God’s pleasure -was accomplished, it made no difference between the poverty and the -wealth of Solomon. - -Footnote 29: - - Kor. xxxviii, 29, 44. - -The author says: “I have heard that Abu ´l-Qásim Qushayrí—God have mercy -on him!—said: ‘People have spoken much concerning poverty and wealth, -and have chosen one or the other for themselves, but I choose whichever -state God chooses for me and keeps me in; if He keeps me rich I will not -be forgetful, and if He wishes me to be poor I will not be covetous and -rebellious.’” Therefore, both wealth and poverty are Divine gifts: -wealth is corrupted by forgetfulness, poverty by covetousness. Both -conceptions are excellent, but they differ in practice. Poverty is the -separation of the heart from all but God, and wealth is the -preoccupation of the heart with that which does not admit of being -qualified. When the heart is cleared (of all except God), poverty is not -better than wealth nor is wealth better than poverty. Wealth is -abundance of worldly goods and poverty is lack of them: all goods belong -to God: when the seeker bids farewell to property, the antithesis -disappears and both terms are transcended. - - - SECTION. - -All the Ṣúfí Shaykhs have spoken on the subject of poverty. I will now -cite as many of their sayings as it is possible to include in this book. - -One of the moderns says: _Laysa ´l-faqír man khalá min al-zád: innama -´l-faqír man khalá min al-murád_, “The poor man is not he whose hand is -empty of provisions, but he whose nature is empty of desires.” For -example, if God gives him money and he desires to keep it, then he is -rich; and if he desires to renounce it, he is rich no less, because -poverty consists in ceasing to act on one’s own initiative. Yaḥyá b. -Mu`ádh al-Rází says: _Al-faqr khawf al-faqr_, “It is a sign of true -poverty that, although one has reached the perfection of saintship and -contemplation and self-annihilation, one should always be dreading its -decline and departure.” And Ruwaym says: _Min na`t al-faqír ḥifṣu -sirrihi wa-ṣiyánatu nafsihi wa-adá´u faríḍatihi_, “It is characteristic -of the poor man that his heart is protected from selfish cares, and that -his soul is guarded from contaminations, and that he performs the -obligatory duties of religion:” that is to say, his inward meditations -do not interfere with his outward acts, nor _vice versâ_; which is a -sign that he has cast off the attributes of mortality. Bishr Ḥáfí says: -_Afḍal al-maqámát i`tiqád al-ṣabr `ala ´l-faqr ila ´l-qabr_, “The best -of ‘stations’ is a firm resolution to endure poverty continually.” Now -poverty is the annihilation of all “stations”: therefore the resolution -to endure poverty is a sign of regarding works and actions as imperfect, -and of aspiring to annihilate human attributes. But in its obvious sense -this saying pronounces poverty to be superior to wealth, and expresses a -determination never to abandon it. Sḥiblí says: _Al-faqír man lá -yastaghní bi-shay´^{in} dúna ´lláh_, “The poor man does not rest content -with anything except God,” because he has no other object of desire. The -literal meaning is that you will not become rich except by Him, and that -when you have gained Him you have become rich. Your being, then, is -other than God; and since you cannot gain wealth except by renouncing -“other”, your “you-ness” is a veil between you and wealth: when that is -removed, you are rich. This saying is very subtle and obscure. In the -opinion of advanced spiritualists (_ahl-i ḥaqíqat_) it means: _Al-faqr -an lá yustaghná `anhu_, “Poverty consists in never being independent of -poverty.” This is what the Pír, i.e. Master `Abdalláh Anṣárí[30]—may God -be well-pleased with him!—meant when he said that our sorrow is -everlasting, that our aspiration never reaches its goal, and that our -sum (_kulliyyat_) never becomes non-existent in this world or the next, -because for the fruition of anything homogeneity is necessary, but God -has no congener, and for turning away from Him forgetfulness is -necessary, but the dervish is not forgetful. What an endless task, what -a difficult road! The dead (_fání_) never become living (_báqí_), so as -to be united with Him; the living never become dead, so as to approach -His presence. All that His lovers do and suffer is entirely a probation -(_miḥnat_); but in order to console themselves they have invented a -fine-sounding phraseology (_`ibáratí muzakhraf_) and have produced -“stations” and “stages” and a “path”. Their symbolic expressions, -however, begin and end in themselves, and their “stations” do not rise -beyond their own _genus_, whereas God is exempt from every human -attribute and relationship. Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí says: _Na`t al-faqír -al-sukún `inda ´l-`adam wa ´l-badhl `inda ´l-wujúd_; and he says also: -_Al-iḍṭiráb `inda ´l-wujúd_, “When he gets nothing he is silent, and -when he gets something he regards another person as better entitled to -it than himself, and therefore gives it away.” The practice enunciated -in this saying is of great importance. There are two meanings: (1) His -quiescence when he gets nothing is satisfaction (_riḍá_), and his -liberality when he gets something is love (_maḥabbat_), because -“satisfied” means “accepting a robe of honour” (_qábil-i khil`at_), and -the robe of honour is a token of proximity (_qurbat_) whereas the lover -(_muḥibb_) rejects the robe of honour inasmuch as it is a token of -severance (_furqat_); and (2) his quiescence when he gets nothing is -expectation of getting something, and when he has got it, that -“something” is other than God: he cannot be satisfied with anything -other than God; therefore he rejects it. Both these meanings are -implicit in the saying of the Grand Shaykh, Abu ´l-Qásim Junayd: -_Al-faqr khuluww al-qalb `an al-ashkál_, “When his heart is empty of -phenomena he is poor.” Since the existence of phenomena is “other” (than -God), rejection is the only course possible. Shiblí says: _Al-faqr baḥr -al-balá wa-balá´uhu kulluhu `izz^{un}_, “Poverty is a sea of trouble, -and all troubles for His sake are glorious.” Glory is a portion of -“other”. The afflicted are plunged in trouble and know nothing of glory, -until they forget their trouble and regard the Author thereof. Then -their trouble is changed into glory, and their glory into a spiritual -state (_waqt_), and their spiritual state into love, and their love into -contemplation, so that finally the brain of the aspirant becomes wholly -a centre of vision through the predominance of his imagination: he sees -without eye, and hears without ear. Again, it is glorious for a man to -bear the burden of trouble laid upon him by his Beloved, for in truth -misfortune is glory, and prosperity is humiliation. Glory is that which -makes one present with God, and humiliation is that which makes one -absent from God: the affliction of poverty is a sign of “presence”, -while the delight of riches is a sign of “absence”. Therefore one should -cling to trouble of any description that involves contemplation and -intimacy. Junayd says: _Yá ma`shar al-fuqará innakum tu`rafúna billáh -wa-tukra-múna lilláh fa-´nẕurú kayfa takúnúna ma`a a ´lláh idhá -khalawtum bihi_, “O ye that are poor, ye are known through God, and are -honoured for the sake of God: take heed how ye behave when ye are alone -with Him,” i.e. if people call you “poor” and recognize your claim, see -that you perform the obligations of the path of poverty; and if they -give you another name, inconsistent with what you profess, do not accept -it, but fulfil your professions. The basest of men is he who is thought -to be devoted to God, but really is not; and the noblest is he who is -not thought to be devoted to God, but really is. The former resembles an -ignorant physician, who pretends to cure people, but only makes them -worse, and when he falls ill himself needs another physician to -prescribe for him; and the latter is like one who is not known to be a -physician, and does not concern himself with other folk, but employs his -skill in order to maintain his own health. One of the moderns has said: -_Al-faqr `adam^{un} bilá wujúd^{in}_, “Poverty is not-being without -existence.” To interpret this saying is impossible, because what is -non-existent does not admit of being explained. On the surface it would -seem that, according to this dictum, poverty is nothing, but such is not -the case; the explanations and consensus of the Saints of God are not -founded on a principle that is essentially non-existent. The meaning -here is not “the not-being of the essence”, but “the not-being of that -which contaminates the essence”; and all human attributes are a source -of contamination: when that is removed, the result is annihilation of -the attributes (_faná-yi ṣifat_), which deprives the sufferer of the -instrument whereby he attains, or fails to attain, his object; but his -not-going to the essence (_`adam-i rawish ba-`ayn_) seems to him -annihilation of the essence and casts him into perdition. - -Footnote 30: - - The celebrated mystic of Herát, who died in 481 A.H. See Professor - Browne’s _Literary History of Persia_, vol. ii, p. 269. - -I have met with some scholastic philosophers who, failing to understand -the drift of this saying, laughed at it and declared it to be nonsense; -and also with certain pretenders (to Ṣúfiism) who made nonsense of it -and were firmly convinced of its truth, although they had no grasp of -the fundamental principle. Both parties are in the wrong: one ignorantly -denies the truth, and the other makes ignorance a state (of perfection). -Now the expressions “not-being” (_`adam_) and “annihilation” (_faná_), -as they are used by Ṣúfís, denote the disappearance of a blameworthy -instrument (_álat-i madhmúm_) and disapproved attribute in the course of -seeking a praiseworthy attribute; they do not signify the search for -non-reality (_`adam-i ma`ní_) by means of an instrument which exists. - -Dervishhood in all its meanings is a metaphorical poverty, and amidst -all its subordinate aspects there is a transcendent principle. The -Divine mysteries come and go over the dervish, so that his affairs are -acquired by himself, his actions attributed to himself, and his ideas -attached to himself. But when his affairs are freed from the bonds of -acquisition (_kasb_), his actions are no more attributed to himself. -Then he is the Way, not the wayfarer, i.e. the dervish is a place over -which something is passing, not a wayfarer following his own will. -Accordingly, he neither draws anything to himself nor puts anything away -from himself: all that leaves any trace upon him belongs to the essence. - -I have seen false Ṣúfís, mere tonguesters (_arbáb al-lisán_), whose -imperfect apprehension of this matter seemed to deny the existence of -the essence of poverty, while their lack of desire for the reality of -poverty seemed to deny the attributes of its essence. They called by the -name of “poverty” and “purity” their failure to seek Truth and Reality, -and it looked as though they affirmed their own fancies but denied all -else. Every one of them was in some degree veiled from poverty, because -the conceit of Ṣúfiism (_pindár-i ín ḥadíth_) betokens perfection of -saintship, and the claim to be suspected of Ṣúfiism (_tawallá-yi -tuhmat-i ín ḥadíth_) is the ultimate goal, i.e. this claim belongs only -to the state of perfection. Therefore the seeker has no choice but to -journey in their path and to traverse their “stations” and to know their -symbolic expressions, in order that he may not be a plebeian _(`ámmí)_ -among the elect. Those who are ignorant of general principles (_`awámm-i -uṣúl_) have no ground to stand on, whereas those who are ignorant only -as regards the derivative branches are supported by the principles. I -have said all this to encourage you to undertake this spiritual journey -and occupy yourself with the due fulfilment of its obligations. - -Now in the chapter on Ṣúfiism I will explain some of the principles and -allegories and mystic sayings of this sect. Then I will mention the -names of their holy men, and afterwards elucidate the different -doctrines held by the Ṣúfi Shaykhs. In the next place, I will treat of -the Verities, Sciences, and Laws of Ṣúfiism. Lastly, I will set forth -their rules of discipline and the significance of their “stations”, in -order that the truth of this matter may become clear to you and to all -my readers. - - - - - CHAPTER III. - ON ṢÚFIISM. - - -God, Almighty and Glorious, has said: “_And those who walk meekly on the -earth, and when the ignorant speak to them answer ‘Peace’_,” (shall be -rewarded with the highest place in Paradise).[31] And the Apostle has -said: “He that hears the voice of Ṣúfís (_ahl al-taṣawwuf_) and does not -say Amen to their prayer is inscribed before God among the heedless.” -The true meaning of this name has been much discussed and many books -have been composed on the subject. Some assert that the Ṣúfí is so -called because he wears a woollen garment (_jáma´-i ṣúf_); others that -he is so called because he is in the first rank (_ṣaff-i awwal_); others -say it is because the Ṣúfís claim to belong to the _Aṣḥáb-i Ṣuffa_,[32] -with whom may God be well-pleased! Others, again, declare that the name -is derived from _ṣafá_ (purity). These explanations of the true meaning -of Ṣúfiism are far from satisfying the requirements of etymology, -although each of them is supported by many subtle arguments. _Ṣafá_ -(purity) is universally praised, and its opposite is _kadar_. The -Apostle—on whom be peace!—said: “The _ṣafw_ (pure part, i.e. the best) -of this world is gone, and only its _kadar_ (impurity) remains.” -Therefore, since the people of this persuasion have purged their morals -and conduct, and have sought to free themselves from natural taints, on -that account they are called Ṣúfís; and this designation of the sect is -a proper name (_az asámi-yi a`lám_), inasmuch as the dignity of the -Ṣúfís is too great for their transactions (_mu`ámalát_) to be hidden, so -that their name should need a derivation. In this age, however, God has -veiled most people from Ṣúfiism and from its votaries, and has concealed -its mysteries from their hearts. Accordingly some imagine that it -consists merely in the practice of outward piety without inward -contemplation, and others suppose that it is a form and a system without -essence and root, to such an extent that they have adopted the view of -scoffers (_ahl-i hazl_) and theologians (_`ulamá_), who regard only the -external, and have condemned Ṣùfiism altogether, making no attempt to -discover what it really is. The people in general, blindly conforming to -this opinion, have erased from their hearts the quest for inward purity -and have discarded the tenets of the Ancients and the Companions of the -Prophet. _Verily, purity is characteristic of the Ṣiddíq,[33] if thou -desirest a true Ṣúfí_—because purity (_ṣafá_) has a root and a branch: -its root being severance of the heart from “others” (_aghyár_), and its -branch that the heart should be empty of this deceitful world. Both -these are characteristic of the Greatest _Ṣiddíq_, (the Caliph) Abú Bakr -`Abdalláh b. Abí Quḥáfa, with whom may God be well-pleased! He is the -leader (_imám_) of all the folk of this Path. - -Footnote 31: - - Kor. xxv, 64. - -Footnote 32: - - See Chapter IX. - -Footnote 33: - - The name _zaddíq_ (an Aramaic word meaning “righteous”) was given to - the ascetics and spiritual adepts among the Manichæans. Its Arabic - equivalent, _siddíq_, which means “veracious”, is a term that is - frequently applied to Ṣúfís. - - [The author then relates how, on Muḥammad’s decease, when `Umar - threatened to decapitate anyone who asserted that the Prophet was - dead, Abú Bakr stepped forth and cried with a loud voice: “Whoever - worships Muḥammad, let him know that Muḥammad is dead; but whoever - worships Muḥammad’s Lord, let him know that HE is living and dieth - not.” Those who regarded Muḥammad with the eye of mortality ceased to - venerate him as soon as he departed from this world, but to those who - regarded him with the eye of reality his presence and absence were - alike, because they attributed both to God; and looked, not at the - particular change which had come to pass, but at the Author of all - change; and venerated Muḥammad only in proportion as God honoured him; - and did not attach their hearts to anyone (except God); and did not - open their eyes to gaze upon mankind, inasmuch as “he that beholdeth - mankind waneth, but he that returneth unto God reigneth” (_man naẕara - ila ´l-khalq halak wa-man raja`a ila ´l-ḥaqq malak_). And Abú Bakr - showed that his heart was empty of this deceitful world, for he gave - away all his wealth and his clients (_mawálí_), and clad himself in a - woollen garment (_gilím_), and came to the Apostle, who asked him what - he had left for his family. Abú Bakr replied: “Only God and His - Apostle.” All this is characteristic of the sincere Ṣúfí.] - -I said that _ṣafá_ (purity) is the opposite of _kadar_ (impurity), and -_kadar_ is one of the qualities of Man. The true Ṣúfí is he that leaves -impurity behind. Thus, human nature (_bashariyyat_) prevailed in the -women of Egypt as they gazed, enraptured, on the wondrous beauty of -Yúsuf (Joseph), on whom be peace! But afterwards the preponderance was -reversed, until at last they beheld him with their human nature -annihilated (_ba-faná-yi bashariyyat_) and cried: “_This is no human -being_” (Kor. xii, 31). They made him their object and gave expression -to their own state. Hence the Shaykhs of this Path—God have mercy on -them!—have said: _Laysa ´l-ṣafá min ṣifat al-bashar li´anna ´l-bashar -madar wa´l-madar lá yakhlú min al-kadar_, “Purity is not one of the -qualities of Man, for Man is clay, and clay involves impurity, and Man -cannot escape from impurity.” Therefore purity bears no likeness to acts -(_af`ál_), nor can the human nature be destroyed by means of effort. The -quality of purity is unrelated to acts and states, and its name is -unconnected with names and nicknames—_purity is characteristic of the -lovers_ (of God), _who are suns without cloud_—because purity is the -attribute of those who love, and the lover is he that is dead (_fání_) -in his own attributes and living (_báqí_) in the attributes of his -Beloved, and their “states” resemble the clear sun in the opinion of -mystics (_arbáb-i ḥál_). The beloved of God, Muḥammad the Chosen One, -was asked concerning the state of Ḥáritha. He answered: _`Abd nawwara -´lláh qalbahu bi ´l-ímán_, “He is a man whose heart is illumined by the -light of faith, so that his face shines like the moon from the effect -thereof, and he is formed by the Divine light.” An eminent Ṣúfí says: -_Ḍiyá al-shams wa´l-qamar idha ´shtaraká namúdhaj^{un} min ṣafá al-ḥubb -wa ´l-tawḥíd idha ´shtabaká_, “The combination of the light of the sun -and moon, when they are in conjunction, is like the purity of Love and -Unification when these are mingled together.” Assuredly, the light of -the sun and moon is worthless beside the light of the Love and -Unification of God Almighty, and they should not be compared; but in -this world there is no light more conspicuous than those two luminaries. -The eye cannot see the light of the sun and moon with complete -demonstration. During the sway of the sun and moon it sees the sky, -whereas the heart (_dil_) sees the empyrean (_`arsh_) by the light of -knowledge and unification and love, and while still in this world -explores the world to come. All the Shaykhs of this Path are agreed that -when a man has escaped from the captivity of “stations” (_maqámát_), and -gets rid of the impurity of “states” (_aḥwál_), and is liberated from -the abode of change and decay, and becomes endowed with all praiseworthy -qualities, he is disjoined from all qualities. That is to say, he is not -held in bondage by any praiseworthy quality of his own, nor does he -regard it, nor is he made self-conceited thereby. His state is hidden -from the perception of intelligences, and his time is exempt from the -influence of thoughts. His presence (_ḥuḍúr_) with God has no end and -his existence has no cause. And when he arrives at this degree, he -becomes annihilated (_fání_) in this world and in the next, and is made -divine (_rabbání_) in the disappearance of humanity; and gold and earth -are the same in his eyes, and the ordinances which others find hard to -keep become easy to him. - - [Here follows the story of Ḥáritha, who declared that he had true - faith in God. The Prophet asked: “What is the reality of thy faith?” - Ḥáritha replied: “I have cut off and turned myself away from this - world, so that its stones and its gold and its silver and its clay are - equal in my sight. And I have passed my nights in wakefulness and my - days in thirst until methinks I see the Throne of my Lord manifest, - and the people of Paradise visiting one another, and the people of - Hell wrestling with one another”[34] (or, according to an alternative - reading: “making sudden attacks on one another”).[35] The Prophet - said, repeating the words thrice: “Thou knowest, therefore - persevere.”] - -Footnote 34: - - _Yataṣára`ún._ B. has _yata`ádawn_, and in marg. _yatasára`ún_. The - true reading is _yata`áwawn_, “barking (or ‘growling’) at one - another.” Cf. _Lisán_, xix, 343, 3. - -Footnote 35: - - _Yatagháwarún._ This is the reading of J., I. has _yata`áwarún_, L. - _yata`áwadún_, B. _yataghámazún_, and in marg. _yatafáwazún_. - -“Ṣúfí” is a name which is given, and has formerly been given, to the -perfect saints and spiritual adepts. One of the Shaykhs says: _Man -ṣaffáhu ´l-ḥubb fa-huwa ṣáf^{in} wa-man ṣaffáhu ´l-ḥabíb fa-huwa -Ṣúfiyy^{un}_, “He that is purified by love is pure, and he that is -absorbed in the Beloved and has abandoned all else is a ‘Ṣúfí’.” The -name has no derivation answering to etymological requirements, inasmuch -as Ṣúfiism is too exalted to have any genus from which it might be -derived; for the derivation of one thing from another demands -homogeneity (_mujánasat_). All that exists is the opposite of purity -(_ṣafá_), and things are not derived from their opposites. To Ṣúfís the -meaning of Ṣúfiism is clearer than the sun and does not need any -explanation or indication. Since “Ṣúfí” admits of no explanation, all -the world are interpreters thereof, whether they recognize the dignity -of the name or no at the time when they learn its meaning. The perfect, -then, among them are called _Ṣúfí_, and the inferior aspirants -(_ṭálibán_) among them are called _Mutaṣawwif_; for _taṣawwuf_ belongs -to the form _tafa``ul_, which implies “taking trouble” (_takalluf_),[36] -and is a branch of the original root. The difference both in meaning and -in etymology is evident. _Purity (ṣafá) is a saintship with a sign and a -relation (riwáyat)_, and _Ṣúfiism (taṣawwuf) is an uncomplaining -imitation of purity (ḥikáyat^{un} li´l-ṣafá bilá shikáyat)._ Purity, -then, is a resplendent and manifest idea, and Ṣúfiism is an imitation of -that idea. Its followers in this degree are of three kinds: the _Ṣúfí_, -the _Mutaṣawwif_, and the _Mustaṣwif_. The _Ṣúfí_ is he that is dead to -self and living by the Truth; he has escaped from the grip of human -faculties and has really attained (to God). The _Mutaṣawwif_ is he that -seeks to reach this rank by means of self-mortification (_mujáhadat_) -and in his search rectifies his conduct in accordance with their (the -Ṣúfís’) example. The _Mustaṣwif_ is he that makes himself like them (the -Ṣúfís) for the sake of money and wealth and power and worldly advantage, -but has no knowledge of these two things.[37] Hence it has been said: -_Al-mustaṣwif `inda ´l-Ṣúfiyyat ka-´l-dhubáb wa-`inda ghayrihim -ka-´l-dhi´áb_, “The _Mustaṣwif_ in the opinion of the Ṣúfís is as -despicable as flies, and his actions are mere cupidity; others regard -him as being like a wolf, and his speech unbridled (_bé afsár_), for he -only desires a morsel of carrion.” Therefore the _Ṣúfí_ is a man of -union (_ṣáḥib wuṣúl_), the _Mutaṣawwif_ a man of principles, (_ṣáḥib -uṣúl_), and the _Mustaṣwif_ a man of superfluities (_ṣáḥib fuḍúl_). He -that has the portion of union loses all end and object by gaining his -end and reaching his object; he that has the portion of principle -becomes firm in the “states” of the mystic path, and steadfastly devoted -to the mysteries thereof; but he that has the portion of superfluity, is -left devoid of all (worth having), and sits down at the gate of -formality (_rasm_), and thereby he is veiled from reality (_ma`ní_) and -this veil renders both union and principle invisible to him. The Shaykhs -of this persuasion have given many subtle definitions of Ṣúfiism which -cannot all be enumerated, but we shall mention some of them in this -book, if God will, who is the Author of success. - -Footnote 36: - - Examples of this signification of the form _tafa``ul_ are given in - Wright’s Arabic Grammar, vol. i, p. 37, Rem. _b_. - -Footnote 37: - - Viz., purity (_ṣafá_) and Ṣúfiism (_taṣawwuf_). - - - SECTION. - -Dhu ´l-Nún, the Egyptian, says: _Al-Ṣúfí idhá naṭaqa bána nuṭquhu `an -al-ḥaqá´iq wa-in sakata naṭaqat `anhu ´l-jawáriḥ bi-qaṭ` al-`alá´iq_, -“The Ṣúfí is he whose language, when he speaks, is the reality of his -state, i.e. he says nothing which he is not, and when he is silent his -conduct explains his state, and his state proclaims that he has cut all -worldly ties;” i.e. all that he says is based on a sound principle and -all that he does is pure detachment from the world (_tajríd_); when he -speaks his speech is entirely the Truth, and when he is silent his -actions are wholly “poverty” (_faqr_). Junayd says: _Al-taṣawwuf -na`t^{un} uqíma ´l-`abd fíhi qíla na`t^{un} li-´l-`abd am li-´l-ḥaqq -faqála na`t al-ḥaqq ḥaqíqat^{an} wa-na`t al-`abd rasm^{an}_, “Ṣúfiism is -an attribute wherein is Man’s subsistence.” They said: “Is it an -attribute of God or of mankind?” He replied: “Its essence is an -attribute of God and its formal system is an attribute of mankind;” i.e. -its essence involves the annihilation of human qualities, which is -brought about by the everlastingness of the Divine qualities, and this -is an attribute of God; whereas its formal system involves on the part -of Man the continuance of self-mortification (_mujáhadat_), and this -continuance of self-mortification is an attribute of Man. Or the words -may be taken in another sense, namely, that in real Unification -(_tawḥíd_) there are, correctly speaking, no human attributes at all, -because human attributes are not constant but are only formal (_rasm_), -having no permanence, for God is the agent. Therefore they are really -the attributes of God. Thus (to explain what is meant), God commands His -servants to fast, and when they keep the fast He gives them the name of -“faster” (_ṣá´im_), and _nominally_ this “fasting” (_ṣawm_) belongs to -Man, but _really_ it belongs to God. Accordingly God told His Apostle -and said: _Al-ṣawm lí wa-ana ajzí bihi_, “Fasting is mine,” because all -His acts are His possessions, and when men ascribe things to themselves, -the attribution is formal and metaphorical, not real. And Abu ´l-Ḥasan -Núrí says: _Al-taṣawwuf tarku kulli ḥaẕẕ^{in}_ _li-´l-nafs_, “Ṣúfiism is -the renunciation of all selfish pleasures.” This renunciation is of two -kinds: formal and essential. For example, if one renounces a pleasure, -and finds pleasure in the renunciation, this is formal renunciation; but -if the pleasure renounces him, then the pleasure is annihilated, and -this case falls under the head of true contemplation (_musháhadat_). -Therefore renunciation of pleasure is the act of Man, but annihilation -of pleasure is the act of God. The act of Man is formal and -metaphorical, while the act of God is real. This saying (of Núrí) -elucidates the saying of Junayd which has been quoted above. And Abu -´l-Ḥasan Núrí also says: _Al-Ṣúfiyyat humu ´lladhína ṣafat arwáḥuhum -fa-ṣárú fi ´l-ṣaff al-awwal bayna yadayi ´l-ḥaqq_, “The Ṣúfís are they -whose spirits have been freed from the pollution of humanity, purified -from carnal taint, and released from concupiscence, so that they have -found rest with God in the first rank and the highest degree, and have -fled from all save Him.” And he also says: _Al-Ṣúfí alladhí lá yamlik -wa-lá yumlak_, “The Ṣúfí is he that has nothing in his possession nor is -himself possessed by anything.” This denotes the essence of annihilation -(_faná_), since one whose qualities are annihilated neither possesses -nor is possessed, inasmuch as the term “possession” can properly be -applied only to existent things. The meaning is, that the Ṣúfí does not -make his own any good of this world or any glory of the next world, for -he is not even in the possession and control of himself: he refrains -from desiring authority over others, in order that others may not desire -submission from him. This saying refers to a mystery of the Ṣúfí’s which -they call “complete annihilation” (_faná-yi kullí_). If God will, we -shall mention in this work, for your information, the points wherein -they have fallen into error. - -Ibn al-Jallá[38] says: _Al-taṣawwuf ḥaqíqat^{un} lá rasm lahu_, “Ṣúfiism -is an essence without form,” because the form belongs to mankind in -respect to their conduct (_mu`ámalát_), while the essence thereof is -peculiar to God. Since Ṣúfiism consists in turning away from mankind, it -is necessarily without form. And Abú `Amr Dimashqí says: _Al-taṣawwuf -ru´yat al-kawn bi-`ayn al-naqṣ, bal ghaḍḍ al-ṭarf `an al-kawn_, “Ṣúfiism -is: to see the imperfection of the phenomenal world (and this shows that -human attributes are still existent), nay, to shut the eye to the -phenomenal world” (and this shows that human attributes are annihilated; -because the objects of sight are phenomena, and when phenomena -disappear, sight also disappears). Shutting the eye to the phenomenal -world leaves the spiritual vision subsistent, i.e. whoever becomes blind -to self sees by means of God, because the seeker of phenomena is also a -self-seeker, and his action proceeds from and through himself, and he -cannot find any way of escaping from himself. Accordingly one sees -himself to be imperfect, and one shuts his eye to self and does not see; -and although the seer sees his imperfection, nevertheless his eye is a -veil, and he is veiled by his sight, but he who does not see is not -veiled by his blindness. This is a well-established principle in the -Path of aspirants to Ṣúfiism and mystics (_arbáb-i ma`ání_), but to -explain it here would be unsuitable. And Abú Bakr Shiblí says: -_Al-taṣawwuf shirk^{un} li´annahu ṣiyánat al-qalb `an ru´yat al-ghayr -wa-lá ghayr_, “Ṣúfiism is polytheism, because it is the guarding of the -heart from the vision of ‘other’, and ‘other’ does not exist.” That is -to say, vision of other (than God) in affirming the Unity of God is -polytheism, and when “other” has no value in the heart, it is absurd to -guard the heart from remembrance of “other”. And Ḥusrí says: -_Al-taṣawwuf ṣafá al-sirr min kudúrat al-mukhálafat_, “Ṣúfiism is the -heart’s being pure from the pollution of discord.” The meaning thereof -is that he should protect the heart from discord with God, because love -is concord, and concord is the opposite of discord, and the lover has -but one duty in the world, namely, to keep the commandment of the -beloved; and if the object of desire is one, how can discord arise? And -Muḥammad b. `Alí b. al-Ḥusayn b. `Alí b. Abí Ṭálib—may God be pleased -with them all!—says: _Al-taṣawwuf khulq^{un} fa-man záda `alayka fi -´l-khulq záda `alayka fi ´l-taṣawwuf_, “Ṣúfiism is goodness of -disposition: he that has the better disposition is the better Ṣúfí.” Now -goodness of disposition is of two kinds: towards God and towards men. -The former is acquiescence in the Divine decrees, the latter is -endurance of the burden of men’s society for God’s sake. These two -aspects refer to the seeker (_ṭálib_). God is independent of the -seeker’s acquiescence or anger, and these two qualities depend on -consideration of His Unity. And Abú Muḥammad Murta`ish says: _Al-Ṣúfí lá -yasbiqu himmatuhu khaṭwatahu_, “The Ṣúfí is he whose thought keeps pace -with his foot,” i.e. he is entirely present: his soul is where his body -is, and his body where his soul is, and his soul where his foot is, and -his foot where his soul is. This is the sign of presence without -absence. Others say, on the contrary: “He is absent from himself and -present with God.” It is not so: he is present with himself and present -with God. The expression denotes perfect union (_jam` al-jam`_), because -there can be no absence from self so long as one regards one’s self; -when self-regard has ceased, there is presence (with God) without -absence. In this particular sense the saying closely resembles that of -Shiblí: _Al-Ṣúfí lá yará fi ´l-dárayn ma`a ´lláh ghayra ´lláh_, “The -Ṣúfí is he that sees nothing except God in the two worlds.” In short, -human existence is “other”, and when a man does not see “other” he does -not see himself; and becomes totally void of self, whether “self” is -affirmed or denied. And Junayd says: _Al-taṣawwuf mabniyy^{un} `alá -thamán khiṣál al-sakhá wa ´l-riḍá wa ´l-ṣabr wa ´l-ishárat wa ´l-ghurbat -wa-labs al-ṣúf wa ´l-siyáḥat wa ´l-faqr amma ´l-sakhá fa-li-Ibráhím -wa-amma ´l-riḍá fa-li-Ismá`íl wa-amma ´l-ṣabr fa-li-Ayyúb wa-amma -´l-ishárat fa-li-Zakariyyá wa-amma ´l-ghurbat fa-li-Yaḥyá wa-amma labs -al-ṣúf fa-li-Músá wa-amma ´l-siyáḥat fa-li-`Ísá wa-amma ´l-faqr -fa-li-Muḥammad ṣalla ´lláhu `alayhi wa-sallama wa-`alayhim ajma`ín_, -“Ṣúfiism is founded on eight qualities exemplified in eight Apostles: -the generosity of Abraham, who sacrificed his son; the acquiescence of -Ishmael, who submitted to the command of God and gave up his dear life; -the patience of Job, who patiently endured the affliction of worms and -the jealousy of the Merciful; the symbolism of Zacharias, to whom God -said, ‘_Thou shalt not speak unto men for three days save by signs_’ -(Kor. iii, 36), and again to the same effect, ‘_When he called upon his -Lord with a secret invocation_’ (Kor. xix, 2); the strangerhood of John, -who was a stranger in his own country and an alien to his own kin -amongst whom he lived; the pilgrimhood of Jesus, who was so detached -therein from worldly things that he kept only a cup and a comb—the cup -he threw away when he saw a man drinking water in the palms of his -hands, and the comb likewise when he saw another man using his fingers -instead of a toothpick; the wearing of wool by Moses, whose garment was -woollen; and the poverty of Muḥammad, to whom God Almighty sent the key -of all the treasures that are upon the face of the earth, saying: ‘Lay -no trouble on thyself, but procure every luxury by means of these -treasures;’ and he answered: ‘O Lord, I desire them not; keep me one day -full-fed and one day hungry.’” These are very excellent principles of -conduct. - -Footnote 38: - - So J. The Lahore edition has Ibn al-Jalálí, I. Ibn al-Jullábí. See - Chapter X, No. 34. - -And Ḥuṣrí says: _Al-Ṣúfí la yújadu ba`da `adamihi wa-lá yu`damu ba`da -wujúdihi_, “The Ṣúfí is he whose existence is without non-existence and -his non-existence without existence,” i.e. he never loses that which he -finds, and he never finds that which he loses. Another meaning is this, -that his finding (_yáft_) has no not-finding (_ná-yáft_), and his -not-finding has no finding at any time, so that there is either an -affirmation without negation or a negation without affirmation. The -object of all these expressions is that the Ṣúfí’s state of mortality -should entirely lapse, and that his bodily feelings (_shawáhid_) should -disappear and his connexion with everything be cut off, in order that -the mystery of his mortality may be revealed and his various parts -united in his essential self, and that he may subsist through and in -himself. The effect of this can be shown in two Apostles: firstly, -Moses, in whose existence there was no non-existence, so that he said: -“_O Lord, enlarge my breast and make my affair easy unto me_” (Kor. xx, -26, 27); secondly, the Apostle (Muḥammad), in whose non-existence there -was no existence, so that God said: “_Did not We enlarge thy breast?_” -(Kor. xciv, 1). The one asked for adornment and sought honour, but the -other was adorned, since he had no request to make for himself. - -And `Alí b. Bundár al-Ṣayrafí of Níshápúr says: _Al-taṣawwuf isqáṭ -al-ru´yat li-´l-ḥaqq ẕáhir^{an} wa-báṭin^{an}_, “Ṣúfiism is this, that -the Ṣúfí should not regard his own exterior and interior, but should -regard all as belonging to God.” Thus, if you look at the exterior, you -will find an outward sign of God’s blessing, and, as you look, outward -actions will not have the weight even of a gnat’s wing beside the -blessing of God, and you will cease from regarding the exterior; and -again, if you look at the interior, you will find an inward sign of -God’s aid, and, as you look, inward actions will not turn the scale by a -single grain in comparison with the aid of God, and you will cease from -regarding the interior, and will see that all belongs to God; and when -you see that all is God’s, you will see that you yourself have nothing. - -Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Muqrí[39] says: _Al-taṣawwuf istiqámat al-aḥwál -ma`a ´l-ḥaqq_, “Ṣúfiism is the maintenance of right states with God,” -i.e. “states” do not seduce the Ṣúfí from his (right) state, nor cast -him into wrong, since he whose heart is devoted to the Author of states -(_muḥawwil-i aḥwál_) is not cast down from the rank of rectitude nor -hindered from attaining to the Truth. - -Footnote 39: - - Died in 366 A.H. See _Nafaḥát_, No. 332. - - - SECTION. - -_Maxims of Conduct_ (_mu`ámalát_). - -Abú Ḥafṣ Ḥaddád of Níshápúr says: _Al-taṣawwuf kulluhu ádáb^{un} -li-kulli waqt^{in} adab^{un} wa-li-kulli maqám^{in} adab^{un} -wa-li-kulli ḥál^{in} adab^{un} fa-man lazima ádáb al-awqát balagha -mablagh_ _al-rijál fa-man ḍayya`a ´l-ádáb fa-huwa ba`íd^{un} min ḥaythu -yaẕunnu ´l-qurb wa-mardúd^{un} min ḥaythu yaẕunnu ´l-qabúl_, “Ṣúfiism -consists entirely of behaviour; every time, place, and circumstance have -their own propriety; he that observes the proprieties of each occasion -attains to the rank of holy men; and he that neglects the proprieties is -far removed from the thought of nearness (to God) and is excluded from -imagining that he is acceptable to God.” The meaning of this is akin to -the dictum of Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí: _Laysa ´l-taṣawwuf rusúm^{an} wa-lá -`ulúm^{an} wa-lákinnahu akhláq^{un}_, “Ṣúfiism is not composed of -practices and sciences, but it is morals,” i.e. if it consisted of -practices, it could be acquired by effort, and if it consisted of -sciences, it could be gained by instruction: hence it is morals, and it -is not acquired until you demand from yourself the principles of morals, -and make your actions square with them, and fulfil their just claims. -The distinction between practices (_rusúm_) and morals (_akhláq_) is -this, that practices are ceremonial actions proceeding from certain -motives, actions devoid of reality, so that their form is at variance -with their spirit, whereas morals are praiseworthy actions without -ceremony or motive, actions devoid of pretension, so that their form is -in harmony with their spirit. - -Murta`ish says: _Al-taṣawwuf ḥusn al-khulq_, “Ṣúfiism is good nature.” -This is of three sorts: firstly, towards God, by fulfilling His -Commandments without hypocrisy; secondly, towards men, by paying respect -to one’s superiors and behaving with kindness to one’s inferiors and -with justice to one’s equals, and by not seeking recompense and justice -from men in general; and thirdly, towards one’s self, by not following -the flesh and the devil. Whoever makes himself right in these three -matters is a good-natured man. This which I have mentioned agrees with a -story told of `Á´isha the veracious (_ṣiddiqa_)—may God be well-pleased -with her! She was asked concerning the nature of the Apostle. “Read from -the Koran,” she replied, “for God has given information in the place -where He says: ‘_Use_ _indulgence and order what is good and turn away -from the ignorant_’ (Kor. vii, 198).” And Murta`ish also says: _Hádhá -madhhab^{un} kulluhu jidd^{un} fa-lá takhliṭúhu bi-shay´^{in} min -al-hazl_, “This religion of Ṣúfiism is wholly earnest, therefore do not -mix jest with it, and do not take the conduct of formalists -(_mutarassimán_) as a model, and shun those who blindly imitate them.” -When the people see these formalists among the aspirants to Ṣúfiism in -our time, and become aware of their dancing and singing and visiting the -court of sultans and quarrelling for the sake of a pittance or a -mouthful of food, their belief in the whole body of Ṣúfís is corrupted, -and they say: “These are the principles of Ṣúfiism, and the tenets of -the ancient Ṣúfís were just the same.” They do not recognize that this -is an age of weakness and an epoch of affliction. Consequently, since -greed incites the sultan to acts of tyranny, and lust incites the savant -to commit adultery and fornication, and ostentation incites the ascetic -to hypocrisy, and vanity incites the Ṣúfí also to dance and sing—you -must know that the evil lies in the men who hold the doctrines, not in -the principles on which the doctrines are based; and that if some -scoffers disguise their folly in the earnestness of true mystics -(_aḥrár_), the earnestness of the latter is not thereby turned to folly. -And Abú `Alí Qarmíni[40] says: _Al-taṣawwuf huwa ´l-akhláq al-raḍiyyat_, -“Ṣúfiism is good morals.” Approved actions are such that the creature in -all circumstances approves of God, and is content and satisfied. Abu ´l -Ḥasan Núrí says: _Al-taṣawwuf huwa ´l-ḥurriyyat wa-´l-futuwwat wa-tark -al-taklíf wa-´l-sakhá wa-badhl al-dunyá_, “Ṣúfiism is liberty, so that a -man is freed from the bonds of desire; and generosity,” i.e. he is -purged from the conceit of generosity; “and abandonment of useless -trouble,” i.e. he does not strive after appurtenances and rewards; “and -munificence,” i.e. he leaves this world to the people of this world. - -Footnote 40: - - IJ. Qazwíní. B. Abú `Alí Kirmánsháhí Qurayshí. The Shaykh in question - is probably Muẕaffar Kirmánsháhí Qarmíní (_Nafaḥát_, No. 270). - -And Abu ´l-Ḥasan Fúshanja[41]—may God have mercy on him!—says: -_Al-taṣawwuf al-yawma ´sm^{un} wa-lá ḥaqíqat^{un} wa-qad kána -ḥaqíqat^{an} wa-la ´sm^{an}_, “To-day Ṣúfiism is a name without a -reality, but formerly it was a reality without a name,” i.e. in the time -of the Companions and the Ancients—may God have mercy on them!—this name -did not exist, but the reality thereof was in everyone; now the name -exists, but not the reality. That is to say, formerly the practice was -known and the pretence unknown, but nowadays the pretence is known and -the practice unknown. - -Footnote 41: - - Generally written “Fúshanjí”. See _Nafaḥát_, No. 279. - -I have brought together and examined in this chapter on Ṣúfiism a number -of the sayings of the Shaykhs, in order that this Path may become clear -to you—God grant you felicity!—and that you may say to the sceptics: -“What do you mean by denying the truth of Ṣúfiism?” If they deny only -the name it is no matter, since ideas are unrelated to things which bear -names; and if they deny the essential ideas, this amounts to a denial of -the whole Sacred Law of the Apostle and his praised qualities. And I -enjoin you in this book—God grant you the felicity with which He has -blessed His Saints!—to hold these ideas in due regard and satisfy their -just claims, so that you may refrain from idle pretensions and have an -excellent belief in the Ṣúfís themselves. It is God that gives success. - - - - - CHAPTER IV. - ON THE WEARING OF PATCHED FROCKS (_Muraqqa`át_). - - -Know that the wearing of a _muraqqa`a_ (patched frock) is the badge of -aspirants to Ṣúfiism. The wearing of these garments is a _Sunna_ (custom -of the Prophet), for the Apostle said: _`Alaykum bi-labs al-ṣúf tajidúna -ḥaláwat al-ímán fí qulúbikum._ And, further, one of the Companions says: -_Kána ´l-nabí salla ´lláh `alayhi wa-sallama yalbasu ´l-ṣúf wa-yarkabu -´l-ḥimár._ And, moreover, the Apostle said to `Á´isha: _Lá tuḍayyi`i -´l-thawb ḥattá turaqqi`íhi._ He said: “See that ye wear woollen raiment, -that ye may feel the sweetness of faith.” And it is related that the -Apostle wore a garment of wool and rode on an ass, and that he said to -`Á´isha: “O `Á´isha, do not let the garment be destroyed, but patch it.” -`Umar, the son of Khaṭṭáb, wore, it is said, a _muraqqa`a_ with thirty -patches inserted on it. Of `Umar, too, we are told that he said: “The -best garment is that which gives the least trouble” (_ki ma´únat-i án -sabuktar buvad_). It is related of the Commander of the Faithful, `Alí, -that he had a shirt of which the sleeves were level with his fingers, -and if at any time he wore a longer shirt he used to tear off the ends -of its sleeves. The Apostle also was commanded by God to shorten his -garments, for God said: “_And purify thy garments_” (Kor. lxxiv, 4), -i.e. shorten them. And Ḥasan of Baṣra says: “I saw seventy comrades who -fought at Badr: all of them had woollen garments; and the greatest -_Ṣiddíq_ (Abú Bakr) wore a garment of wool in his detachment from the -world” (_tajríd_). Ḥasan of Baṣra says further: “I saw Salmán -(al-Fárisí) wearing a woollen frock (_gilím_) with patches.” The -Commander of the Faithful, `Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb, and the Commander of the -Faithful, `Alí, and Harim b. Ḥayyán relate that they saw Uways Qaraní -with a woollen garment on which patches were inserted. Ḥasan of Baṣra -and Málik Dínár and Sufyán Thawrí were owners of woollen patched frocks. -And it is related of the Imám Abú Ḥanífa of Kúfa—this is written in the -History of the Shaykhs composed by Muḥammad b. `Alí Ḥakím Tirmidhí—that -he at first clothed himself in wool and was on the point of retiring -from the world, when he saw in a dream the Apostle, who said: “It -behoves thee to live amidst the people, because thou art the means -whereby my _Sunna_ will be revived.” Then Abú Ḥanífa refrained from -solitude, but he never put on a garment of any value. And Dáwud Ṭá´í, -who was one of the veritable adepts among the aspirants to Ṣúfiism -(_yakí az muḥaqqiqán-i mutaṣawwifa_), enjoined the wearing of wool. And -Ibráhím the son of Adham came to visit the most venerable Imám Abú -Ḥanífa, clad in a garment of wool. The latter’s disciples looked at him -with contempt and disparagement, until Abú Ḥanífa said: “Our lord -Ibráhím b. Adham has come.” The disciples said: “The Imám utters no -jests: how has he gained this lordship?” Abú Ḥanífa replied: “By -continual devotion. He has been occupied in serving God while we have -been engaged in serving our own bodies. Thus he has become our lord.” - -It may well be the case that at the present day some persons wear -patched frocks and religious habits (_muraqqa`át ú khiraq_) for the sake -of public honour and reputation, and that their hearts belie their -external garb; for there may be but one champion in a host, and in every -sect the genuine adepts are few. People, however, reckon as Ṣúfís all -who resemble the Ṣúfís even in a single rule. The Apostle said: _Man -tashabbaha bi-qawm^{in} fa-huwa minhum_, “He that makes himself akin to -a party either in conduct or in belief, is one of that party.” But while -some regard only the outward forms of their practice, others direct -attention to their spirit of inward purity. - -Those who wish to associate with aspirants to Ṣúfiism fall into four -classes: (1) He whose purity, enlightenment, subtlety, even balance of -temperament, and soundness of character give him insight into the hearts -of the Ṣúfís, so that he perceives the nearness of their spiritual -adepts to God and the loftiness of their eminent men. He joins himself -to them in hope of attaining to the same degree, and the beginning of -his novitiate is marked by revelation of “states” (_kashf-i aḥwál_), and -purgation from desire, and renunciation of self. (2) He whose health of -body and continence of heart and quiet peace of mind enable him to see -their outward practice, so that he fixes his gaze on their observance of -the holy law and of the different sorts of discipline, and on the -excellence of their conduct: consequently he seeks to associate with -them and give himself up to the practice of piety, and the beginning of -his novitiate is marked by self-mortification (_mujáhadat_) and good -conduct. (3) He whose humanity and custom of social intercourse and -goodness of disposition cause him to consider their actions and to see -the virtue of their outward life: how they treat their superiors with -respect and their inferiors with generosity and their equals as -comrades, and how untroubled they are by thoughts of worldly gain and -contented with what they have; he seeks their society, and renders easy -to himself the hard path of worldly ambition, and makes himself at -leisure one of the good. (4) He whose stupidity and feebleness of -soul—his love of power without merit and of distinction without -knowledge—lead him to suppose that the outward actions of the Ṣúfís are -everything. When he enters their company they treat him kindly and -indulgently, although they are convinced that he is entirely ignorant of -God and that he has never striven to advance upon the mystic path. -Therefore he is honoured by the people as if he were a real adept and is -venerated as if he were one of God’s saints, but his object is only to -assume their dress and hide his deformity under their piety. He is like -an ass laden with books (Kor. lxxii, 5). In this age the majority are -impostors such as have been described. Accordingly, it behoves you not -to seem to be anything except what you really are. It is inward glow -(_ḥurqat_) that makes the Ṣúfí, not the religious habit (_khirqat_). To -the true mystic there is no difference between the mantle (_`abá_) worn -by dervishes, and the coat (_qabá_) worn by ordinary people. An eminent -Shaykh was asked why he did not wear a patched frock (_muraqqa`a_). He -replied: “It is hypocrisy to wear the garb of the Ṣúfís and not to bear -the burdens which Ṣúfiism entails.” If, by wearing this garb, you wish -to make known to God that you are one of the elect, God knows that -already; and if you wish to show to the people that you belong to God, -should your claim be true, you are guilty of ostentation; and should it -be false, of hypocrisy. The Ṣúfís are too great to need a special -garment for this purpose. Purity (_ṣafá_) is a gift from God, whereas -wool (_ṣúf_) is the clothing of animals. The Ṣúfí Shaykhs enjoined their -disciples to wear patched frocks, and did the same themselves, in order -that they might be marked men, and that all the people might keep watch -over them: thus if they committed a transgression, every tongue would -rebuke them, and if they wished to sin while clad in this garment, they -would be held back by shame. In short, the _muraqqa`a_ is the garb of -God’s saints. The vulgar use it merely as a means of gaining worldly -reputation and fortune, but the elect prefer contumely to honour, and -affliction to prosperity. Hence it is said “the _muraqqa`a_ is a garb of -happiness for the vulgar, but a mail-coat (_jawshan_) of affliction for -the elect.” You must seek what is spiritual, and shun what is external. -The Divine is veiled by the human, and that veil is annihilated only by -passing through the “states” and “stages” of the mystic Way. Purity -(_ṣafá_) is the name given to such annihilation. How can he who has -gained it choose one garment rather than another, or take pains to adorn -himself at all? How should he care whether people call him a Ṣúfí or by -some other name? - - - SECTION. - -_Muraqqa`as_ should be made with a view to ease and lightness, and when -the original cloth is torn a patch should be inserted. There are two -opinions of the Shaykhs as to this matter. Some hold that it is improper -to sew the patch on neatly and accurately, and that the needle should be -drawn through the cloth at random,[42] and that no trouble should be -taken. Others again hold that the stitches should be straight and -regular, and that it is part of the practice of the dervishes to keep -the stitches straight and to take pains therein; for sound practice -indicates sound principles. - -Footnote 42: - - Literally, “in whatever place it raises its head.” - -Now I, who am `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, asked the Grand Shaykh, Abu -´l-Qásim Gurgání at Ṭús, saying: “What is the least thing necessary for -a dervish in order that he may become worthy of poverty?” He replied: “A -dervish must not have less than three things: first, he must know how to -sew on a patch rightly; second, he must know how to listen rightly; -third, he must know how to set his foot on the ground rightly.” A number -of dervishes were present with me when he said this. As soon as we came -to the door each one began to apply this saying to his own case, and -some ignorant fellows fastened on it with avidity. “This,” they cried, -“is poverty indeed,” and most of them were hastening to sew patches on -nicely and to set their feet on the ground correctly; and everyone of -them imagined that he knew how to listen to sayings on Ṣúfiism. -Wherefore, since my heart was devoted to that Sayyid, and I was -unwilling that his words should fall to the ground, I said: “Come, let -each of us say something upon this subject.” So everyone stated his -views, and when my turn came I said: “A right patch is one that is -stitched for poverty, not for show; if it is stitched for poverty, it is -right, even though it be stitched wrong. And a right word is one that is -heard esoterically (_ba-ḥál_), not wilfully (_ba-munyat_), and is -applied earnestly, not frivolously, and is apprehended by life, not by -reason. And a right foot is one that is put on the ground with true -rapture, not playfully and formally.” Some of my remarks were reported -to the Sayyid (Abu ´l-Qásim Gurgání), who said: “`Alí has spoken -well—God reward him!” The aim of this sect in wearing patched frocks is -to alleviate the burden of this world and to be sincere in poverty -towards God. It is related in the genuine Traditions that Jesus, son of -Mary—God bless him!—was wearing a _muraqqa`a_ when he was taken up to -heaven. A certain Shaykh said: “I dreamed that I saw him clad in a -woollen patched frock, and light was shining from every patch. I said: -‘O Messiah, what are these lights on thy garment?’ He answered: ‘The -lights of necessary grace; for I sewed on each of those patches through -necessity, and God Almighty hath turned into a light every tribulation -which He inflicted on my heart.’” - -I saw in Transoxania an old man who belonged to the sect of Malámatís. -He neither ate nor wore anything in which human beings had a hand. His -food consisted of things thrown away by men, such as putrid vegetables, -sour gourds, rotten carrots, and the like. His clothes were made of rags -which he had picked up from the road and washed: of these he had made a -_muraqqa`a_. And I have heard that among the mystics of recent times -there was an old man of flourishing condition (_qawí ḥál_) and of -excellent character, living at Marv al-Rúd, who had sewn so many -patches, without taking pains, on his prayer-rug and cap, that scorpions -brought forth their young in them. And my Shaykh—may God be well pleased -with him!—wore for fifty-one years a single cloak (_jubba_), on which he -used to sew pieces of cloth without taking any pains. I have found the -following tale among the anecdotes of the (holy) men of `Iráq. There -were two dervishes, one a votary of the contemplative life (_ṣáḥib -musháhadat_), and the other a votary of the purgative life (_ṣáḥib -mujáhadat_). The former never clothed himself except in the pieces of -cloth which were torn off by dervishes in a state of ecstasy (_samá`_) -from their own garments, while the other used for the same purpose only -the pieces torn off by dervishes who were asking forgiveness: thus the -outward garb of each was in harmony with his inward disposition. This is -observance of the “state” (_pás dáshtan-i ḥál_). Shaykh Muḥammad b. -Khafíf wore a coarse woollen frock (_palás_) for twenty years, and every -year he used to undergo four fasts of forty days’ duration (_chilla_), -and every forty days he would compose a work on the mysteries of the -Sciences of the Divine Verities. In his time there was an old man,[43] -one of the adepts learned in the Way (_Ṭaríqat_) and the Truth -(_Ḥaqíqat_), who resided at Parg[44] in Fárs and was called Muḥammad b. -Zakariyyá.[45] He had never worn a _muraqqa`a_. Now Shaykh Muḥammad b. -Khafíf was asked: “What is involved in wearing a _muraqqa`a_, and who is -permitted to do so?” He replied: “It involves those obligations which -are fulfilled by Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá in his white shirt, and the -wearing of such a frock is permitted to him.” - -Footnote 43: - - This story is related in _`Aṭṭár’s Tadhkirat al-Awliyá_ (pt. ii, p. - 125, l. 17 sqq.), where it is expressly said that the old man was - _not_ “learned in the Way”. - -Footnote 44: - - I. in margin has Park. The _Nuzhat al-Quhúb_ gives the name as برک - (Bark), and refers it to a village in the district of Kirmán. - -Footnote 45: - - B., I., and J. have Dhakariyyá (Zakariyya), L. ذكرى. The MSS. of the - _Tadhkirat al-Awliyá_ vary between Dhakírí and ذكرى. - - - SECTION. - -It is not the way of the Ṣúfís to abandon their customs. If they seldom -wear garments of wool at the present day, there are two reasons for this -fact: (1) that wools have deteriorated (_pashmhá shúrída shuda ast_) and -the animals (which produce wool) have been carried off from one place to -another by raiders; and (2) that a sect of heretics has adopted the -woollen garment as a badge (_shi`ár_). And it is praiseworthy to depart -from the badge of heretics, even although one departs at the same time -from a traditional practice (_sunna_). - -To take pains (_takalluf_) in sewing _muraqqa`as_ is considered -allowable by the Ṣúfís because they have gained a high reputation among -the people; and since many imitate them and wear _muraqqa`as_, and are -guilty of improper acts, and since the Ṣúfís dislike the society of -others than themselves—for these reasons they have invented a garb which -none but themselves can sew, and have made it a mark of mutual -acquaintance and a badge. So much so that when a certain dervish came to -one of the Shaykhs wearing a garment on which the patch had been sewn -with too wide stitches (_khaṭṭ ba-pahná áwarda búd_) the Shaykh banished -him from his presence. The argument is that purity (_ṣafá_) is founded -on delicacy of nature and fineness of temperament, and undoubtedly -crookedness in one’s nature is not good. It is natural to disapprove of -incorrect actions, just as it is natural to derive no pleasure from -incorrect poetry. - -Others, again, do not trouble themselves about clothes at all. They wear -either a religious habit (_`abá_) or an ordinary coat (_qabá_), -whichever God may have given them; and if He keeps them naked, they -remain in that state. I, who am `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, approve of -this doctrine, and I have practised it in my journeys. It is related -that Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya wore a coat when he visited Abú Yazíd, and that -Sháh b. Shujá` wore a coat when he visited Abú Ḥafṣ. This was not their -usual dress, for sometimes they wore a _muraqqa`a_ and sometimes a -woollen garment or a white shirt, as it might happen. The human soul is -habituated to things, and fond of custom, and when anything has become -habitual to the soul it soon grows natural, and when it has grown -natural it becomes a veil. Hence the Apostle said: _Khayr al-ṣiyám ṣawm -akhí Dáwud `alayhi ´l-salám_, “The best of fasts is that of my brother -David.” They said: “O Apostle of God, what kind of fast is that?” He -replied: “David used to keep his fast one day and break it on the next -day,” in order that his soul should not become accustomed either to -keeping the fast or to breaking it, for fear that he might be veiled -thereby. And, as regards this matter, Abú Ḥámid Dústán[46] of Merv was -the most sound. His disciples used to put a garment on him, but those -who wanted it used to seek him out when he was at leisure and alone, and -divest him of it; and he would never say to the person who put it on -him: “Why do you put it on?” nor to the person who took it off: “Why do -you take it off?” Moreover, at the present day there is at Ghazna—may -God protect it!—an old man with the sobriquet Mu´ayyad, who has no -choice or discrimination with respect to his clothes; and he is sound in -that degree. - -Footnote 46: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 350. - -Now, as to their garments being mostly blue (_kabúd_), one of the -reasons is that they have made wandering (_siyáḥat_) and travelling the -foundation of their Path; and on journeys a white garment does not -retain its original appearance, and is not easily washed, and besides, -everyone covets it. Another cause is this, that a blue dress is the -badge of the bereaved and afflicted, and the apparel of mourners; and -this world is the abode of trouble, the pavilion of affliction, the den -of sorrow, the house of parting, the cradle of tribulation: the (Ṣúfí) -disciples, seeing that their heart’s desire is not to be gained in this -world, have clad themselves in blue and have sat down to mourn union -(with God). Others behold in the practice (of devotion) only -imperfection, in the heart only evil, in life only loss of time: -therefore they wear blue; for loss (_fawt_) is worse than death -(_mawt_). One wears blue for the death of a dear friend, another for the -loss of a cherished hope. - -A dervish was asked why he wore blue. He replied: “The Apostle left -three things: poverty, knowledge, and the sword. The sword was taken by -potentates, who misused it; knowledge was chosen by savants, who were -satisfied with merely teaching it; poverty was chosen by dervishes, who -made it a means of enriching themselves. I wear blue as a sign of -mourning for the calamity of these three classes of men.” Once Murta`ish -was walking in one of the quarters of Baghdád. Being thirsty, he went to -a door and asked for a drink of water. The daughter of the householder -brought him some water in a jug. Murta`ish was smitten with her beauty -and would not leave the spot until the master of the house came to him. -“O sir,” cried Murta`ish, “she gave me a drink of water and robbed me of -my heart.” The householder replied: “She is my daughter, and I give her -to you in marriage.” So Murta`ish went into the house, and the wedding -was immediately solemnized. The bride’s father, who was a wealthy man, -sent Murta`ish to the bath, where they took off his patched frock -(_muraqqa`a_) and clothed him in a night-dress. At nightfall he rose to -say his prayers and engage in solitary devotion. Suddenly he called out, -“Bring my patched frock.” They asked, “What ails you?” He answered, “I -heard a voice within, whispering: ‘On account of one disobedient look We -have removed thy _muraqqa`a_, the garb of piety, from thy body: if thou -lookest again We shall remove the raiment of intimacy from thy heart.’” -Only two kinds of men are fitted to wear the _muraqqa`a_: (1) those who -are cut off from the world, and (2) those who feel a longing for the -Lord (_mushtáqán-i mawlá_). - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs observe the following rule. When a novice joins them, -with the purpose of renouncing the world, they subject him to spiritual -discipline for the space of three years. If he fulfil the requirements -of this discipline, well and good; otherwise, they declare that he -cannot be admitted to the Path (_Ṭaríqat_). The first year is devoted to -service of the people, the second year to service of God, and the third -year to watching over his own heart. He can serve the people only when -he places himself in the rank of servants and all other people in the -rank of masters, i.e. he must regard all, without any discrimination, as -being better than himself, and must consider it his duty to serve all -alike; not in such a way as to deem himself superior to those whom he -serves, for this is manifest perdition and evident fraud, and is one of -the infectious cankers of the age (_az áfát-i zamána andar zamána yakí -ínast_). And he can serve God Almighty only when he cuts off all his -selfish interests relating either to this world or to the next, and -worships God absolutely for His sake alone, inasmuch as whoever worships -God for any thing’s sake worships himself and not God. And he can watch -over his heart only when his thoughts are collected and cares are -dismissed from his heart, so that in the presence of intimacy (with God) -he preserves his heart from the assaults of heedlessness. When these -three qualifications are possessed by the novice, he may wear the -_muraqqa`a_ as a true mystic, not merely as an imitator of others. - -Now as to the person who invests the novice with the _muraqqa`a_, he -must be a man of rectitude (_mustaqím al-ḥál_) who has traversed all the -hills and dales of the Path, and tasted the rapture of “states” and -perceived the nature of actions, and experienced the severity of the -Divine majesty and the clemency of the Divine beauty. Furthermore, he -must examine the state of his disciples and judge what point they will -ultimately reach: whether they will retire (_ráji`án_), or stand still -(_wáqifán_), or attain (_bálighán_). If he knows that some day they will -abandon this Path, he must forbid them to enter upon it; if they will -come to a stand, he must enjoin them to practise devotion; and if they -will reach the goal, he must give them spiritual nourishment. The Ṣúfí -Shaykhs are physicians of men’s souls. When the physician is ignorant of -the patient’s malady he kills him by his art, because he does not know -how to treat him and does not recognize the symptoms of danger, and -prescribes food and drink unsuitable to his disease. The Apostle said: -“The shaykh in his tribe is like the prophet in his nation.” -Accordingly, as the prophets showed insight in their call to the people, -and kept everyone in his due degree, so the Shaykh likewise should show -insight in his call, and should give to everyone his proper spiritual -food, in order that the object of his call may be secured. - -The adept, then, who has attained the perfection of saintship takes the -right course when he invests the novice with the _muraqqa`a_ after a -period of three years during which he has educated him in the necessary -discipline. In respect of the qualifications which it demands, the -_muraqqa`a_ is comparable to a winding-sheet (_kafan_): the wearer must -resign all his hopes of the pleasures of life, and purge his heart of -all sensual delights, and devote his life entirely to the service of God -and completely renounce selfish desires. Then the Director (_Pír_) -ennobles him by clothing him in that robe of honour, while he on his -part fulfils the obligations which it involves, and strives with all his -might to perform them, and deems it unlawful to satisfy his own wishes. - -Many allegories (_ishárát_) have been uttered concerning the -_muraqqa`a_. Shaykh Abú Ma`mar of Iṣfahán has written a book on the -subject, and the generality of aspirants to Ṣúfiism display much -extravagance (_ghuluww_) in this matter. My aim, however, in the present -work is not to relate sayings, but to elucidate the difficulties of -Ṣúfiism. The best allegory concerning the _muraqqa`a_ is this, that its -collar (_qabba_) is patience, its two sleeves fear and hope, its two -gussets (_tiríz_) contraction and dilation, its belt self-abnegation, -its hem (_kursí_)[47] soundness in faith, its fringe (_faráwíz_) -sincerity. Better still is the following: “Its collar is annihilation of -intercourse (with men), its two sleeves are observance (_ḥifẕ_) and -continence (_`iṣmat_), its two gussets are poverty and purity, its belt -is persistence in contemplation, its hem (_kursí_) is tranquillity in -(God’s) presence, and its fringe is settlement in the abode of union.” -When you have made a _muraqqa`a_ like this for your spiritual self it -behoves you to make one for your exterior also. I have composed a -separate book on this subject, entitled “The Mysteries of Patched Frocks -and Means of Livelihood” (_Asrár al-khiraq wa-´l-ma´únát_), of which the -novice should get a copy. - -Footnote 47: - - This conjectural translation of _kursí_ was suggested to me by Colonel - Ranking. The dictionaries give no explanation of the word as it is - used here. - -If the novice, having donned the _muraqqa`a_, should be forced to tear -it under compulsion of the temporal authority, this is permissible and -excusable; but should he tear it of free will and deliberately, then -according to the law of the sect he is not allowed to wear a _muraqqa`a_ -in future, and if he do so, he stands on the same footing as those in -our time who are content to wear _muraqqa`as_ for outward show, with no -spiritual meaning. As regards the rending of garments the true doctrine -is this, that when Ṣúfís pass from one stage to another they immediately -change their dress in thankfulness for having gained a higher stage; but -whereas every other garment is the dress of a single stage, the -_muraqqa`a_ is a dress which comprises all the stages of the Path of -poverty and purity, and therefore to discard it is equivalent to -renouncing the whole Path. I have made a slight allusion to this -question, although this is not the proper place for it, in order to -settle the particular point at issue; but, please God, I will give a -detailed explanation of the principle in the chapter on rending -(_kharq_), and in the revelation of the mystery of “audition” (_samá`_). -Furthermore, it has been said that one who invests a novice with the -_muraqqa`a_ should possess such sovereign mystical powers that any -stranger on whom he looks kindly should become a friend, and any sinner -whom he clothes in this garment should become a saint. - -Once I was travelling with my Shaykh in Ádharbáyaján, and we saw two or -three persons wearing _muraqqa`as_, who were standing beside a -wheat-barn and holding up their skirts in the hope that the farmer would -throw them some wheat. On seeing this the Shaykh exclaimed: “_Those are -they who have purchased error at the price of true guidance, but their -traffic has not been profitable_” (Kor. ii, 15). I asked him how they -had fallen into this calamity and disgrace. He said: “Their spiritual -directors were greedy to gather disciples, and they themselves are -greedy to collect worldly goods.” It is related of Junayd that he saw at -the Báb al-Ṭáq[48] a beautiful Christian youth and said: “O Lord, pardon -him for my sake, for Thou hast created him exceeding fair.” After a -while the youth came to Junayd and made profession of Islam and was -enrolled among the saints. Abú `Alí Siyáh was asked: “Who is permitted -to invest novices with the _muraqqa`a_?” He replied: “That one who -oversees the whole kingdom of God, so that nothing happens in the world -without his knowledge.” - -Footnote 48: - - A gate in the eastern quarter of Baghdád. - - - - - CHAPTER V. - ON THE DIFFERENT OPINIONS HELD CONCERNING POVERTY AND PURITY. - - -The Doctors of the Mystic Path are not agreed as to the respective -merits of Poverty (_faqr_) and Purity (_ṣafwat_). Some hold that Poverty -is more perfect than Purity. Poverty, they say, is complete annihilation -in which every thought ceases to exist, and Purity is one of the -“stations” (_maqámát_) of Poverty: when annihilation is gained, all -“stations” vanish into nothing. This is ultimately the same question as -that touching Poverty and Wealth, which has already been discussed. -Those who set Purity above Poverty say that Poverty is an existent thing -(_shay ast mawjúd_) and is capable of being named, whereas Purity is the -being pure (_ṣafá_) from all existing things: _ṣafá_ is the essence of -annihilation (_faná_), and Poverty is the essence of subsistence -(_baqá_): therefore Poverty is one of the names of “stations”, but -Purity is one of the names of perfection. This matter has been disputed -at great length in the present age, and both parties have resorted to -far-fetched and amazing verbal subtleties; but it will be allowed on all -sides that Poverty and Purity are not mere words and nothing else. The -disputants have made up a doctrine out of words and have neglected to -apprehend meanings: they have abandoned discussion of the Truth. -Negation of arbitrary will they call negation of essence, and -affirmation of desire they regard as affirmation of essence. The Mystic -Path is far removed from such idle fictions. In short, the Saints of God -attain to a place where place no longer exists, where all degrees and -“stations” disappear, and where outward expressions fall off from the -underlying realities, so that neither “spiritual delight” (_shurb_) is -left, nor “taste” (_dhawq_), nor “sobriety” (_ṣaḥw_), nor “effacement” -(_maḥw_). These controversialists, however, seek a forced name with -which to cloak ideas that do not admit of being named or of being used -as attributes; and everyone applies to them whatever name he thinks most -estimable. Now, in dealing with the ideas themselves, the question of -superiority does not arise, but when names are given to them, one will -necessarily be preferred to another. Accordingly, to some people the -name of Poverty seemed to be superior and of greater worth because it is -connected with renunciation and humility, while others preferred Purity, -and held it the more honourable because it comes nearer to the notion of -discarding all that contaminates and annihilating all that has a taint -of the world. They adopted these two names as symbols of an -inexpressible idea, in order that they might converse with each other on -that subject and make their own state fully known; and there is no -difference of opinion in this sect (the Ṣúfís), although some use the -term “Poverty” and others the term “Purity” to express the same idea. -With the verbalists (_ahl-i `ibárat_), on the contrary, who are ignorant -of the true meaning of these ideas, the whole question is an affair of -words. To conclude, whoever has made that idea his own and fixed his -heart upon it, heeds not whether they call him “Poor” (_faqír_) or -“Pure” (_Ṣúfí_), since both these appellations are forced names for an -idea that cannot be brought under any name. - -This controversy dates from the time of Abu ´l-Ḥasan Sumnún. He, on -occasions when he was in a state of revelation (_kashf_) akin to -subsistence (_baqá_), used to set Poverty above Purity; and on being -asked by spiritualists (_arbáb-i ma`ání_) why he did so, he replied: -“Inasmuch as I naturally delight in annihilation and abasement, and no -less in subsistence and exaltation, I prefer Purity to Poverty when I am -in a state akin to annihilation, and Poverty to Purity when I am in a -state akin to subsistence; for Poverty is the name of subsistence and -Purity that of annihilation. In the latter state I annihilate from -myself the sight (consciousness) of subsistence, and in the former state -I annihilate from myself the sight of annihilation, so that my nature -becomes dead both to annihilation and to subsistence.” Now this, -regarded as an explanation (_`ibárat_), is an excellent saying, but -neither annihilation nor subsistence can be annihilated: every -subsistent thing that suffers annihilation is annihilated from itself, -and every annihilated thing that becomes subsistent is subsistent from -itself. Annihilation is a term of which it is impossible to speak -hyperbolically. If a person says that annihilation is annihilated, he -can only be expressing hyperbolically the non-existence of any vestige -of the idea of annihilation; but so long as any vestige of existence -remains, annihilation has not yet come to pass; and when it has been -attained, the “annihilation” thereof is nothing but self-conceit -flattered by meaningless phrases. In the vanity and rashness of youth I -composed a discourse of this kind, entitled the “Book of Annihilation -and Subsistence” (_Kitáb-i Faná ú Baqá_), but in the present work I will -set forth the whole matter with caution, please God the Almighty and -Glorious. - -This is the distinction between Purity and Poverty in the spiritual -sense. It is otherwise when Purity and Poverty are considered in their -practical aspect, namely, the denuding one’s self of worldly things -(_tajríd_) and the casting away of all one’s possessions. Here the real -point is the difference between Poverty (_faqr_) and Lowliness -(_maskanat_). Some Shaykhs assert that the Poor (_faqír_) are superior -to the Lowly (_miskín_), because God has said, “_the poor who are -straitened in the way of Allah, unable to go to and fro on the earth_” -(Kor. ii, 274): the Lowly possess means of livelihood, which the Poor -renounce: therefore Poverty is honour and Lowliness abasement, for, -according to the rule of the Mystic Path, he who possesses the means of -livelihood is base, as the Apostle said: “Woe befall those who worship -the dínár and the dirhem, woe befall those who worship garments with a -nap!” He who renounces the means of livelihood is honoured, inasmuch as -he depends on God, while he who has means depends on them. Others, -again, declare the Lowly to be superior, because the Apostle said: “Let -me live lowly, and let me die lowly, and raise me from the dead among -the lowly!” whereas, speaking of Poverty, he said, “Poverty is near to -being unbelief.” On this account the Poor are dependent on a means, but -the Lowly are independent. In the domain of Sacred Law, some divines -hold that the Poor are those who have a sufficiency ([_s.]áḥib bulgha_), -and the Lowly those who are free from worldly cares (_mujarrad_); but -other divines hold the converse of this view. Hence the name “Ṣúfí” is -given to the Lowly by followers of the Path (_ahl-i maqámát_) who adopt -the former opinion: they prefer Purity (_ṣafwat_) to Poverty. Those -Ṣúfís who accept the latter view prefer Poverty to Purity, for a similar -reason. - - - - - CHAPTER VI. - ON BLAME (_Malámat_). - - -The path of Blame has been trodden by some of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs. Blame -has a great effect in making love sincere. The followers of the Truth -(_ahl-i ḥaqq_) are distinguished by their being the objects of vulgar -blame, especially the eminent ones of this community. The Apostle, who -is the exemplar and leader of the adherents of the Truth, and who -marches at the head of the lovers (of God), was honoured and held in -good repute by all until the evidence of the Truth was revealed to him -and inspiration came upon him. Then the people loosed their tongues to -blame him. Some said, “He is a soothsayer;” others, “He is a poet;” -others, “He is a madman;” others, “He is a liar;” and so forth. And God -says, describing the true believers: “_They fear not the blame of -anyone; that is the grace of God which He bestows on whomsoever He -pleases; God is bounteous and wise_” (Kor. v, 59). Such is the ordinance -of God, that He causes those who discourse of Him to be blamed by the -whole world, but preserves their hearts from being preoccupied by the -world’s blame. This He does in His jealousy: He guards His lovers from -glancing aside to “other” (_ghayr_), lest the eye of any stranger should -behold the beauty of their state; and He guards them also from seeing -themselves, lest they should regard their own beauty and fall into -self-conceit and arrogance. Therefore He hath set the vulgar over them -to loose the tongues of blame against them, and hath made the “blaming -soul” (_nafs-i lawwáma_) part of their composition, in order that they -may be blamed by others for whatever they do, and by themselves for -doing evil or for doing good imperfectly. - -Now this is a firm principle in the Way to God, for in this Path there -is no taint or veil more difficult to remove than self-conceit. God in -His kindness hath barred the way of error against His friends. Their -actions, however good, are not approved by the vulgar, who do not see -them as they really are; and they themselves do not regard their works -of mortification, however numerous, as proceeding from their own -strength and power: consequently they are not pleased with themselves -and are protected from self-conceit. Whoever is approved by God is -disapproved by the vulgar, and whoever is elected by himself is not -among the elect of God. Thus Iblís was approved by mankind and accepted -by the angels, and he was pleased with himself; but since God was not -pleased with him, their approval only brought a curse upon him. Adam, on -the other hand, was disapproved by the angels, who said: “_Wilt Thou -place there_ [on the earth] _one who will do evil therein?_” (Kor. ii, -28), and was not pleased with himself, for he said: “_O Lord, we have -done ourselves a wrong_” (Kor. vii, 22); but since God was pleased with -him, the disapproval of the angels and his own displeasure bore the -fruit of mercy. Let all men, therefore, know that those accepted by us -are rejected by the people, and that those accepted by the people are -rejected by us. Hence the blame of mankind is the food of the friends of -God, because it is a token of Divine approval; it is the delight of the -saints of God, because it is a sign of nearness to Him: they rejoice in -it even as other men rejoice in popularity. There is a Tradition, which -the Apostle received from Gabriel, that God said: “My friends (saints) -are under My cloak: save Me, none knoweth them except My friends.” - - - SECTION. - -Now blame (_malámat_) is of three kinds: it may result (1) from -following the right way (_malámat-i rást raftan_), or (2) from an -intentional act (_malámat-i qaṣd kardan_), or (3) from abandonment of -the law (_malámat-i tark kardan_). In the first case, a man is blamed -who minds his own business and performs his religious duties and does -not omit any practice of devotion: he is entirely indifferent to the -behaviour of the people towards him. In the second case a man is greatly -honoured by the people and pointed out among them: his heart inclines to -the honour in which he is held, and becomes attached to those by whom it -is bestowed: he wishes to make himself independent of them and devote -himself wholly to God; therefore he purposely incurs their blame by -committing some act which is offensive to them but which is no violation -of the law: in consequence of his behaviour they wash their hands of -him. In the third case, a man is driven by his natural infidelity and -erroneous beliefs to abandon the sacred law and abjure its observances, -and say to himself, “I am treading the path of blame:” in this case his -behaviour depends on himself alone. - -He who follows the right way and refuses to act hypocritically, and -refrains from ostentation, pays no heed to the blame of the vulgar, but -invariably takes his own course: it is all one to him what name they -call him by. I find among the anecdotes (of holy men) that one day -Shaykh Abú Ṭáhir Ḥaramí was seen in the bazaar, riding a donkey and -attended by one of his disciples. Some person cried out, “Here comes -that old freethinker!” The indignant disciple rushed at the speaker, -trying to strike him, and the whole bazaar was filled with tumult. The -Shaykh said to his disciple: “If you will be quiet, I will show you -something that will save you from trouble of this sort.” When they -returned home, he bade the disciple bring a certain box, which contained -letters, and told him to look at them. “Observe,” he said, “how the -writers address me. One calls me ‘the Shaykh of Islam’, another ‘the -pure Shaykh’, another ‘the ascetic Shaykh’, another ‘the Shaykh of the -two Sanctuaries’, and so on. They are all titles, there is no mention of -my name. I am none of these things, but every person gives me the title -which accords with his belief concerning me. If that poor fellow did the -same just now, why should you quarrel with him?” - -He who incurs blame purposely and resigns honour and withdraws from -authority is like the Caliph `Uthmán who, although he possessed four -hundred slaves, one day came forth from his plantation of date-palms -carrying a bundle of firewood on his head. On being asked why he did -this, he answered: “I wish to make trial of myself.” He would not let -the dignity which he enjoyed hinder him from any work. A similar tale -related of the Imám Abú Ḥanífa will be found in this treatise. And a -story is told about Abú Yazíd, that, when he was entering Rayy on his -way from the Ḥijáz, the people of that city ran to meet him in order -that they might show him honour. Their attentions distracted him and -turned his thoughts away from God. When he came to the bazaar, he took a -loaf from his sleeve and began to eat. They all departed, for it was the -month of Ramaḍán. He said to a disciple who was travelling with him: -“You see! as soon as I perform a single article of the law,[49] they all -reject me.” In those days it was necessary, for incurring blame, to do -something disapproved or extraordinary; but in our time, if anyone -desires blame, he need only lengthen a little his voluntary prayers or -fulfil the religious practices which are prescribed: at once everybody -will call him a hypocrite and impostor. - -Footnote 49: - - Abú Yazíd, being at that time on a journey, was not legally bound to - observe the fast. - -He who abandons the law and commits an irreligious act, and says that he -is following the rule of “blame”, is guilty of manifest wrong and -wickedness and self-indulgence. There are many in the present age who -seek popularity by this means, forgetting that one must already have -gained popularity before deliberately acting in such a way as to make -the people reject him; otherwise, his making himself unpopular is a mere -pretext for winning popularity. On a certain occasion I was in the -company of one of these vain pretenders. He committed a wicked act and -excused himself by saying that he did it for the sake of blame. One of -the party said, “That is nonsense.” He heaved a sigh. I said to him: “If -you claim to be a Malámatí and are firm in your belief, this gentleman’s -disapproval of what you have done ought to encourage you to persevere; -and since he is seconding you in your chosen course, why are you so -unfriendly and angry with him? Your behaviour is more like pretence than -pursuit of blame. Whoever claims to be guided by the Truth must give -some proof of his assertion, and the proof consists in observing the -_Sunna_ (Ordinances of the Prophet). You make this claim, and yet I see -that you have failed to perform an obligatory religious duty. Your -conduct puts you outside the pale of Islam.” - - - SECTION. - -The doctrine of Blame was spread abroad in this sect by the Shaykh of -his age, Ḥamdún Qaṣṣár. He has many fine sayings on the subject. It is -recorded that he said: _Al-malámat tark al-salámat_, “Blame is the -abandonment of welfare.” If anyone purposely abandons his own welfare -and girds himself to endure misfortune, and renounces his pleasures and -familiar ties, in hope that the glory of God will be revealed to him, -the more he is separated from mankind the more he is united to God. -Accordingly, the votaries of Blame turn their backs on that thing, -namely welfare (_salámat_), to which the people of this world turn their -faces, for the aspirations of the former are Unitarian (_waḥdání_). -Aḥmad b. Fátik relates that Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr, in reply to the question -“Who is the Ṣúfí?” said: “He who is single in essence” (_waḥdání -al-dhát_). Ḥamdún also said concerning Blame: “It is a hard way for the -vulgar to follow, but I will tell one part thereof: the Malámatí is -characterized by the hope of the Murjites and the fear of the -Qadarites.” This saying has a hidden meaning which demands explanation. -It is the nature of man to be deterred by popularity more than any other -thing from seeking access to God. Consequently he who fears this danger -is always striving to avoid it, and there are two perils which confront -him: firstly, the fear that he may be veiled from God by the favour of -his fellow-creatures; and secondly, the fear of committing some act for -which the people will blame him and thereby fall into sin. Accordingly, -the Malámatí must, in the first instance, take care to have no quarrel -with the people for what they say of him, either in this world or the -next, and for the sake of his own salvation he must commit some act -which, legally, is neither a great sin (_kabíra_) nor a trivial offence -(_ṣaghíra_), in order that the people may reject him. Hence his fear in -matters of conduct is like the fear of the Qadarites, and his hope in -dealing with those who blame him is like the hope of the Murjites. In -true love there is nothing sweeter than blame, because blame of the -Beloved makes no impression on the lover’s heart: he heeds not what -strangers say, for his heart is ever faithful to the object of his love. - - “_’Tis sweet to be reviled for passion’s sake._” - -This sect (the Ṣúfís) are distinguished above all creatures in the -universe by choosing to be blamed in the body on account of the welfare -of their souls; and this high degree is not attained by the Cherubim or -any spiritual beings, nor has it been reached by the ascetics, devotees, -and seekers of God belonging to the nations of antiquity, but it is -reserved for those of this nation who journey on the path of entire -severance from the things of the world. - -In my opinion, to seek Blame is mere ostentation, and ostentation is -mere hypocrisy. The ostentatious man purposely acts in such a way as to -win popularity, while the Malámatí purposely acts in such a way that the -people reject him. Both have their thoughts fixed on mankind and do not -pass beyond that sphere. The dervish, on the contrary, never even thinks -of mankind, and when his heart has been broken away from them he is as -indifferent to their reprobation as to their favour: he moves unfettered -and free. I once said to a Malámatí of Transoxania, with whom I had -associated long enough to feel at my ease: “O brother, what is your -object in these perverse actions?” He replied: “To make the people -non-existent in regard to myself.” “The people,” I said, “are many, and -during a lifetime you will not be able to make them non-existent in -regard to yourself; rather make yourself non-existent in regard to the -people, so that you may be saved from all this trouble. Some who are -occupied with the people imagine that the people are occupied with them. -If you wish no one to see you, do not see yourself. Since all your evils -arise from seeing yourself, what business have you with others? If a -sick man whose remedy lies in abstinence seeks to indulge his appetite, -he is a fool.” Others, again, practise the method of Blame from an -ascetic motive: they wish to be despised by the people in order that -they may mortify themselves, and it is their greatest delight to find -themselves wretched and abased. Ibráhím b. Adham was asked, “Have you -ever attained your desire?” He answered: “Yes, twice; on one occasion I -was in a ship where nobody knew me. I was clad in common clothes and my -hair was long, and my guise was such that all the people in the ship -mocked and laughed at me. Among them was a buffoon, who was always -coming and pulling my hair and tearing it out, and treating me with -contumely after the manner of his kind. At that time I felt entirely -satisfied, and I rejoiced in my garb. My joy reached its highest pitch -one day when the buffoon rose from his place and _super me minxit_. On -the second occasion I arrived at a village in heavy rain, which had -soaked the patched frock on my body, and I was overcome by the wintry -cold. I went to a mosque, but was refused admittance. The same thing -happened at three other mosques where I sought shelter. In despair, as -the cold strengthened its grip on my heart, I entered a bathhouse and -drew my skirt close up to the stove. The smoke enveloped me and -blackened my clothes and my face. Then also I felt entirely satisfied.” - -Once I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, found myself in a difficulty. After -many devotional exercises undertaken in the hope of clearing it away, I -repaired—as I had done with success on a former occasion—to the tomb of -Abú Yazíd, and stayed beside it for a space of three months, performing -every day three ablutions and thirty purifications in the hope that my -difficulty might be removed. It was not, however; so I departed and -journeyed towards Khurásán. One night I arrived at a village in that -country where there was a convent (_khánaqáh_) inhabited by a number of -aspirants to Ṣúfiism. I was wearing a dark-blue frock (_muraqqa`-i -khishan_), such as is prescribed by the _Sunna_;[50] but I had with me -nothing of the Ṣúfí’s regular equipment (_álat-i ahl-i rasm_) except a -staff and a leathern water-bottle (_rakwa_). I appeared very -contemptible in the eyes of these Ṣúfís, who did not know me. They -regarded only my external habit and said to one another, “This fellow is -not one of us.” And so in truth it was: I was not one of them, but I had -to pass the night in that place. They lodged me on a roof, while they -themselves went up to a roof above mine, and set before me dry bread -which had turned green, while I was drawing into my nostrils the savour -of the viands with which they regaled themselves. All the time they were -addressing derisive remarks to me from the roof. When they finished the -food, they began to pelt me with the skins of the melons which they had -eaten, by way of showing how pleased they were with themselves and how -lightly they thought of me. I said in my heart: “O Lord God, were it not -that they are wearing the dress of Thy friends, I would not have borne -this from them.” And the more they scoffed at me the more glad became my -heart, so that the endurance of this burden was the means of delivering -me from that difficulty which I have mentioned; and forthwith I -perceived why the Shaykhs have always given fools leave to associate -with them and for what reason they submit to their annoyance. - -Footnote 50: - - I. adds in margin “for travellers”. - - - - - CHAPTER VII. - CONCERNING THEIR IMÁMS WHO BELONGED TO THE COMPANIONS. - - -1. THE CALIPH ABÚ BAKR, THE VERACIOUS (_al-Ṣiddíq_). - -He is placed by the Ṣúfí Shaykhs at the head of those who have adopted -the contemplative life (_musháhadat_), on account of the fewness of the -stories and traditions which he related; while `Umar is placed at the -head of those who have adopted the purgative life (_mujáhadat_), because -of his rigour and assiduity in devotion. It is written among the genuine -Traditions, and is well known to scholars, that when Abú Bakr prayed at -night he used to recite the Koran in a low voice, whereas `Umar used to -recite in a loud voice. The Apostle asked Abú Bakr why he did this. Abú -Bakr replied: “He with whom I converse will hear.” `Umar, in his turn, -replied: “I wake the drowsy and drive away the Devil.” The one gave a -token of contemplation, the other of purgation. Now purgation, compared -with contemplation, is like a drop of water in a sea, and for this -reason the Apostle said that `Umar, the glory of Islam, was only -(equivalent to) a single one of the good deeds of Abú Bakr (_hal anta -illá ḥasanat^{un} min ḥasanáti Abí Bakr_). It is recorded that Abú Bakr -said: “Our abode is transitory, our life therein is but a loan, our -breaths are numbered, and our indolence is manifest.” By this he -signified that the world is too worthless to engage our thoughts; for -whenever you occupy yourself with what is perishable, you are made blind -to that which is eternal: the friends of God turn their backs on the -world and the flesh which veil them from Him, and they decline to act as -if they were owners of a thing that is really the property of another. -And he said: “O God, give me plenty of the world and make me desirous of -renouncing it!” This saying has a hidden sense, viz.: “First bestow on -me worldly goods that I may give thanks for them, and then help me to -abstain from them for Thy sake, so that I may have the treble merit of -thanksgiving and liberality and abstinence, and that my poverty may be -voluntary, not compulsory.” These words refute the Director of mystical -practice, who said: “He whose poverty is compulsory is more perfect than -he whose poverty is voluntary; for if it be compulsory, he is the -creature (_ṣan`at_) of poverty, and if it be voluntary, poverty is his -creature; and it is better that his actions should be free from any -attempt to gain poverty for himself than that he should seek to acquire -it by his own effort.” I say in answer to this: The creature of poverty -is most evidently that person who, while enjoying independence, is -possessed by the desire for poverty, and labours to recover it from the -clutches of the world; not that person who, in the state of poverty, is -possessed by the desire for independence and has to go to the houses of -evildoers and the courts of governors for the sake of earning money. The -creature of poverty is he who falls from independence to poverty, not he -who, being poor, seeks to become powerful. Abú Bakr is the foremost of -all mankind after the prophets, and it is not permissible that anyone -should take precedence of him, for he set voluntary poverty above -compulsory poverty. This doctrine is held by all the Ṣúfí Shaykhs except -the spiritual Director whom we have mentioned. - -Zuhrí relates that, when Abú Bakr received the oaths of allegiance as -Caliph, he mounted the pulpit and pronounced an oration, in the course -of which he said: “By God, I never coveted the command nor desired it -even for a day or a night, nor ever asked God for it openly or in -secret, nor do I take any pleasure in having it.” Now, when God causes -anyone to attain perfect sincerity and exalts him to the rank of fixity -(_tamkín_) he waits for Divine inspiration, that it may guide him; and -according as he is bidden, he will be either a beggar or a prince, -without exercising his own choice and will. Thus Abú Bakr, the -Veracious, resigned himself to the will of God from first to last. Hence -the whole sect of Ṣúfís have made him their pattern in stripping -themselves of worldly things, in fixity (_tamkín_), in eager desire for -poverty, and in longing to renounce authority. He is the Imám of the -Moslems in general, and of the Ṣúfís in particular. - - - 2.THE CALIPH `UMAR B. AL-KHAṬṬÁB. - -He was specially distinguished by sagacity and resolution, and is the -author of many fine sayings on Ṣúfiism. The Apostle said: “The Truth -speaks by the tongue of `Umar;” and again, “There have been inspired -relaters (_muḥaddath^{un}_) in the peoples of antiquity, and if there be -any such in my people, it is `Umar.” `Umar said: “Retirement (_`uzlat_) -is a means of relieving one’s self of bad company.” Retirement is of two -sorts: firstly, turning one’s back on mankind (_i`ráḍ az khalq_), and -secondly, entire severance from them (_inqiṭá` az íshán_). Turning one’s -back on mankind consists in choosing a solitary retreat, and in -renouncing the society of one’s fellow-creatures externally, and in -quiet contemplation of the faults in one’s own conduct, and in seeking -release for one’s self from intercourse with men, and in making all -people secure from one’s evil actions. But severance from mankind is a -spiritual state, which is not connected with anything external. When a -person is severed from mankind in spirit, he knows nothing of created -beings and no thought thereof can take possession of his mind. Such a -person, although he is living among the people, is isolated from them, -and his spirit dwells apart from them. This is a very exalted station. -`Umar followed the right path herein, for externally he lived among the -people as their Commander and Caliph. His words show clearly that -although spiritualists may outwardly mix with mankind, their hearts -always cling to God and return to Him in all circumstances. They regard -any intercourse they may have with men as an affliction sent by God; and -that intercourse does not divert them from God, since the world never -becomes pure in the eyes of those whom God loves. `Umar said: “An abode -which is founded upon affliction cannot possibly be without affliction.” -The Ṣúfís make him their model in wearing a patched frock (_muraqqa`a_) -and rigorously performing the duties of religion. - - - 3. THE CALIPH `UTHMÁN B. `AFFÁN. - -It is related by `Abdalláh b. Rabáḥ and Abú Qatáda as follows: “We were -with the Commander of the Faithful, `Uthmán, on the day when his house -was attacked. His slaves, seeing the crowd of rebels gathered at the -door, took up arms. `Uthmán said: ‘Whoever of you does not take up arms -is a free man.’ We went forth from the house in fear of our lives. Ḥasan -b. `Alí met us on the way, and we returned with him to `Uthmán, that we -might know on what business he was going. After he had saluted `Uthmán -and condoled with him he said: ‘O Prince of the Faithful, I dare not -draw sword against Moslems without thy command. Thou art the true Imám. -Give the order and I will defend thee.’ `Uthmán replied: ‘O my cousin, -go back to thy house and sit there until God shall bring His decree to -pass. We do not wish to shed blood.’” - -These words betoken resignation in the hour of calamity, and show that -the speaker had attained the rank of friendship with God (_khullat_). -Similarly, when Nimrod lit a fire and put Abraham in the sling -(_pala_)[51] of a catapult, Gabriel came to Abraham and said, “Dost thou -want anything?” He answered, “From thee, no.” Gabriel said, “Then ask -God.” He answered, “Since He knows in what plight I am I need not ask -Him.” Here `Uthmán was in the position of the Friend (Khalíl)[52] in the -catapult, and the seditious mob was in the place of the fire, and Ḥasan -was in the place of Gabriel; but Abraham was saved, while `Uthmán -perished. Salvation (_naját_) is connected with subsistence (_baqá_) and -destruction (_halák_) with annihilation (_faná_): on this topic -something has been said above. The Ṣúfís take `Uthmán as their exemplar -in sacrificing life and property, in resigning their affairs to God, and -in sincere devotion. - -Footnote 51: - - Arabic _kiffat_. See Dozy, _Supplément_, ii, 476. - -Footnote 52: - - Abraham is called by Moslems “the Friend of God” (_al-Khalíl_). - - - 4. THE CALIPH `ALÍ B. ABÍ ṬÁLIB. - -His renown and rank in this Path (of Ṣúfiism) were very high. He -explained the principles (_uṣúl_) of Divine truth with exceeding -subtlety, so that Junayd said: “`Alí is our Shaykh as regards the -principles and as regards the endurance of affliction,” i.e. in the -theory and practice of Ṣúfiism; for Ṣúfís call the theory of this Path -“principles” (_uṣúl_), and its practice consists entirely in the -endurance of affliction. It is related that some one begged `Alí to give -him a precept (_waṣiyyat_). `Alí replied: “Do not let your wife and -children be your chief cares; for if they be friends of God, God will -look after His friends, and if they are enemies of God, why should you -take care of God’s enemies?” This question is connected with the -severance of the heart from all things save God, who keeps His servants -in whatever state He willeth. Thus Moses left the daughter of -Shu`ayb[53] in a most miserable plight and committed her to God; and -Abraham took Hagar and Ishmael and brought them to a barren valley and -committed them to God. Both these prophets, instead of making wife and -child their chief care, fixed their hearts on God. This saying resembles -the answer which `Alí gave to one who asked what is the purest thing -that can be acquired. He said: “It is that which belongs to a heart made -rich by God” (_ghaná al-qalb billáh_). The heart that is so enriched is -not made poor by having no worldly goods nor glad by having them. This -subject really turns on the theory regarding poverty and purity, which -has been already discussed. `Alí is a model for the Ṣúfís in respect to -the truths of outward expressions and the subtleties of inward meanings, -the stripping one’s self of all property either of this world or of the -next, and consideration of the Divine providence. - -Footnote 53: - - Moses is said to have married one of the daughters of Shu`ayb. See - Kor. xxviii, 22-8, where Shu`ayb, however, is not mentioned by name. - - - - - CHAPTER VIII. - CONCERNING THEIR IMÁMS WHO BELONGED TO THE HOUSE OF THE PROPHET. - - - 1. ḤASAN B. `ALÍ. - -He was profoundly versed in Ṣúfiism. He said, by way of precept: “See -that ye guard your hearts, for God knows your secret thoughts.” -“Guarding the heart” consists in not turning to others (than God) and in -keeping one’s secret thoughts from disobedience to the Almighty. When -the Qadarites got the upper hand, and the doctrine of Rationalism became -widely spread, Ḥasan of Baṣra wrote to Ḥasan b. `Alí begging for -guidance, and asking him to state his opinion on the perplexing subject -of predestination and on the dispute whether men have any power to act -(_istiṭá`at_). Ḥasan b. `Alí replied that in his opinion those who did -not believe in the determination (_qadar_) of men’s good and evil -actions by God were infidels, and that those who imputed their sins to -God were miscreants, i.e. the Qadarites deny the Divine providence, and -the Jabarites impute their sins to God; hence men are free to acquire -their actions according to the power given them by God, and thus our -religion takes the middle course between free-will and predestination. I -have read in the Anecdotes that when Ḥasan b. `Alí was seated at the -door of his house in Kúfa, a Bedouin came up and reviled him and his -father and his mother. Ḥasan rose and said: “O Bedouin, perhaps you are -hungry or thirsty, or what ails you?” The Bedouin took no heed, but -continued to abuse him. Ḥasan ordered his slave to bring a purse of -silver, and gave it to the fellow, saying: “O Bedouin, excuse me, for -there is nothing else in the house; had there been more, I should not -have grudged it to you.” On hearing this, the Bedouin exclaimed: “I bear -witness that thou art the grandson of the Apostle of God. I came hither -to make trial of thy mildness.” Such are the true saints and Shaykhs who -care not whether they are praised or blamed, and listen calmly to abuse. - - 2. ḤUSAYN B. `ALÍ - -He is the martyr of Karbalá, and all Ṣúfís are agreed that he was in the -right. So long as the Truth was apparent, he followed it; but when it -was lost he drew the sword and never rested until he sacrificed his dear -life for God’s sake. The Apostle distinguished him by many tokens of -favour. Thus `Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb relates that one day he saw the Apostle -crawling on his knees, while Ḥusayn rode on his back holding a string, -of which the other end was in the Apostle’s mouth. `Umar said: “What an -excellent camel thou hast, O father of `Abdalláh!” The Apostle replied: -“What an excellent rider is he, O `Umar!” It is recorded that Ḥusayn -said: “Thy religion is the kindest of brethren towards thee,” because a -man’s salvation consists in following religion, and his perdition in -disobeying it. - - - 3. `ALÍ B. ḤUSAYN B. `ALÍ, CALLED ZAYN AL-`ÁBIDÍN. - -He said that the most blessed man in this world and in the next is he -who, when he is pleased, is not led by his pleasure into wrong, and when -he is angry, is not carried by his anger beyond the bounds of right. -This is the character of those who have attained perfect rectitude -(_kamál-i mustaqímán_). Ḥusayn used to call him `Alí the Younger (`Alí -Aṣghar). When Ḥusayn and his children were killed at Karbalá, there was -none left except `Alí to take care of the women; and he was ill. The -women were brought unveiled on camels to Yazíd b. Mu`áwiya—may God curse -him, but not his father!—at Damascus. Some one said to `Alí: “How are ye -this morning, O `Alí and O members of the House of Mercy?” `Alí replied: -“We are in the same position among our people as the people of Moses -among Pharaoh’s folk, who slaughtered their sons and took their women -alive; we do not know morning from evening on account of the reality of -our affliction.” - - [The author then relates the well-known story of Hishám b. `Abd - al-Malik’s encounter with `Alí b. Ḥusayn at Mecca—how the Caliph, who - desired to kiss the Black Stone but was unable to reach it, saw the - crowd immediately make way for `Alí and retire to a respectful - distance; how a man of Syria asked the Caliph to tell him the name of - this person who was held in so great veneration; how Hishám feigned - ignorance, for fear that his partisans should be shaken in allegiance - to himself; and how the poet Farazdaq stepped forward and recited the - splendid encomium beginning—[54] - - “_This is he whose footprint is known to the valley of Mecca, - He whom the Temple knows, and the unhallowed territory and the holy - ground. - This is the son of the best of all the servants of God, - This is the pious, the elect, the pure, the eminent._” - - Hishám was enraged and threw Farazdaq into prison. `Alí sent to him a - purse containing 12,000 dirhems; but the poet returned it, with the - message that he had uttered many lies in the panegyrics on princes and - governors which he was accustomed to compose for money, and that he - had addressed these verses to `Alí as a partial expiation for his sins - in that respect, and as a proof of his affection towards the House of - the Prophet. `Alí, however, begged to be excused from taking back what - he had already given away; and Farazdaq at last consented to receive - the money.] - -Footnote 54: - - Twenty-five verses are quoted. - - - 4. ABÚ JA`FAR MUḤAMMAD B. `ALÍ B. ḤUSAYN AL-BÁQIR. - -Some say that his “name of honour” was Abú `Abdalláh. His nickname was -Báqir. He was distinguished for his knowledge of the abstruse sciences -and for his subtle indications as to the meaning of the Koran. It is -related that on one occasion a king, who wished to destroy him, summoned -him to his presence. When Báqir appeared, the king begged his pardon, -bestowed gifts upon him, and dismissed him courteously. On being asked -why he had acted in this manner, the king replied: “When he came in, I -saw two lions, one on his right hand and one on his left, who threatened -to destroy me if I should attempt to do him any harm.” In his -explanation of the verse, “_Whosoever believes in the_ ṭághút _and -believes in God_” (Kor. ii, 257), Báqir said: “Anything that diverts -thee from contemplation of the Truth is thy _ṭághút_.” One of his -intimate friends relates that when a portion of the night had passed and -Báqir had finished his litanies, he used to cry aloud to God: “O my God -and my Lord, night has come, and the power of monarchs has ceased, and -the stars are shining in the sky, and all mankind are asleep and silent, -and the Banú Umayya have gone to rest and shut their doors and set -guards to watch over them; and those who desired anything from them have -forgotten their business. Thou, O God, art the Living, the Lasting, the -Seeing, the Knowing. Sleep and slumber cannot overtake Thee. He who does -not acknowledge that Thou art such as I have described is unworthy of -Thy bounty. O Thou whom no thing withholds from any other thing, whose -eternity is not impaired by Day and Night, whose doors of Mercy are open -to all who call upon Thee, and whose entire treasures are lavished on -those who praise Thee: Thou dost never turn away the beggar, and no -creature in earth or heaven can prevent the true believer who implores -Thee from gaining access to Thy court. O Lord, when I remember death and -the grave and the reckoning, how can I take joy in this world? -Therefore, since I acknowledge Thee to be One, I beseech Thee to give me -peace in the hour of death, without torment, and pleasure in the hour of -reckoning, without punishment.” - - - 5. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD JA`FAR B. MUḤAMMAD ṢÁDIQ. - -He is celebrated among the Ṣúfí Shaykhs for the subtlety of his -discourse and his acquaintance with spiritual truths, and he has written -famous books in explanation of Ṣúfiism. It is related that he said: -“Whoever knows God turns his back on all else.” The gnostic (_`árif_) -turns his back on “other” (than God) and is cut off from worldly things, -because his knowledge (_ma`rifat_) is pure nescience (_nakirat_), -inasmuch as nescience forms part of his knowledge, and knowledge forms -part of his nescience. Therefore the gnostic is separated from mankind -and from thought of them, and he is joined to God. “Other” has no place -in his heart, that he should pay any heed to them, and their existence -has no worth for him, that he should fix the remembrance of them in his -mind. And it is related that he said: “There is no right service without -repentance, because God hath put repentance before service, and hath -said, _Those who repent and serve_” (Kor. ix, 113). Repentance -(_tawbat_) is the first of the “stations” in this Path, and service -(_`ibádat_) is the last. When God mentioned the disobedient He called -them to repentance and said, “_Repent unto God together_” (Kor. xxiv, -31); but when He mentioned the Apostle He referred to his “servantship” -(_`ubúdiyyat_), and said, “_He revealed to His servant that which He -revealed_” (Kor. liii, 10). I have read in the Anecdotes that Dáwud Ṭá´í -came to Ja`far Ṣádiq and said: “O son of the Apostle of God, counsel me, -for my mind is darkened.” Ja`far replied: “O Abú Sulaymán, thou art the -ascetic of thy time: what need hast thou of counsel from me?” He -answered: “O son of the Apostle, thy family are superior to all mankind, -and it is incumbent on thee to give counsel to all.” “O Abú Sulaymán,” -cried Ja`far, “I am afraid that at the Resurrection my grandsire will -lay hold on me, saying, ‘Why didst not thou fulfil the obligation to -follow in my steps?’ This is not a matter that depends on authentic and -sure affinity (to Muḥammad), but on good conduct in the presence of the -Truth.” Dáwud Ṭá´í began to weep and exclaimed: “O Lord God, if one -whose clay is moulded with the water of Prophecy, whose grandsire is the -Apostle, and whose mother is Fáṭima (_Batúl_)—if such a one is -distracted by doubts, who am I that I should be pleased with my dealings -(towards God)?” One day Ja`far said to his clients: “Come, let us take a -pledge that whoever amongst us shall gain deliverance on the Day of -Resurrection shall intercede for all the rest.” They said: “O son of the -Apostle, how canst thou have need of our intercession since thy -grandsire intercedes for all mankind?” Ja`far replied: “My actions are -such that I shall be ashamed to look my grandsire in the face on the -Last Day.” To see one’s faults is a quality of perfection, and is -characteristic of those who are established in the Divine presence, -whether they be prophets, saints, or apostles. The Apostle said: “When -God wishes a man well, He gives him insight into his faults.” Whoever -bows his head with humility, like a servant, God will exalt his state in -both worlds. - -Now I shall mention briefly the People of the Veranda (_Ahl-i Ṣuffa_). -In a book entitled “The Highway of Religion” (_Minháj al-Dín_), which I -composed before the present work, I have given a detailed account of -each of them, but here it will suffice to mention their names and “names -of honour”. - - - - - CHAPTER IX. - CONCERNING THE PEOPLE OF THE VERANDA (_Ahl-i Ṣuffa_). - - -Know that all Moslems are agreed that the Apostle had a number of -Companions, who abode in his Mosque and engaged in devotion, renouncing -the world and refusing to seek a livelihood. God reproached the Apostle -on their account and said: “_Do not drive away those who call unto their -Lord at morn and eve, desiring His face_” (Kor. vi, 52). Their merits -are proclaimed by the Book of God, and in many traditions of the Apostle -which have come down to us. It is related by Ibn `Abbás that the Apostle -passed by the People of the Veranda, and saw their poverty and their -self-mortification and said: “Rejoice! for whoever of my community -perseveres in the state in which ye are, and is satisfied with his -condition, he shall be one of my comrades in Paradise.” Among the _Ahl-i -Ṣuffa_[55] were Bilál b. Rabáḥ, Salmán al-Fárisí, Abú `Ubayda b. -al-Jarráḥ, Abu ´l-Yaqẕán `Ammár b. Yásir, `Abdalláh b. Mas`úd -al-Hudhalí, his brother `Utba b. Mas`úd, Miqdád b. al-Aswad, Khabbáb b. -al-Aratt, Ṣuhayb b. Sinán, `Utba b. Ghazwán, Zayd b. al-Khaṭṭáb, brother -of the Caliph `Umar; Abú Kabsha, the Apostle’s client; Abu ´l-Marthad -Kinána b. al-Ḥusayn al-`Adawí; Sálim, client of Hudhayfa al-Yamání; -`Ukkásha b. Miḥṣan; Mas`úd b. Rabí` al-Fárisí; Abú Dharr Jundab b. -Junáda al-Ghifárí; `Abdalláh b. `Umar; Ṣafwán b. Bayḍá; Abú Dardá `Uwaym -b. `Ámír; Abú Lubába b. `Abd al-Mundhir; and `Abdalláh b. Badr -al-Juhaní. - -Footnote 55: - - I have corrected many of the following names, which are erroneously - written in the Persian text, by reference to various Arabic works. - -Shaykh Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Sulamí,[56] the -traditionist (_naqqál_) of Ṣúfiism and transmitter of the sayings of the -Ṣúfí Shaykhs, has written a separate history of the _Ahl-i Ṣuffa_, in -which he has recorded their virtues and merits and names and “names of -honour”. He has included among them Misṭaḥ b. Uthátha b. `Abbád, whom I -dislike because he began the slanders about `Á´isha, the Mother of the -Believers. Abú Hurayra, and Thawbán, and Mu`ádh b. al-Ḥárith, and Sá´ib -b. Khallád, and Thábit b. Wadí`at, and Abú `Ísá `Uwaym b. Sá`ida, and -Sálim b. `Umayr b. Thábit, and Abu ´l-Yasar Ka`b b. `Amr, and Wahb b. -Ma`qal, and `Abdalláh b. Unays, and Ḥajjáj b. `Umar al-Aslamí belonged -to the _Ahl-i Ṣuffa_. Now and then they had recourse to some means of -livelihood (_ta`alluq ba-sababí kardandí_), but all of them were in one -and the same degree (of dignity). Verily, the generation of the -Companions was the best of all generations; and they were the best and -most excellent of mankind, since God bestowed on them companionship with -the Apostle and preserved their hearts from blemish. - -Footnote 56: - - See Brockelmann, i, 200. - - - - - CHAPTER X. - CONCERNING THEIR IMÁMS WHO BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS (_al-Tábi`ún_). - - - 1. UWAYS AL-QARANÍ. - -He lived in the time of the Apostle, but was prevented from seeing him, -firstly by the ecstasy which overmastered him, and secondly by duty to -his mother. The Apostle said to the Companions: “There is a man at -Qaran, called Uways, who at the Resurrection will intercede for a -multitude of my people, as many as the sheep of Rabí`a and Muḍar.” Then -turning to `Umar and `Alí, he said: “You will see him. He is a lowly -man, of middle height, and hairy; on his left side there is a white -spot, as large as a dirhem, which is not from leprosy (_pístí_), and he -has a similar spot on the palm of his hand. When you see him, give him -my greeting, and bid him pray for my people.” After the Apostle’s death -`Umar came to Mecca, and cried out in the course of a sermon: “O men of -Najd, are there any natives of Qaran amongst you?” They answered, “Yes”; -whereupon `Umar sent for them and asked them about Uways. They said: “He -is a madman who dwells in solitude and associates with no one. He does -not eat what men eat, and he feels no joy or sorrow. When others smile -he weeps, and when others weep he smiles.” `Umar said: “I wish to see -him.” They replied: “He lives in a desert, far from our camels.” `Umar -and `Alí set out in quest of him. They found him praying, and waited -until he was finished. He saluted them and showed them the marks on his -side and the palm of his hand. They asked his blessing and gave him the -Apostle’s greeting, and enjoined him to pray for the Moslem people. -After they had stayed with him for a while, he said: “You have taken -trouble (to see me); now return, for the Resurrection is near, when we -shall see each other without having to say farewell. At present I am -engaged in preparing for the Resurrection.” When the men of Qaran came -home, they exhibited great respect for Uways. He left his native place -and came to Kúfa. One day he was seen by Harim b. Ḥayyán, but after that -nobody saw him until the period of civil war. He fought for `Alí, and -fell a martyr at the battle of Ṣiffín. - -It is related that he said: “Safety lies in solitude,” because the heart -of the solitary is free from thought of “other”, and in no circumstances -does he hope for anything from mankind. Let none imagine, however, that -solitude (_waḥdat_) merely consists in living alone. So long as the -Devil associates with a man’s heart, and sensual passion holds sway in -his breast, and any thought of this world or the next occurs to him in -such a way as to make him conscious of mankind, he is not truly in -solitude; since it is all one whether he takes pleasure in the thing -itself or in the thought of it. Accordingly, the true solitary is not -disturbed by society, but he who is preoccupied seeks in vain to acquire -freedom from thought by secluding himself. In order to be cut off from -mankind one must become intimate with God, and those who have become -intimate with God are not hurt by intercourse with mankind. - - - 2. HARIM B. ḤAYYÁN. - -He went to visit Uways Qaraní, but on arriving at Qaran he found that -Uways was no longer there. Deeply disappointed, he returned to Mecca, -where he learned that Uways was living at Kúfa. He repaired thither, but -could not discover him for a long time. At last he set out for Baṣra and -on the way he saw Uways, clad in a patched frock, performing an ablution -on the banks of the Euphrates. As soon as he came up from the shore of -the river and combed his beard, Harim advanced to meet him and saluted -him. Uways said: “Peace be with thee, O Harim b. Ḥayyán!” Harim cried: -“How did you know that I am Harim?” Uways answered: “My spirit knew thy -spirit.” He said to Harim: “Keep watch over thy heart” (_`alayka -bi-qalbika_), i.e. “Guard thy heart from thoughts of ‘other’”. This -saying has two meanings: (1) “Make thy heart obedient to God by -self-mortification”, and (2) “Make thyself obedient to thy heart”. These -are two sound principles. It is the business of novices (_murídán_) to -make their hearts obedient to God in order to purge them from -familiarity with vain desires and passions, and sever them from unseemly -thoughts, and fix them on the method of gaining spiritual health, on the -keeping of the commandments, and on contemplation of the signs of God, -so that their hearts may become the shrine of Love. To make one’s self -obedient to one’s heart is the business of adepts (_kámilán_), whose -hearts God has illumined with the light of Beauty, and delivered from -all causes and means, and invested with the robe of proximity (_qurb_), -and thereby has revealed to them His bounties and has chosen them to -contemplate Him and to be near Him: hence He has made their bodies -accordant with their hearts. The former class are masters of their -hearts (_ṣáḥib al-qulúb_), the latter are under the dominion of their -hearts (_maghlúb al-qulúb_); the former retain their attributes (_báqi -´l-ṣifat_), the latter have lost their attributes (_fáni ´l-ṣifat_). The -truth of this matter goes back to the words of God: _Illá `íbádaka -minhumu ´l-mukhlaṣína_, “Except such of them as are Thy purified -(chosen) servants” (Kor. xv, 40). Here some read _mukhliṣína_ instead of -_mukhlaṣína_. The _mukhliṣ_ (purifying one’s self) is active, and -retains his attributes, but the _mukhlaṣ_ (purified) is passive, and has -lost his attributes. I will explain this question more fully elsewhere. -The latter class, who make their bodies accordant with their hearts, and -whose hearts abide in contemplation of God, are of higher rank than -those who by their own effort make their hearts comply with the Divine -commandments. This subject has its foundation in the principles of -sobriety (_ṣahw_) and intoxication (_sukr_), and in those of -contemplation (_musháhadat_) and self-mortification (_mujáhadat_). - - 3. ḤASAN OF BAṢRA. - -His “name of honour” was Abú `Alí; according to others, Abú Muḥammad or -Abú Sa`íd. He is held in high regard and esteem by the Ṣúfís. He gave -subtle directions relating to the science of practical religion (_`ilm-i -mu`ámalat_). I have read in the Anecdotes that a Bedouin came to him and -asked him about patience (_ṣabr_). Ḥasan replied: “Patience is of two -sorts: firstly, patience in misfortune and affliction; and secondly, -patience to refrain from the things which God has commanded us to -renounce and has forbidden us to pursue.” The Bedouin said: “Thou art an -ascetic; I never saw anyone more ascetic than thou art.” “O Bedouin!” -cried Ḥasan, “my asceticism is nothing but desire, and my patience is -nothing but lack of fortitude.” The Bedouin begged him to explain this -saying, “for [said he] thou hast shaken my belief.” Ḥasan replied: “My -patience in misfortune and my submission proclaim my fear of Hell-fire, -and this is lack of fortitude (_jaza`_); and my asceticism in this world -is desire for the next world, and this is the quintessence of desire. -How excellent is he who takes no thought of his own interest! so that -his patience is for God’s sake, not for the saving of himself from Hell; -and his asceticism is for God’s sake, not for the purpose of bringing -himself into Paradise. This is the mark of true sincerity.” And it is -related that he said: “Association with the wicked produces suspicion of -the good.” This saying is very apt and suitable to the people of the -present age, who all disbelieve in the honoured friends of God. The -reason of their disbelief is that they associate with pretenders to -Ṣúfiism, who have only its external forms; and perceiving their actions -to be perfidious, their tongues false, their ears listening to idle -quatrains, their eyes following pleasure and lust, and their hearts set -on amassing unlawful or dubious lucre, they fancy that aspirants to -Ṣúfiism behave in the same manner, or that this is the doctrine of the -Ṣúfís themselves, whereas, on the contrary, the Ṣúfís act in obedience -to God, and speak the word of God, and keep the love of God in their -hearts and the voice (_samá`_) of God in their ears, and the beauty of -Divine contemplation in their eyes, and all their thoughts are fixed on -the gaining of holy mysteries in the place where Vision is vouchsafed to -them. If evildoers have appeared among them and have adopted their -practices, the evil must be referred to those who commit it. Anyone who -associates with the wicked members of a community does so through his -own wickedness, for he would associate with the good if there were any -good in him. - - 4. SA`ÍD B. AL-MUSAYYIB. - -It is said that he was a man of devout nature who made a show of -hypocrisy, not a hypocrite who pretended to be devout. This way of -acting is approved in Ṣúfiism and is held laudable by all the Shaykhs. -He said: “Be content with a little of this world while thy religion is -safe, even as some are content with much thereof while their religion is -lost,” i.e. poverty without injury to religion is better than riches -with heedlessness. It is related that when he was at Mecca a man came to -him and said: “Tell me a lawful thing in which there is nothing -unlawful.” He replied: “Praise (_dhikr_) of God is a lawful thing in -which there is nothing unlawful, and praise of aught else is an unlawful -thing in which there is nothing lawful,” because your salvation lies in -the former and your perdition in the latter. - - - - - CHAPTER XI. - CONCERNING THEIR IMÁMS WHO LIVED SUBSEQUENTLY TO THE FOLLOWERS - (_al-Tábi`ún_) DOWN TO OUR DAY. - - 1. ḤABÍB AL-`AJAMÍ. - -His conversion (_tawbat_) was begun by Ḥasan of Baṣra. At first he was a -usurer and committed all sorts of wickedness, but God gave him a sincere -repentance, and he learned from Ḥasan something of the theory and -practice of religion. His native tongue was Persian (_`ajamí_), and he -could not speak Arabic correctly. One evening Ḥasan of Baṣra passed by -the door of his cell. Ḥabíb had uttered the call to prayer and was -standing, engaged in devotion. Ḥasan came in, but would not pray under -his leadership, because Ḥabíb was unable to speak Arabic fluently or -recite the Koran correctly. The same night, Ḥasan dreamed that he saw -God and said to Him: “O Lord, wherein does Thy good pleasure consist?” -and that God answered: “O Ḥasan, you found My good pleasure, but did not -know its value: if yesternight you had said your prayers after Ḥabíb, -and if the rightness of his intention had restrained you from taking -offence at his pronunciation, I should have been well pleased with you.” -It is common knowledge among Ṣúfís that when Ḥasan of Baṣra fled from -Ḥajjáj he entered the cell of Ḥabíb. The soldiers came and said to -Ḥabíb: “Have you seen Ḥasan anywhere?” Ḥabíb said: “Yes.” “Where is he?” -“He is in my cell.” They went into the cell, but saw no one there. -Thinking that Ḥabíb was making fun of them, they abused him and called -him a liar. He swore that he had spoken the truth. They returned twice -and thrice, but found no one, and at last departed. Ḥasan immediately -came out and said to Ḥabíb: “I know it was owing to thy benedictions -that God did not discover me to these wicked men, but why didst thou -tell them I was here?” Ḥabíb replied: “O Master, it was not on account -of my benedictions that they failed to see thee, but through the -blessedness of my speaking the truth. Had I told a lie, we both should -have been shamed.” Ḥabíb was asked: “With what thing is God pleased?” He -answered: “With a heart which is not sullied by hypocrisy,” because -hypocrisy (_nifáq_) is the opposite of concord (_wifáq_), and the state -of being well pleased (_riḍá_) is the essence of concord. There is no -connexion between hypocrisy and love, and love subsists in the state of -being well pleased (with whatever is decreed by God). Therefore -acquiescence (_riḍá_) is a characteristic of God’s friends, while -hypocrisy is a characteristic of His enemies. This is a very important -matter. I will explain it in another place. - - 2. MÁLIK B. DÍNÁR. - -He was a companion of Ḥasan of Baṣra. Dínár was a slave, and Málik was -born before his father’s emancipation. His conversion began as follows. -One evening he had been enjoying himself with a party of friends. When -they were all asleep a voice came from a lute which they had been -playing: “O Málik! why dost thou not repent?” Málik abandoned his evil -ways and went to Ḥasan of Baṣra, and showed himself steadfast in -repentance. He attained to such a high degree that once when he was in a -ship, and was suspected of stealing a jewel, he no sooner lifted his -eyes to heaven than all the fishes in the sea came to the surface, every -one carrying a jewel in its mouth. Málik took one of the jewels, and -gave it to the man whose jewel was missing; then he set foot on the sea -and walked until he reached the shore. It is related that he said: “The -deed that I love best is sincerity in doing,” because an action only -becomes an action in virtue of its sincerity. Sincerity bears the same -relation to an action as the spirit to the body: as the body without the -spirit is a lifeless thing, so an action without sincerity is utterly -unsubstantial. Sincerity belongs to the class of internal actions, -whereas acts of devotion belong to the class of external actions: the -latter are completed by the former, while the former derive their value -from the latter. Although a man should keep his heart sincere for a -thousand years, it is not sincerity until his sincerity is combined with -action; and although he should perform external actions for a thousand -years, his actions do not become acts of devotion until they are -combined with sincerity. - - 3. ABÚ ḤALÍM ḤABÍB B. SALÍM[57] AL-RÁ`Í. - -He was a companion of Salmán Fárisí. He related that the Apostle said: -“The believer’s intentions are better than his acts.” He had flocks of -sheep, and his home was on the bank of the Euphrates. His religious Path -(_ṭaríq_) was retirement from the world. A certain Shaykh relates as -follows: “Once I passed by him and found him praying, while a wolf -looked after his sheep. I resolved to pay him a visit, since he appeared -to me to have the marks of greatness. When we had exchanged greetings, I -said: ‘O Shaykh! I see the wolf in accord with the sheep.’ He replied: -‘That is because the shepherd is in accord with God.’ With those words -he held a wooden bowl under a rock, and two fountains gushed from the -rock, one of milk and one of honey. ‘O Shaykh!’ I cried, as he bade me -drink, ‘how hast thou attained to this degree?’ He answered: ‘By -obedience to Muḥammad, the Apostle of God. O my son! the rock gave water -to the people of Moses,[58] although they disobeyed him, and although -Moses is not equal in rank to Muḥammad: why should not the rock give -milk and honey to me, inasmuch as I am obedient to Muḥammad, who is -superior to Moses?’ I said: ‘Give me a word of counsel.’ He said: ‘Do -not make your heart a coffer of covetousness and your belly a vessel of -unlawful things.’” - -Footnote 57: - - L. Aslam. - -Footnote 58: - - Kor. vii, 160. - -My Shaykh had further traditions concerning him, but I could not -possibly set down more than this (_andar waqt-i man ḍíqí búd ú bísh az -ín mumkin na-shud_), my books having been left at Ghazna—may God guard -it!—while I myself had become a captive among uncongenial folk (_dar -miyán-i nájinsán_) in the district of Laháwur, which is a dependency of -Múltán. God be praised both in joy and sorrow! - - 4. ABÚ ḤÁZIM AL-MADANÍ. - -He was steadfast in poverty, and thoroughly versed in different kinds of -self-mortification. `Amr b. `Uthmán al-Makkí, who shows great zeal on -his behalf (_andar amr-i way ba-jidd báshad_), relates that on being -asked what he possessed he answered: “Satisfaction (_riḍá_) with God and -independence of mankind.” A certain Shaykh went to see him and found him -asleep. When he awoke he said: “I dreamed just now that the Apostle gave -me a message to thee, and bade me inform thee that it is better to -fulfil the duty which is owed to one’s mother than to make the -pilgrimage. Return, therefore, and try to please her.” The person who -tells the story turned back and did not go to Mecca. This is all that I -have heard about Abú Ḥázim. - - 5. MUḤAMMAD B. WÁSI`. - -He associated with many of the Followers and with some of the ancient -Shaykhs, and had a perfect knowledge of Ṣúfiism. It is related that he -said: “I never saw anything without seeing God therein.” This is an -advanced stage (_maqám_) of Contemplation. When a man is overcome with -love for the Agent, he attains to such a degree that in looking at His -act he does not see the act but the Agent only and entirely, just as -when one looks at a picture and sees only the painter. The true meaning -of these words is the same as in the saying of Abraham, the Friend of -God (_Khalíl_) and the Apostle, who said to the sun and moon and stars: -“_This is my Lord_” (Kor. vi, 76-8), for he was then overcome with -longing (_shawq_), so that the qualities of his beloved appeared to him -in everything that he saw. The friends of God perceive that the universe -is subject to His might and captive to His dominion, and that the -existence of all created things is as nothing in comparison with the -power of the Agent thereof. When they look thereon with longing, they do -not see what is subject and passive and created, but only the -Omnipotent, the Agent, the Creator. I shall treat of this in the chapter -on Contemplation. Some persons have fallen into error, and have alleged -that the words of Muḥammad b. Wási`, “I saw God therein,” involve a -place of division and descent (_makán-i tajziya ú ḥulúl_), which is -sheer infidelity, because place is homogeneous with that which is -contained in it, and if anyone supposes that place is created the -contained object must also be created; or if the latter be eternal the -former also must be eternal: hence this assertion entails two evil -consequences, both of which are infidelity, viz., either that created -things are eternal (_qadím_) or that the Creator is non-eternal -(_muḥdath_). Accordingly, when Muḥammad b. Wási` said that he saw God in -things, he meant, as I have explained above, that he saw in those things -the signs and evidences and proofs of God. - -I shall discuss in the proper place some subtle points connected with -this question. - - 6. ABÚ ḤANÍFA NU`MÁN B. THÁBIT AL-KHARRÁZ. - -He is the Imám of Imáms and the exemplar of the Sunnites. He was firmly -grounded in works of mortification and devotion, and was a great -authority on the principles of Ṣúfiism. At first he wished to go into -seclusion and abandon the society of mankind, for he had made his heart -free from every thought of human power and pomp. One night, however, he -dreamed that he was collecting the bones of the Apostle from the tomb, -and choosing some and discarding others. He awoke in terror and asked -one of the pupils of Muḥammad b. Sírín[59] (to interpret the dream). -This man said to him: “You will attain a high rank in knowledge of the -Apostle and in preserving his ordinances (_sunnat_), so that you will -sift what is genuine from what is spurious.” Another time Abú Ḥanífa -dreamed that the Apostle said to him: “You have been created for the -purpose of reviving my ordinances.” He was the master of many Shaykhs, -e.g. Ibráhím b. Adham and Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ and Dáwud Ṭá´í and Bishr Ḥáfí. - -Footnote 59: - - A well-known divine, who died in 110 A.H. See Ibn Khallikán, No. 576. - An extant work on the interpretation of dreams is attributed to him - (Brockelmann, i, 66). - -In the reign of the Caliph Manṣúr a plan was formed to appoint to the -office of Cadi one of the following persons: Abú Ḥanífa, Sufyán Thawrí, -Mis`ar b. Kidám, and Shurayḥ. While they were journeying together to -visit Manṣúr, who had summoned them to his presence, Abú Ḥanífa said to -his companions: “I will reject this office by means of a certain trick, -Mis`ar will feign to be mad, Sufyán will run away, and Shurayḥ will be -made Cadi.” Sufyán fled and embarked in a ship, imploring the captain to -conceal him and save him from execution. The others were ushered into -the presence of the Caliph. Manṣúr said to Abú Ḥanífa: “You must act as -Cadi.” Abú Ḥanífa replied: “O Commander of the Faithful, I am not an -Arab, but one of their clients; and the chiefs of the Arabs will not -accept my decisions.” Manṣúr said: “This matter has nothing to do with -lineage: it demands learning, and you are the most eminent doctor of the -day.” Abú Ḥanífa persisted that he was unfit to hold the office. “What I -have just said shows it,” he exclaimed; “for if I have spoken the truth -I am disqualified, and if I have told a falsehood it is not right that a -liar should be judge over Moslems, and that you should entrust him with -the lives, property, and honour of your subjects.” He escaped in this -way. Then Mis`ar came forward and seized the Caliph’s hand and said: -“How are you, and your children, and your beasts of burden?” “Away with -him,” cried Manṣúr, “he is mad!” Finally, Shurayḥ was told that he must -fill the vacant office. “I am melancholic,” said he, “and light-witted,” -whereupon Manṣúr advised him to drink ptisanes and potions (_`aṣídahá-yi -muwáfiq ú nabídhhá-yi muthallath_) until his intellect was fully -restored. So Shurayḥ was made Cadi, and Abú Ḥanífa never spoke a word to -him again. This story illustrates not only the sagacity of Abú Ḥanífa, -but also his adherence to the path of righteousness and salvation, and -his determination not to let himself be deluded by seeking popularity -and worldly renown. It shows, moreover, the soundness of blame -(_malámat_), since all these three venerable men resorted to some trick -in order to avoid popularity. Very different are the doctors of the -present age, who make the palaces of princes their _qibla_ and the -houses of evildoers their temple. - -Once a doctor of Ghazna, who claimed to be a learned divine and a -religious leader, declared it heresy to wear a patched frock -(_muraqqa`a_). I said to him: “You do not call it heretical to wear -robes of brocade,[60] which are made entirely of silk and, besides being -in themselves unlawful for men to wear, have been begged with -importunity, which is unlawful, from evildoers whose property is -absolutely unlawful. Why, then, is it heretical to wear a lawful -garment, procured from a lawful place, and purchased with lawful money? -If you were not ruled by inborn conceit and by the error of your soul, -you would express a more judicious opinion. Women may wear a dress of -silk lawfully, but it is unlawful for men, and only permissible -(_mubáḥ_) for lunatics. If you acknowledge the truth of both these -statements you are excused (for condemning the patched frock). God save -us from lack of fairness!” - -Footnote 60: - - The text has _jáma-i ḥashíshí ú díbaqí_. Apparently the former word - should be written “_khashíshí_”. It is described in Vullers’s Persian - Dictionary as “a kind of garment”. - -Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází relates as follows: “I dreamed that I said to -the Apostle, ‘O Apostle of God, where shall I seek thee?’ He answered: -‘In the science of Abú Ḥanífa.’” - -Once, when I was in Syria, I fell asleep at the tomb of Bilál the -Muezzin,[61] and dreamed that I was at Mecca, and that the Apostle came -in through the gate of the Banú Shayba, tenderly clasping an old man to -his bosom in the same fashion as people are wont to carry children; and -that I ran to him and kissed the back of his foot, and stood marvelling -who the old man might be; and that the Apostle was miraculously aware of -my secret thought and said to me, “This is thy Imám and the Imám of thy -countryman,” meaning Abú Ḥanífa. In consequence of this dream I have -great hopes for myself and also for the people of my country. It has -convinced me, moreover, that Abú Ḥanífa was one of those who, having -annihilated their natural qualities, continue to perform the ordinances -of the sacred law, as appears from the fact that he was carried by the -Apostle. If he had walked by himself, his attributes must have been -subsistent, and such a one may either miss or hit the mark; but inasmuch -as he was carried by the Apostle, his attributes must have been -non-existent while he was sustained by the living attributes of the -Apostle. The Apostle cannot err, and it is equally impossible that one -who is sustained by the Apostle should fall into error. - -Footnote 61: - - Bilál b. Rabáḥ, the Prophet’s Muezzin, was buried at Damascus. - -When Dáwud Ṭá´í had acquired learning and become a famous authority, he -went to Abú Ḥanífa and said to him: “What shall I do now?” Abú Ḥanífa -replied: “Practise what you have learned, for theory without practice is -like a body without a spirit.” He who is content with learning alone is -not learned, and the truly learned man is not content with learning -alone. - -Similarly, Divine guidance (_hidáyat_) involves self-mortification -(_mujáhadat_), without which contemplation (_musháhadat_) is -unattainable. There is no knowledge without action, since knowledge is -the product of action, and is brought forth and developed and made -profitable by the blessings of action. The two things cannot be divorced -in any way, just as the light of the sun cannot be separated from the -sun itself. - - 7. `ABDALLÁH B. MUBÁRAK AL-MARWAZÍ. - -He was the Imám of his time and consorted with many eminent Shaykhs. He -is the author of celebrated works and famous miracles. The occasion of -his conversion is related as follows: He was in love with a girl, and -one night in winter he stationed himself at the foot of the wall of her -house, while she came on to the roof, and they both stayed gazing at -each other until daybreak. When `Abdalláh heard the call to morning -prayers he thought it was time for evening prayers; and only when the -sun began to shine did he discover that he had spent the whole night in -rapturous contemplation of his beloved. He took warning by this, and -said to himself: “Shame on thee, O son of Mubárak! Dost thou stand on -foot all night for thine own pleasure, and yet become furious when the -Imám reads a long chapter of the Koran?” He repented and devoted himself -to study, and entered upon a life of asceticism, in which he attained -such a high degree that once his mother found him asleep in the garden, -while a great snake was driving the gnats away from him with a spray of -basil which it held in its mouth. Then he left Merv and lived for some -time in Baghdád, associating with the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, and also resided for -some time at Mecca. When he returned to Merv, the people of the town -received him with friendship and founded for him a professorial chair -and a lecture hall (_dars ú majlis nihádand_). At that epoch half the -population of Merv were followers of Tradition and the other half -adherents of Opinion, just as at the present day. They called him _Raḍí -al-faríqayn_ because of his agreement with both sides, and each party -claimed him as one of themselves. He built two convents (_ribáṭ_) at -Merv—one for the followers of Tradition and one for the followers of -Opinion—which have retained their original constitution down to the -present day. Afterwards he went back to the Ḥijáz and settled at Mecca. -On being asked what wonders he had seen, he replied: “I saw a Christian -monk (_ráhib_), who was emaciated by self-mortification and bent double -by fear of God. I asked him to tell me the way to God. He answered, ‘If -you knew God, you would know the way to Him.’ Then he said, ‘I worship -Him although I do not know him, whereas you disobey Him although you -know Him,’ i.e. ‘knowledge entails fear, yet I see that you are -confident; and infidelity entails ignorance, yet I feel fear within -myself.’ I laid this to heart, and it restrained me from many ill -deeds.” It is related that `Abdalláh b. Mubárak said: “Tranquillity is -unlawful to the hearts of the Saints of God,” for they are agitated in -this world by seeking God (_ṭalab_) and in the next world by rapture -(_ṭarab_); they are not permitted to rest here, while they are absent -from God, nor there, while they enjoy the presence, manifestation, and -vision of God. Hence this world is even as the next world in their eyes, -and the next world even as this world, because tranquillity of heart -demands two things, either attainment of one’s aim or indifference to -the object of one’s desire. Since He is not to be attained in this world -or the next, the heart can never have rest from the palpitation of love; -and since indifference is unlawful to those who love Him, the heart can -never have rest from the agitations of seeking Him. This is a firm -principle in the path of spiritual adepts. - - 8. ABÚ `ALÍ AL-FUḌAYL B. `IYÁḌ. - -He is one of the paupers (_ṣa`álík_) of the Ṣúfís, and one of their most -eminent and celebrated men. At first he used to practise brigandage -between Merv and Báward, but he was always inclined to piety, and -invariably showed a generous and magnanimous disposition, so that he -would not attack a caravan in which there was any woman, or take the -property of anyone whose stock was small; and he let the travellers keep -a portion of their property, according to the means of each. One day a -merchant set out from Merv. His friends advised him to take an escort, -but he said to them: “I have heard that Fuḍayl is a God-fearing man;” -and instead of doing as they wished he hired a Koran-reader and mounted -him on a camel in order that he might read the Koran aloud day and night -during the journey. When they reached the place where Fuḍayl was lying -in ambush, the reader happened to be reciting: “_Is not the time yet -come unto those who believe, that their hearts should humbly submit to -the admonition of God?_” (Kor. lvii, 15). Fuḍayl’s heart was softened. -He repented of the business in which he was engaged, and having a -written list of those whom he had robbed he satisfied all their claims -upon him. Then he went to Mecca and resided there for some time and -became acquainted with certain saints of God. Afterwards he returned to -Kúfa, where he associated with Abú Ḥanífa. He has handed down relations -which are held in high esteem by Traditionists, and he is the author of -lofty sayings concerning the verities of Ṣúfiism and Divine Knowledge. -It is recorded that he said: “Whoever knows God as He ought to be known -worships Him with all his might,” because everyone who knows God -acknowledges His bounty and beneficence and mercy, and therefore loves -Him; and since he loves Him he obeys Him so far as he has the power, for -it is not difficult to obey those whom one loves. Accordingly, the more -one loves, the more one is obedient, and love is increased by true -knowledge.[62] It is related that he said: “The world is a madhouse, and -the people therein are madmen, wearing shackles and chains.” Lust is our -shackle and sin is our chain. - -Footnote 62: - - Here the author relates two anecdotes illustrating the devotion of - Muḥammad. - -Faḍl b. Rabí` relates as follows: “I accompanied Hárún al-Rashíd to -Mecca. When we had performed the pilgrimage, he said to me, ‘Is there -any man of God here that I may visit him?’ I replied, ‘Yes, there is -`Abd al-Razzáq Ṣan`ání.’[63] We went to his house and talked with him -for a while. When we were about to leave, Hárún bade me ask him whether -he had any debts. He said, ‘Yes,’ and Hárún gave orders that they should -be paid. On coming out, Hárún said to me, ‘O Faḍl, my heart still -desires to see a man greater than this one.’ I conducted him to Sufyán -b. `Uyayna.[64] Our visit ended in the same way. Hárún gave orders to -pay his debts and departed. Then he said to me, ‘I recollect that Fuḍayl -b. `Iyáḍ is here; let us go and see him.’ We found him in an upper -chamber, reciting a verse of the Koran. When we knocked at the door, he -cried, ‘Who is there?’ I replied, ‘The Commander of the Faithful.’ ‘What -have I to do with the Commander of the Faithful?’ said he. I said, ‘Is -there not an Apostolic Tradition to the effect that no one shall seek to -abase himself in devotion to God?’ He answered, ‘Yes, but acquiescence -in God’s will (_riḍá_) is everlasting glory in the opinion of quietists: -you see my abasement, but I see my exaltation.’ Then he came down and -opened the door, and extinguished the lamp and stood in a corner. Hárún -went in and tried to find him. Their hands met. Fuḍayl exclaimed, ‘Alas! -never have I felt a softer hand: ’t will be very wonderful if it escape -from the Divine torment.’ Hárún began to weep, and wept so violently -that he swooned. When he came to himself, he said, ‘O Fuḍayl, give me a -word of counsel.’ Fuḍayl said: ‘O Commander of the Faithful, thy -ancestor (`Abbás) was the uncle of Muṣṭafá. He asked the Prophet to give -him dominion over men. The Prophet answered, “O my uncle, I will give -thee dominion for one moment over thyself,” i.e. one moment of thy -obedience to God is better than a thousand years of men’s obedience to -thee, since dominion brings repentance on the Day of Resurrection’ -(_al-imárat yawm al-qiyámat nadámat_). Hárún said, ‘Counsel me further.’ -Fuḍayl continued: ‘When `Umar b. `Abd al-`Azíz was appointed Caliph, he -summoned Sálim b. `Abdalláh and Rajá b. Ḥayát, and Muḥammad b. Ka`b -al-Quraẕí, and said to them, “What am I to do in this affliction? for I -count it an affliction, although people in general consider it to be a -blessing.” One of them replied: “If thou wouldst be saved to-morrow from -the Divine punishment, regard the elders of the Moslems as thy fathers, -and their young men as thy brothers, and their children as thy children. -The whole territory of Islam is thy house, and its people are thy -family. Visit thy father, and honour thy brother, and deal kindly with -thy children.“’ Then Fuḍayl said: ‘O Commander of the Faithful, I fear -lest that handsome face of thine fall into Hell-fire. Fear God, and -perform thy obligations to Him better than this.’ Hárún asked Fuḍayl -whether he had any debts. He answered, ‘Yes, the debt which I owe to -God, namely, obedience to Him; woe is me, if He call me to account for -it!’ Hárún said, ‘O Fuḍayl, I am speaking of debts to men.’ He replied, -‘God be praised! His bounty towards me is great, and I have no reason to -complain of Him to His servants.’ Hárún offered him a purse of a -thousand dinars, saying, ‘Use the money for some purpose of thine own.’ -Fuḍayl said, ‘O Commander of the Faithful, my counsels have done thee no -good. Here again thou art behaving wrongly and unjustly.’ Hárún -exclaimed, ‘How is that?’ Fuḍayl said, ‘I wish thee to be saved, but -thou wouldst cast me into perdition: is not this unjust?’ We took leave -of him with tears in our eyes, and Hárún said to me, ‘O Faḍl, Fuḍayl is -a king indeed.’” - -Footnote 63: - - He died in 211 A.H. See Ibn Khallikán, No. 409. - -Footnote 64: - - Died in 168 A.H. See Ibn Khallikán, No. 266. - -All this shows his hatred of the world and its people, and his contempt -for its gauds, and his refusal to abase himself before worldlings for -the sake of worldly gain. - - 9. ABU ´L-FAYḌ DHU ´L-NÚN B. IBRÁHÍM AL-MIṢRÍ. - -He was the son of a Nubian, and his name was Thawbán. He is one of the -best of this sect, and one of the most eminent of their hidden -spiritualists (_`ayyárán_), for he trod the path of affliction and -travelled on the road of blame (_malámat_). All the people of Egypt were -lost in doubt as to his true state, and did not believe in him until he -was dead. On the night of his decease seventy persons dreamed that they -saw the Apostle, who said: “I have come to meet Dhu ´l-Nún, the friend -of God.” And after his death the following words were found inscribed on -his forehead: _This is the beloved of God, who died in love of God, -slain by God_. At his funeral the birds of the air gathered above his -bier, and wove their wings together so as to shadow it. On seeing this, -all the Egyptians felt remorse and repented of the injustice which they -had done to him. He has many fine and admirable sayings on the verities -of mystical knowledge. He says, for example: “The gnostic (_`árif_) is -more lowly every day, because he is approaching nearer to his Lord every -moment,” inasmuch as he thereby becomes aware of the awfulness of the -Divine Omnipotence, and when the majesty of God has taken possession of -his heart, he sees how far he is from God and that there is no way of -reaching Him; hence his lowliness is increased. Thus Moses said, when he -conversed with God: “O Lord, where shall I seek Thee?” God answered: -“Among those whose hearts are broken.” Moses said: “O Lord, no heart is -more broken and despairing than mine.” God answered: “Then I am where -thou art.” Accordingly, anyone who pretends to know God without -lowliness and fear is an ignorant fool, not a gnostic. The sign of true -knowledge is sincerity of will, and a sincere will cuts off all -secondary causes and severs all ties of relationship, so that nothing -remains except God. Dhu ´l-Nún says: “Sincerity (_ṣidq_) is the sword of -God on the earth: it cuts everything that it touches.” Now sincerity -regards the Causer, and does not consist in affirmation of secondary -causes. To affirm the latter is to destroy the principle of sincerity. - -Among the stories told of Dhu ´l-Nún I have read that one day he was -sailing with his disciples in a boat on the River Nile, as is the custom -of the people of Egypt when they desire recreation. Another boat was -coming up, filled with merry—makers, whose unseemly behaviour so -disgusted the disciples that they begged Dhu ´l-Nún to implore God to -sink the boat. Dhu ´l-Nún raised his hands and cried: “O Lord, as Thou -hast given these people a pleasant life in this world, give them a -pleasant life in the next world too!” The disciples were astonished by -his prayer. When the boat came nearer and those in it saw Dhu ´l-Nún, -they began to weep and ask pardon, and broke their lutes and repented -unto God. Dhu ´l-Nún said to his disciples: “A pleasant life in the next -world is repentance in this world. You and they are all satisfied -without harm to anyone.” He acted thus from his extreme affection -towards the Moslems, following the example of the Apostle, who, -notwithstanding the ill-treatment which he received from the infidels, -never ceased to say: “O God! direct my people, for they know not.” Dhu -´l-Nún relates that as he was journeying from Jerusalem to Egypt he saw -in the distance some one advancing towards him, and felt impelled to ask -a question. When the person came near he perceived that it was an old -woman carrying a staff (_`ukkáza_[65]), and wearing a woollen tunic -(_jubba_). He asked her whence she came. She answered: “From God.” “And -whither goest thou?” “To God.” Dhu ´l-Nún drew forth a piece of gold -which he had with him and offered it to her, but she shook her hand in -his face and cried: “O Dhu ´l-Nún, the notion which thou hast formed of -me arises from the feebleness of thy intelligence. I work for God’s -sake, and accept nothing unless from Him. I worship Him alone and take -from Him alone.” With these words she went on her way. - -Footnote 65: - - According to a marginal gloss in I, _`ukkáza_ is a tripod on which a - leathern water-bottle is suspended. - -The old woman’s saying that she worked for God’s sake is a proof of her -sincerity in love. Men in their dealings with God fall into two classes. -Some imagine that they work for God’s sake when they are really working -for themselves; and though their work is not done with any worldly -motive, they desire a recompense in the next world. Others take no -thought of reward or punishment in the next world, any more than of -ostentation and reputation in this world, but act solely from reverence -for the commandments of God. Their love of God requires them to forget -every selfish interest while they do His bidding. The former class fancy -that what they do for the sake of the next world they do for God’s sake, -and fail to recognize that the devout have a greater self-interest in -devotion than the wicked have in sin, because the sinner’s pleasure -lasts only for a moment, whereas devotion is a delight for ever. -Besides, what gain accrues to God from the religious exercises of -mankind, or what loss from their non-performance? If all the world acted -with the veracity of Abú Bakr, the gain would be wholly theirs, and if -with the falsehood of Pharaoh, the loss would be wholly theirs, as God -hath said: “_If ye do good, it is to yourselves, and if ye do evil, it -is to yourselves_” (Kor. xvii, 7); and also: “_Whoever exerts himself_ -[in religion] _does so for his_ _own advantage. Verily, God is -independent of created beings_” (Kor. xxix, 5). They seek for themselves -an everlasting kingdom and say, “We are working for God’s sake”; but to -tread the path of love is a different thing. Lovers, in fulfilling the -Divine commandment, regard only the accomplishment of the Beloved’s -will, and have no eyes for anything else. - -A similar topic will be discussed in the chapter on Sincerity -(_ikhláṣ_). - - 10. ABÚ ISḤÁQ IBRÁHÍM B. ADHAM B. MANṢÚR. - -He was unique in his Path, and the chief of his contemporaries. He was a -disciple of the Apostle Khiḍr. He met a large number of the ancient Ṣúfí -Shaykhs, and associated with the Imám Abú Ḥanífa, from whom he learned -divinity (_`ilm_). In the earlier part of his life he was Prince of -Balkh. One day he went to the chase, and having become separated from -his suite was pursuing an antelope. God caused the antelope to address -him in elegant language and say: “Wast thou created for this, or wast -thou commanded to do this?” He repented, abandoned everything, and -entered on the path of asceticism and abstinence. He made the -acquaintance of Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ and Sufyán Thawrí, and consorted with -them. After his conversion he never ate any food except what he had -earned by his own labour. His sayings on the verities of Ṣúfiism are -original and exquisite. Junayd said: “Ibráhím is the key of the -(mystical) sciences.” It is related that he said: “Take God as thy -companion and leave mankind alone,” i.e. when anyone is rightly and -sincerely turned towards God, the rightness of his turning towards God -requires that he should turn his back on mankind, inasmuch as the -society of mankind has nothing to do with thoughts of God. Companionship -with God is sincerity in fulfilling His commands, and sincerity in -devotion springs from purity of love, and pure love of God proceeds from -hatred of passion and lust. Whoever is familiar with sensual affections -is separated from God, and whoever is separated from sensual affections -is dwelling with God. Therefore thou art all mankind in regard to -thyself: turn away from thyself, and thou hast turned away from all -mankind. Thou dost wrong to turn away from mankind and towards thyself, -and to be concerned with thyself, whereas the actions of all mankind are -determined by the providence and predestination of God. The outward and -inward rectitude (_istiqámat_) of the seeker is founded on two things, -one of which is theoretical and the other practical. The former consists -in regarding all good and evil as predestined by God, so that nothing in -the universe passes into a state of rest or motion until God has created -rest or motion in that thing; the latter consists in performing the -command of God, in rightness of action towards Him, and in keeping the -obligations which he Has imposed. Predestination can never become an -argument for neglecting His commands. True renunciation of mankind is -impossible until thou hast renounced thyself. As soon as thou hast -renounced thyself, all mankind are necessary for the fulfilment of the -will of God; and as soon as thou hast turned to God, thou art necessary -for the accomplishment of the decree of God. Hence it is not permissible -to be satisfied with mankind. If thou wilt be satisfied with anything -except God, at least be satisfied with another (_ghayr_) for -satisfaction with another is to regard unification (_tawḥíd_), whereas -satisfaction with thyself is to affirm the nullity of the Creator -(_ta`tíl_). For this reason Shaykh Abu ´l-Ḥasan Sáliba[66] used to say -that it is better for novices to be under the authority of a cat than -under their own authority, because companionship with another is for -God’s sake, while companionship with one’s self is calculated to foster -the sensual affections. This topic will be discussed in the proper -place. Ibráhím b. Adham tells the following story: “When I reached the -desert, an old man came up and said to me, ‘O Ibráhím, do you know what -place this is, and where you are journeying without provisions and on -foot?’ I knew that he was Satan. I produced from the bosom of my shirt -four _dániqs_—the price of a basket which I had sold in Kúfa—and cast -them away and made a vow that I would perform a prayer of four hundred -genuflexions for every mile that I travelled. I remained four years in -the desert, and God was giving me my daily bread without any exertion on -my part. During that time Khiḍr consorted with me and taught me the -Great Name of God. Then my heart became wholly empty of ‘other’ -(_ghayr_).” - -Footnote 66: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 347, where he is called Abu ´l-Ḥusayn Sáliba. - - 11. BISHR B. AL-ḤÁRITH AL-ḤÁFÍ. - -He associated with Fuḍayl and was the disciple of his own maternal -uncle, `Alí b. Khashram. He was versed in the principal, as well as the -derivative, sciences. His conversion began as follows. One day, when he -was drunk, he found on the road a piece of paper on which was written: -“_In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful._” He picked it up -with reverence, perfumed it, and laid in a clean place. The same night -he dreamed that God said to him: “O Bishr, as thou hast made My name -sweet, I swear by My glory that I will make thy name sweet both in this -world and the next.” Thereupon he repented and took to asceticism. So -intensely was he absorbed in contemplation of God that he never put -anything on his feet. When he was asked the reason of this, he said: -“The Earth is His carpet, and I deem it wrong to tread on His carpet -while there is anything between my foot and His carpet.” This is one of -his peculiar practices: in the concentration of his mind on God a shoe -seemed to him a veil (between him and God). It is related that he said: -“Whoever desires to be honoured in this world and exalted in the next -world, let him shun three things: let him not ask a boon of anyone, nor -speak ill of anyone, nor accept an invitation to eat with anyone.” No -man who knows the way to God will ask a boon of human beings, since to -do so is a proof of his ignorance of God: if he knew the Giver of all -boons, he would not ask a boon from a fellow-creature. Again, the man -who speaks ill of anyone is criticizing the decree of God, inasmuch as -both the individual himself and his actions are created by God; and on -whom can the blame for an action be thrown except on the agent? This -does not apply, however, to the blame which God has commanded us to -bestow upon infidels. Thirdly, as to his saying, “Do not eat of men’s -food,” the reason is that God is the Provider. If He makes a creature -the means of giving you daily bread, do not regard that creature, but -consider that the daily bread which God has caused to come to you does -not belong to him but to God. If he thinks that it is his, and that he -is thereby conferring a favour on you, do not accept it. In the matter -of daily bread one person does not confer on another any favour at all, -because, according to the opinion of the orthodox, daily bread is food -(_ghidhá_), although the Mu`tazilites hold it to be property (_milk_); -and God, not any created being, nourishes mankind with food. This saying -may be explained otherwise, if it be taken in a profane sense (_majáz_). - - 12. ABÚ YAZÍD ṬAYFÚR B. `ÍSÁ AL-BISṬÁMÍ. - -He is the greatest of the Shaykhs in state and dignity, so that Junayd -said: “Abú Yazíd holds the same rank among us as Gabriel among the -angels.” His grandfather was a Magian, and his father was one of the -notables of Bisṭám. He is the author of many trustworthy relations -concerning the Traditions of the Apostle, and he is one of the ten -celebrated Imáms of Ṣúfiism. No one before him penetrated so deeply into -the arcana of this science. In all circumstances he was a lover of -theology and a venerator of the sacred law, notwithstanding the spurious -doctrine which has been foisted on him by some persons with the object -of supporting their own heresies. From the first, his life was based on -self-mortification and the practice of devotion. It is recorded that he -said: “For thirty years I was active in self-mortification, and I found -nothing harder than to learn divinity and follow its precepts. But for -the disagreement of divines I should have utterly failed in my -endeavour. The disagreement of divines is a mercy save on the point of -Unification.” This is true indeed, for human nature is more prone to -ignorance than to knowledge, and while many things can be done easily -with ignorance, not a single step can be made easily with knowledge. The -bridge of the sacred law is much narrower and more dangerous than the -Bridge (_Ṣiráṭ_) in the next world. Therefore it behoves thee so to act -in all circumstances that, if thou shouldst not attain a high degree and -an eminent station, thou mayst at any rate fall within the pale of the -sacred law. Even if thou lose all else, thy practices of devotion will -remain with thee. Neglect of those is the worst mischief that can happen -to a novice. - -It is related that Abú Yazíd said: “Paradise hath no value in the eyes -of lovers, and lovers are veiled (from God) by their love,” i.e. -Paradise is created, whereas love is an uncreated attribute of God. -Whoever is detained by a created thing from that which is uncreated, is -without worth and value. Created things are worthless in the eyes of -lovers. Lovers are veiled by love, because the existence of love -involves duality, which is incompatible with unification (_tawḥíd_). The -way of lovers is from oneness to oneness, but there is in love this -defect, that it needs a desirer (_muríd_) and an object of desire -(_murád_). Either God must be the desirer and Man the desired, or _vice -versâ_. In the former case, Man’s being is fixed in God’s desire, but if -Man is the desirer and God the object of desire, the creature’s search -and desire can find no way unto Him: in either case the canker of being -remains in the lover. Accordingly, the annihilation of the lover in the -everlastingness of love is more perfect than his subsistence through the -everlastingness of love. - -It is related that Abú Yazíd said: “I went to Mecca and saw a House -standing apart. I said, ‘My pilgrimage is not accepted, for I have seen -many stones of this sort.’ I went again, and saw the House and also the -Lord of the House. I said, ‘This is not yet real unification.’ I went a -third time, and saw only the Lord of the House. A voice in my heart -whispered, ‘O Báyazíd, if thou didst not see thyself, thou wouldst not -be a polytheist (_mushrik_) though thou sawest the whole universe; and -since thou seest thyself, thou art a polytheist though blind to the -whole universe.’ Thereupon I repented, and once more I repented of my -repentance, and yet once more I repented of seeing my own existence.” - -This is a subtle tale concerning the soundness of his state, and gives -an excellent indication to spiritualists. - - 13. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH AL-ḤÁRITH B. ASAD AL-MUḤÁSIBÍ. - -He was learned in the principal and derivative sciences, and his -authority was recognized by all the theologians of his day. He wrote a -book, entitled _Ri`áyat_,[67] on the principles of Ṣúfiism, as well as -many other works. In every branch of learning he was a man of lofty -sentiment and noble mind. He was the chief Shaykh of Baghdád in his -time. It is related that he said: _Al-`ilm bi-ḥarakát al-qulúb fí -muṭála`at al-ghuyúb ashraf min al-`amal bi-ḥarakát al-jawáriḥ_, i.e. he -who is acquainted with the secret motions of the heart is better than he -who acts with the motions of the limbs. The meaning is that knowledge is -the place of perfection, whereas ignorance is the place of search, and -knowledge at the shrine is better than ignorance at the door: knowledge -brings a man to perfection, but ignorance does not even allow him to -enter (on the way to perfection). In reality knowledge is greater than -action, because it is possible to know God by means of knowledge, but -impossible to attain to Him by means of action. If He could be found by -action without knowledge, the Christians and the monks in their -austerities would behold Him face to face and sinful believers would -have no vision of Him. Therefore knowledge is a Divine attribute and -action a human attribute. Some relaters of this saying have fallen into -error by reading _al-`amal bi-ḥarakát al-qulúb_,[68] which is absurd, -since human actions have nothing to do with the motions of the heart. If -the author uses this expression to denote reflection and contemplation -of the inward feelings, it is not strange, for the Apostle said: “A -moment’s reflection is better than sixty years of devotion,” and -spiritual actions are in truth more excellent than bodily actions, and -the effect produced by inward feelings and actions is really more -complete than the effect produced by outward actions. Hence it is said: -“The sleep of the sage is an act of devotion and the wakefulness of the -fool is a sin,” because the sage’s heart is controlled (by God) whether -he sleeps or wakes, and when the heart is controlled the body also is -controlled. Accordingly, the heart that is controlled by the sway of God -is better than the sensual part of Man which controls his outward -motions and acts of self-mortification. It is related that Ḥárith said -one day to a dervish, _Kun lilláh wa-illá lá takun_, “Be God’s or be -nothing,” i.e. either be subsistent through God or perish to thine own -existence; either be united with Purity (_ṣafwat_) or separated by -Poverty (_faqr_); either in the state described by the words “Bow ye -down to Adam” (Kor. ii, 32) or in the state described by the words “_Did -there not come over Man a time when he was not anything worthy of -mention?_” (Kor. lxxvi, 1). If thou wilt give thyself to God of thy own -free choice, thy resurrection will be through thyself, but if thou wilt -not, then thy resurrection will be through God. - -Footnote 67: - - Its full title is _Ri`áyat li-ḥuqúq Allah_, “The observance of what is - due to God.” - -Footnote 68: - - This reading is given in the _Ṭabaqát al-Ṣúfiyya_ of Abú `Abd - al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí (British Museum MS., Add. 18,520, f. 13_a_). - - - 14. ABÚ SULAYMÁN DÁWUD B. NUṢAYR AL-ṬÁ´Í. - -He was a pupil of Abú Ḥanífa and a contemporary of Fuḍayl and Ibráhím b. -Adham. In Ṣúfiism he was a disciple of Ḥabíb Rá`í. He was deeply versed -in all the sciences and unrivalled in jurisprudence (_fiqh_); but he -went into seclusion and turned his back on authority, and took the path -of asceticism and piety. It is related that he said to one of his -disciples: “If thou desirest welfare, bid farewell to this world, and if -thou desirest grace (_karámat_), pronounce the _takbír_[69] over the -next world,” i.e. both these are places of veiling (places which prevent -thee from seeing God). Every kind of tranquillity (_farághat_) depends -on these two counsels. Whoever would be tranquil in body, let him turn -his back on this world; and whoever would be tranquil in heart, let him -clear his heart of all desire for the next world. It is a well-known -story that Dáwud used constantly to associate with Muḥammad b. -al-Ḥasan,[70] but would never receive the Cadi Abú Yúsuf. On being asked -why he honoured one of these eminent divines but refused to admit the -other to his presence, he replied that Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan had become a -theologian after being rich and wealthy, and theology was the cause of -his religious advancement and worldly abasement, whereas Abú Yúsuf had -become a theologian after being poor and despised, and had made theology -the means of gaining wealth and power. It is related that Ma`rúf Karkhí -said: “I never saw anyone who held worldly goods in less account than -Dáwud Ṭá´í; the world and its people had no value whatsoever in his -eyes, and he used to regard dervishes (_fuqará_) as perfect although -they were corrupt.” - -Footnote 69: - - The _takbír_, i.e. the words _Allah akbar_, “God is most great,” is - pronounced four times in Moslem funeral prayers. - -Footnote 70: - - Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan and Abú Yúsuf were celebrated lawyers of the - Ḥanafite school. See Brockelmann, i, 171. - - - 15. ABU ´L-ḤASAN SARÍ B. MUGHALLIS AL-SAQAṬÍ. - -He was the maternal uncle of Junayd. He was well versed in all the -sciences and eminent in Ṣúfiism, and he was the first of those who have -devoted their attention to the arrangement of “stations” (_maqámát_) and -to the explanation of spiritual “states” (_aḥwál_). Most of the Shaykhs -of `Iráq are his pupils. He had seen Ḥabíb Rá`í and associated with him. -He was a disciple of Ma`rúf Karkhí. He used to carry on the business of -a huckster (_saqaṭ-firúsh_) in the bazaar at Baghdád. When the bazaar -caught fire, he was told that his shop was burnt. He replied: “Then I am -freed from the care of it.” Afterwards it was discovered that his shop -had not been burnt, although all the shops surrounding it were -destroyed. On seeing this, Sarí gave all that he possessed to the poor -and took the path of Ṣúfiism. He was asked how the change in him began. -He answered: “One day Ḥabíb Rá`í passed my shop, and I gave him a crust -of bread, telling him to give it to the poor. He said to me, ‘May God -reward thee!’ From the day when I heard this prayer my worldly affairs -never prospered again.” It is related that Sarí said: “O God, whatever -punishment Thou mayst inflict upon me, do not punish me with the -humiliation of being veiled from Thee,” because, if I am not veiled from -Thee, my torment and affliction will be lightened by the remembrance and -contemplation of Thee; but if I am veiled from Thee, even Thy bounty -will be deadly to me. There is no punishment in Hell more painful and -hard to bear than that of being veiled. If God were revealed in Hell to -the people of Hell, sinful believers would never think of Paradise, -since the sight of God would so fill them with joy that they would not -feel bodily pain. And in Paradise there is no pleasure more perfect than -unveiledness (_kashf_). If the people there enjoyed all the pleasures of -that place and other pleasures a hundredfold, but were veiled from God, -their hearts would be utterly broken. Therefore it is the custom of God -to let the hearts of those who love Him have vision of Him always, in -order that the delight thereof may enable them to endure every -tribulation; and they say in their orisons: “We deem all torments more -desirable than to be veiled from Thee. When Thy beauty is revealed to -our hearts, we take no thought of affliction.” - - - 16. ABÚ `ALÍ SHAQÍQ B. IBRÁHÍM AL-AZDÍ. - -He was versed in all the sciences—legal, practical, and theoretical—and -composed many works on various branches of Ṣúfiism. He consorted with -Ibráhím b. Adham and many other Shaykhs. It is related that he said: -“God hath made the pious living in their death, and hath made the wicked -dead during their lives,” i.e., the pious, though they be dead, yet -live, since the angels utter blessings on their piety until they are -made immortal by the recompense which they receive at the Resurrection. -Hence, in the annihilation wrought by death they subsist through the -everlastingness of retribution. Once an old man came to Shaqíq and said -to him: “O Shaykh, I have sinned much and now wish to repent.” Shaqíq -said: “Thou hast come late.” The old man answered: “No, I have come -soon. Whoever comes before he is dead comes soon, though he may have -been long in coming.” It is said that the occasion of Shaqíq’s -conversion was this, that one year there was a famine at Balkh, and the -people were eating one another’s flesh. While all the Moslems were -bitterly distressed, Shaqíq saw a youth laughing and making merry in the -bazaar. The people said: “Why do you laugh? Are not you ashamed to -rejoice when everyone else is mourning?” The youth said: “I have no -sorrow. I am the servant of a man who owns a village as his private -property, and he has relieved me of all care for my livelihood.” Shaqíq -exclaimed: “O Lord God, this youth rejoices so much in having a master -who owns a single village, but Thou art the King of kings, and Thou hast -promised to give us our daily bread; and nevertheless we have filled our -hearts with all this sorrow because we are engrossed with worldly -things.” He turned to God and began to walk in the way of the Truth, and -never troubled himself again about his daily bread. Afterwards he used -to say: “I am the pupil of a youth; all that I have learned I learned -from him.” His humility led him to say this. - - 17. ABÚ SULAYMÁN `ABD AL-RAḤMÁN B.`ATIYYA AL-DÁRÁNÍ. - -He was held in honour by the Ṣúfís and was (called) the sweet basil of -hearts (_rayḥán-i dilhá_). He is distinguished by his severe austerities -and acts of self-mortification. He was versed in the science of “time” -(_`ilm-i waqt_)[71] and in knowledge of the cankers of the soul, and had -a keen eye for its hidden snares. He spoke in subtle terms concerning -the practice of devotion, and the watch that should be kept over the -heart and the limbs. It is related that he said: “When hope predominates -over fear, one’s ‘time’ is spoilt,” because “time” is the preservation -of one’s “state” (_ḥál_), which is preserved only so long as one is -possessed by fear. If, on the other hand, fear predominates over hope, -belief in Unity (_tawḥíd_) is lost, inasmuch as excessive fear springs -from despair, and despair of God is polytheism (_shirk_). Accordingly, -the maintenance of belief in Unity consists in right hope, and the -maintenance of “time” in right fear, and both are maintained when hope -and fear are equal. Maintenance of belief in Unity makes one a believer -(_mu´min_), while maintenance of “time” makes one pious (_muṭí`_). Hope -is connected entirely with contemplation (_musháhadat_), in which is -involved a firm conviction (_i`tiqád_); and fear is connected entirely -with purgation (_mujáhadat_), in which is involved an anxious -uncertainty (_iḍṭiráb_). Contemplation is the fruit of purgation, or, to -express the same idea differently, every hope is produced by despair. -Whenever a man, on account of his actions, despairs of his future -welfare, that despair shows him the way to salvation and welfare and -Divine mercy, and opens to him the door of gladness, and clears away -sensual corruptions from his heart, and reveals to it the Divine -mysteries. - -Footnote 71: - - See note on p. 13. - -Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí relates that one night, when he was praying in -private, he felt great pleasure. Next day he told Abú Sulaymán, who -replied: “Thou art a weak man, for thou still hast mankind in view, so -that thou art one thing in private and another in public.” There is -nothing in the two worlds that is sufficiently important to hold man -back from God. When a bride is unveiled to the people, the reason is -that everyone may see her and that she may be honoured the more through -being seen, but it is not proper that she should see anyone except the -bridegroom, since she is disgraced by seeing anyone else. If all mankind -should see the glory of a pious man’s piety, he would suffer no harm, -but if he sees the excellence of his own piety he is lost. - - 18. ABÚ MAḤFÚẔ MA`RÚF B. FÍRÚZ AL-KARKHÍ. - -He is one of the ancient and principal Shaykhs, and was famed for his -generosity and devoutness. This notice of him should have come earlier -in the book, but I have placed it here in accordance with two venerable -persons who wrote before me, one of them a relater of traditions and the -other an independent authority (_ṣáḥib taṣarruf_)—I mean Shaykh Abú `Abd -al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí, who in his work adopts the arrangement which I have -followed, and the Master and Imám Abu ´l-Qásimal-Qushayrí, who has put -the notice of Ma`rúf in the same order in the introductory portion of -his book.[72] I have chosen this arrangement because Ma`rúf was the -master of Sarí Saqaṭí and the disciple of Dáwud Ṭá´í. At first Ma`rúf -was a non-Moslem (_bégána_), but he made profession of Islam to `Alí b. -Músá al-Riḍá, who held him in the highest esteem. It is related that he -said: “There are three signs of generosity—to keep faith without -resistance, to praise without being incited thereto by liberality, and -to give without being asked.” In men all these qualities are merely -borrowed, and in reality they belong to God, who acts thus towards His -servants. God keeps unresisting faith with those who love Him, and -although they show resistance in keeping faith with Him, He only -increases His kindness towards them. The sign of God’s keeping faith is -this, that in eternity past He called His servant to His presence -without any good action on the part of His servant, and that to-day He -does not banish His servant on account of an evil action. He alone -praises without the incitement of liberality, for He has no need of His -servant’s actions, and nevertheless extols him for a little thing that -he has done. He alone gives without being asked, for He is generous and -knows the state of everyone and fulfils his desire unasked. Accordingly, -when God gives a man grace and makes him noble, and distinguishes him by -His favour, and acts towards him in the three ways mentioned above, and -when that man, as far as lies in his power, acts in the same way towards -his fellow-creatures, then he is called generous and gets a reputation -for generosity. Abraham the Apostle possessed these three qualities in -very truth, as I shall explain in the proper place. - -Footnote 72: - - This statement is not accurate. The notice of Ma`rúf Karkhí is the - fourth in Qushayrí’s list of biographies at the beginning of his - treatise on Ṣúfiism, and stands between the notices of Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ - and Sarí Saqaṭí. In the _Ṭabaqát al-Ṣúfiyya_, by Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán - al-Sulamí, the notice of Ma`rúf comes tenth in order, but occupies the - same position as it does here in so far as it is preceded by the - article on Abú Sulaymán Dárání and is followed by the article on Ḥátim - al-Aṣamm. It appears from the next sentence that al-Hujwírí intended - to place the life of Ma`rúf between those of Dáwud Ṭá´í and Sarí - Saqaṭí (Nos. 14 and 15), but neither of the two above-mentioned - authorities has adopted this arrangement. - - 19. ABÚ `ABD AL-RAḤMÁN ḤÁTIM B. `ULWÁN[73] AL-AṢAMM. - -He was one of the great men of Balkh and one of the ancient Shaykhs of -Khurásán, a disciple of Shaqíq and the teacher of Aḥmad Khaḍrúya. In all -his circumstances, from beginning to end, he never once acted -untruthfully, so that Junayd said: “Ḥátim al-Aṣamm is the veracious one -(_ṣiddíq_) of our time.” He has lofty sayings on the subtleties of -discerning the cankers of the soul and the weaknesses of human nature, -and is the author of famous works on ethics (_`ilm-i mu`ámalát_). It is -related that he said: “Lust is of three kinds—lust in eating, lust in -speaking, and lust in looking. Guard thy food by trust in God, thy -tongue by telling the truth, and thine eye by taking example -(_`ibrat_).” Real trust in God proceeds from right knowledge, for those -who know Him aright have confidence that He will give them their daily -bread, and they speak and look with right knowledge, so that their food -and drink is only love, and their speech is only ecstasy, and their -looking is only contemplation. Accordingly, when they know aright they -eat what is lawful, and when they speak aright they utter praise (of -God), and when they look aright they behold Him, because no food is -lawful except what He has given and permits to be eaten, and no praise -is rightly offered to anyone in the eighteen thousand worlds except to -Him, and it is not allowable to look on anything in the universe except -His beauty and majesty. It is not lust when thou receivest food from Him -and eatest by His leave, or when thou speakest of Him by His leave, or -when thou seest His actions by His leave. On the other hand, it _is_ -lust when of thy own will thou eatest even lawful food, or of thy own -will thou speakest even praise of Him, or of thy own will thou lookest -even for the purpose of seeking guidance. - -Footnote 73: - - LIJ. have عنوان [**Arabic] علوان. - - - 20. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD B. IDRÍS AL-SHÁFI`Í. - -While he was at Medína he was a pupil of the Imám Málik, and when he -came to `Iráq he associated with Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan. He always had a -natural desire for seclusion, and used to seek an intimate comprehension -of this way of life, until a party gathered round him and followed his -authority. One of them was Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal. Then Sháfi`í became occupied -with seeking position and exercising his authority as Imám, and was -unable to retire from the world. At first he was not favourably disposed -towards aspirants to Ṣúfiism, but after seeing Sulaymán Rá`í and -obtaining admission to his society, he continued to seek the truth -wherever he went. It is related that he said: “When you see a divine -busying himself with indulgences (_rukhaṣ_) no good thing will come from -him,” i.e. divines are the leaders of all classes of men, and no one may -take precedence of them in any matter, and the way of God cannot be -traversed without precaution and the utmost self-mortification, and to -seek indulgences in divinity is the act of one who flees from -self-mortification and prefers an alleviation for himself. Ordinary -people seek indulgences to keep themselves within the pale of the sacred -law, but the elect practise self-mortification to feel the fruit thereof -in their hearts. Divines are among the elect, and when one of them is -satisfied with behaving like ordinary people, nothing good will come -from him. Moreover, to seek indulgences is to think lightly of God’s -commandment, and divines love God: a lover does not think lightly of the -command of his beloved. - -A certain Shaykh relates that one night he dreamed of the Prophet and -said to him: “O Apostle of God, a tradition has come down to me from -thee that God hath upon the earth saints of diverse rank (_awtád ú -awliyá ú abrár_).” The Apostle said that the relater of the tradition -had transmitted it correctly, and in answer to the Shaykh’s request that -he might see one of these holy men, he said: “Muḥammad b. Idrís is one -of them.” - - 21. THE IMÁM AḤMAD B. ḤANBAL. - -He was distinguished by devoutness and piety, and was the guardian of -the Traditions of the Apostle. Ṣúfís of all sects regard him as blessed. -He associated with great Shaykhs, such as Dhu ´l-Nún of Egypt, Bishr -al-Ḥáfí, Sarí al-Saqaṭí, Ma`rúf al-Karkhí, and others. His miracles were -manifest and his intelligence sound. The doctrines attributed to him -to-day by certain Anthropomorphists are inventions and forgeries; he is -to be acquitted of all notions of that sort. He had a firm belief in the -principles of religion, and his creed was approved by all the divines. -When the Mu`tazilites came into power at Baghdád, they wished to extort -from him a confession that the Koran was created, and though he was a -feeble old man they put him to the rack and gave him a thousand lashes. -In spite of all this he would not say that the Koran was created. While -he was undergoing punishment his _izár_ became untied. His own hands -were fettered, but another hand appeared and tied it. Seeing this -evidence, they let him go. He died, however, of the wounds inflicted on -that occasion. Shortly before his death some persons visited him and -asked what he had to say about those who flogged him. He answered: “What -should I have to say? They flogged me for God’s sake, thinking that I -was wrong and that they were right. I will not claim redress from them -at the Resurrection for mere blows.” He is the author of lofty sayings -on ethics. When questioned on any point relating to practice he used to -answer the question himself, but if it was a point of mystical theory -(_ḥaqá´iq_) he would refer the questioner to Bishr Ḥáfí. One day a man -asked him: “What is sincerity (_ikhláṣ_)?” He replied: “To escape from -the cankers of one’s actions,” i.e. let thy actions be free from -ostentation and hypocrisy and self-interest. The questioner then asked: -“What is trust (_tawakkul_)?” Ahmad replied: “Confidence in God, that He -will provide thy daily bread.” The man asked: “What is acquiescence -(_riḍá_)?” He replied: “To commit thy affairs to God.” “And what is love -(_maḥabbat_)?” Ahmad said: “Ask this question of Bishr Ḥáfí, for I will -not answer it while he is alive.” Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal was constantly exposed -to persecution: during his life by the attacks of the Mu`tazilites, and -after his death by the suspicion of sharing the views of the -Anthropomorphists. Consequently the orthodox Moslems are ignorant of his -true state and hold him suspect. But he is clear of all that is alleged -against him. - - 22. ABU ´L-ḤASAN AḤMAD B. ABI ´L-ḤAWÁRÍ. - -He was one of the most eminent of the Syrian Shaykhs and is praised by -all the leading Ṣúfís. Junayd said: “Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí is the sweet -basil of Syria (_rayḥánat al-Shám_).” He was the pupil of Abú Sulaymán -Dárání, and associated with Sufyán b. `Uyayna and Marwán b. Mu`áwiya the -Koran-reader (_al-Qárí_).[74] He had been a wandering devotee -(_sayyáḥ_). It is related that he said: “This world is a dunghill and a -place where dogs gather; and one who lingers there is less than a dog, -for a dog takes what he wants from it and goes, but the lover of the -world never departs from it or leaves it at any time,” At first he was a -student and attained the rank of the Imáms, but afterwards he threw all -his books into the sea, and said: “Ye were excellent guides, but it is -impossible to occupy one’s self with a guide after one has reached the -goal,” because a guide is needed only so long as the disciple is on the -road: when the shrine comes into sight the road and the gate are -worthless. The Shaykhs have said that Aḥmad did this in the state of -intoxication (_sukr_). In the mystic Path he who says “I have arrived” -has gone astray. Since arriving is non-accomplishment, occupation is -(superfluous) trouble, and freedom from occupation is idleness, and in -either case the principle of union (_wuṣúl_) is non-existence, for both -occupation and its opposite are human qualities. Union and separation -alike depend on the eternal will and providence of God. Hence it is -impossible to attain to union with Him. The terms “nearness” and -“neighbourhood” are not applicable to God. A man is united to God when -God holds him in honour, and separated from God when God holds him in -contempt. I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, say that possibly that eminent -Shaykh in using the word “union” (_wuṣúl_) may have meant “discovery of -the way to God”, for the way to God is not found in books; and when the -road lies plain before one no explanation is necessary. Those who have -attained true knowledge have no use for speech, and even less for books. -Other Shaykhs have done the same thing as Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí, for -example the Grand Shaykh Abú Sa`íd Faḍlalláh b. Muḥammad al-Mayhaní, and -they have been imitated by a number of formalists whose only object is -to gratify their indolence and ignorance. It would seem that those noble -Shaykhs acted as they did from the desire of severing all worldly ties -and making their hearts empty of all save God. This, however, is proper -only in the intoxication of commencement (_ibtidá_) and in the fervour -of youth. Those who have become fixed (_mutamakkin_) are not veiled -(from God) by the whole universe: how, then, by a sheet of paper? It may -be said that the destruction of a book signifies the impossibility of -expressing the real meaning (of an idea). In that case the same -impossibility should be predicated of the tongue, because spoken words -are no better than written ones. I imagine that Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí, -finding no listener in his fit of ecstasy, wrote down an explanation of -his feelings on pieces of paper, and having amassed a large quantity, -did not regard them as suitable to be divulged and accordingly cast them -into the water. It is also possible that he had collected many books, -which diverted him from his devotional practices, and that he got rid of -them for this reason. - -Footnote 74: - - Marwán b. Mu`áwiya al-Fazárí of Kúfa died in 193 A.H. See Dhahabí’s - _Ṭabaqát al-Ḥuffáẕ_, ed. by Wüstenfeld, p. 63, No. 44. Al-Qárí is - probably a mistranscription of al-Fazárí. - - - 23. ABÚ ḤÁMID AḤMAD B. KHAḌRÚYA AL-BALKHÍ. - -He adopted the path of blame (_malámat_) and wore a soldier’s dress. His -wife, Fáṭima, daughter of the Amír of Balkh, was renowned as a Ṣúfí. -When she desired to repent (of her former life), she sent a message to -Aḥmad bidding him ask her in marriage of her father. Aḥmad refused, -whereupon she sent another message in the following terms: “O Aḥmad, I -thought you would have been too manly to attack those who travel on the -way to God. Be a guide (_ráhbar_), not a brigand (_ráhbur_).” Aḥmad -asked her in marriage of her father, who gave her to him in the hope of -receiving his blessing. Fáṭima renounced all traffic with the world and -lived in seclusion with her husband. When Aḥmad went to visit Báyazíd -she accompanied him, and on seeing Báyazíd she removed her veil and -talked to him without embarrassment. Aḥmad became jealous and said to -her: “Why dost thou take this freedom with Báyazíd?” She replied: -“Because you are my natural spouse, but he is my religious consort; -through you I come to my desire, but through him to God. The proof is -that he has no need of my society, whereas to you it is necessary.” She -continued to treat Báyazíd with the same boldness, until one day he -observed that her hand was stained with henna and asked her why. She -answered: “O Báyazíd, so long as you did not see my hand and the henna I -was at my ease with you, but now that your eye has fallen on me our -companionship is unlawful.” Then Aḥmad and Fáṭima came to Níshápúr and -abode there. The people and Shaykhs of Níshápúr were well pleased with -Aḥmad. When Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází passed through Níshápúr on his way -from Rayy to Balkh, Aḥmad wished to give him a banquet, and consulted -with Fáṭima as to what things were required. She told him to procure so -many oxen and sheep, such and such a quantity of sweet herbs, -condiments, candles, and perfumes, and added, “We must also kill twenty -donkeys.” Aḥmad said: “What is the sense of killing donkeys?” “Oh!” said -she, “when a noble comes as guest to the house of a noble the dogs of -the quarter have something too.” Báyazíd said of her: “Whoever wishes to -see a man disguised in women’s clothes, let him look at Fáṭima!” And Abú -Ḥafṣ Ḥaddád says: “But for Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya generosity would not have -been displayed.” He has lofty sayings to his credit, and faultless -utterances (_anfás-i muhadhdhab_), and is the author of famous works in -every branch of ethics and of brilliant discourses on mysticism. It is -related that he said: “The way is manifest and the truth is clear, and -the shepherd has uttered his call; after this if anyone loses himself, -it is through his own blindness,” i.e., it is wrong to seek the way, -since the way to God is like the blazing sun; do thou seek thyself, for -when thou hast found thyself thou art come to thy journey’s end, -inasmuch as God is too manifest to admit of His being sought. He is -recorded to have said: “Hide the glory of thy poverty,” i.e., do not say -to people, “I am a dervish,” lest thy secret be discovered, for it is a -great grace bestowed on thee by God. It is related that he said: “A -dervish invited a rich man to a repast in the month of Ramaḍán, and -there was nothing in his house except a loaf of dry bread. On returning -home the rich man sent to him a purse of gold. He sent it back, saying, -‘This serves me right for revealing my secret to one like you.’ The -genuineness of his poverty led him to act thus.” - - - 24. ABÚ TURÁB `ASKAR B. AL-ḤUSAYN AL-NAKHSHABÍ AL-NASAFÍ. - -He was one of the chief Shaykhs of Khurásán, and was celebrated for his -generosity, asceticism, and devoutness. He performed many miracles, and -experienced marvellous adventures without number in the desert and -elsewhere. He was one of the most noted travellers among the Ṣúfís, and -used to cross the deserts in complete disengagement from worldly things -(_ba-tajríd_). His death took place in the desert of Baṣra. After many -years had elapsed he was found standing erect with his face towards the -Ka`ba, shrivelled up, with a bucket in front of him and a staff in his -hand; and the wild beasts had not touched him or come near him. It is -related that he said: “The food of the dervish is what he finds, and his -clothing is what covers him, and his dwelling-place is wherever he -alights,” i.e. he does not choose his own food or his own dress, or make -a home for himself. The whole world is afflicted by these three items, -and personal initiative therein keeps us in a state of distraction -(_mashghúlí_) while we make efforts to procure them. This is the -practical aspect of the matter, but in a mystical sense the food of the -dervish is ecstasy, and his clothing is piety, and his dwelling-place is -the Unseen, for God hath said, “_If they stood firm in the right path, -We should water them with abundant rain_” (Kor. lxxii, 16); and again, -“_and fair apparel; but the garment of piety, that is better_” (Kor. -vii, 25); and the Apostle said, “Poverty is to dwell in the Unseen.” - - 25. ABÚ ZAKARIYYÁ YAḤYÁ B. MU`ÁDH AL-RÁZÍ. - -He was perfectly grounded in the true theory of hope in God, so that -Ḥuṣrí says: “God had two Yaḥyás, one a prophet and the other a saint. -Yaḥyá b. Zakariyyá trod the path of fear so that all pretenders were -filled with fear and despaired of their salvation, while Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh -trod the path of hope so that he tied the hands of all pretenders to -hope.” They said to Ḥuṣrí: “The state of Yaḥyá b. Zakariyyá is well -known, but what was the state of Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh?” He replied: “I have -been told that he was never in the state of ignorance (_jáhiliyyat_) and -never committed any of the greater sins (_kabíra_).” In the practice of -devotion he showed an intense perseverance which was beyond the power of -anyone else. One of his disciples said to him: “O Shaykh, thy station is -the station of hope, but thy practice is the practice of those who -fear.” Yaḥyá answered: “Know, my son, that to abandon the service of God -is to go astray.” Fear and hope are the two pillars of faith. It is -impossible that anyone should fall into error through practising either -of them. Those who fear engage in devotion through fear of separation -(from God), and those who hope engage in it through hope of union (with -God). Without devotion neither fear nor hope can be truly felt, but when -devotion is there this fear and hope are altogether metaphorical; and -metaphors (_`ibárat_) are useless where devotion (_`ibádat_) is -required. Yaḥyá is the author of many books, fine sayings, and original -precepts. He was the first of the Shaykhs of this sect, after the -Orthodox Caliphs, to mount the pulpit. I am very fond of his sayings, -which are delicately moulded and pleasant to the ear and subtle in -substance and profitable in devotion. It is related that he said: “This -world is an abode of troubles (_ashghál_) and the next world is an abode -of terrors (_ahwál_), and Man never ceases to be amidst troubles or -terrors until he finds rest either in Paradise or in Hell-fire.” Happy -the soul that has escaped from troubles and is secure from terrors, and -has detached its thoughts from both worlds, and has attained to God! -Yaḥyá held the doctrine that wealth is superior to poverty. Having -contracted many debts at Rayy, he set out for Khurásán. When he arrived -at Balkh the people of that city detained him for some time in order -that he might discourse to them, and they gave him a hundred thousand -dirhems. On his way back to Rayy he was attacked by brigands, who seized -the whole sum. He came in a destitute condition to Níshápúr, where he -died. He was always honoured and held in respect by the people. - - 26. ABÚ ḤAFṢ `AMR B. SÁLIM[75] AL-NÍSHÁPÚRÍ AL-ḤADDÁDÍ.[76] - -He was an eminent Ṣúfí, who is praised by all the Shaykhs. He associated -with Abú `Abdalláh al-Abíwardí and Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya. Sháh Shujá` came -from Kirmán to visit him. He did not know Arabic, and when he went to -Baghdád to visit the Shaykhs there, his disciples said to one another: -“It is a great shame that the Grand Shaykh of Khurásán should need an -interpreter to make him understand what they say.” However, when he met -the Shaykhs of Baghdád, including Junayd, in the Shúníziyya Mosque, he -conversed with them in elegant Arabic, so that they despaired of -rivalling his eloquence. They asked him: “What is generosity?” He said: -“Let one of you begin and declare what it is.” Junayd said: “In my -opinion generosity consists in not regarding your generosity and in not -referring it to yourself.” Abú Ḥafṣ replied: “How well the Shaykh has -spoken! but in my opinion generosity consists in doing justice and in -not demanding justice.” Junayd said to his disciples: “Rise! for Abú -Ḥafṣ has surpassed Adam and all his descendants (in generosity).” His -conversion is related as follows. He was enamoured of a girl, and on the -advice of his friends sought help from a certain Jew living in the city -(_sháristán_) of Níshápúr. The Jew told him that he must perform no -prayers for forty days, and not praise God or do any good deed or form -any good intention; he would then devise a means whereby Abú Ḥafṣ should -gain his desire. Abú Ḥafṣ complied with these instructions, and after -forty days the Jew made a talisman as he had promised, but it proved -ineffectual. He said: “You have undoubtedly done some good deed. Think!” -Abú Ḥafṣ replied that the only good thing of any sort that he had done -was to remove a stone which he found on the road lest some one might -stumble on it. The Jew said to him: “Do not offend that God who has not -let such a small act of yours be wasted though you have neglected His -commands for forty days.” Abú Ḥafṣ repented, and the Jew became a -Moslem. - -Footnote 75: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 44, has “Salama”. Qushayrí calls him `Umar b. Maslama. - -Footnote 76: - - So LIJ. B. has “al-Ḥaddád”, which is the form generally used by his - biographers. - -Abú Ḥafṣ continued to ply the trade of a blacksmith until he went to -Báward and took the vows of discipleship to Abú `Abdalláh Báwardí. One -day, after his return to Níshápúr, he was sitting in his shop listening -to a blind man who was reciting the Koran in the bazaar. He became so -absorbed in listening that he put his hand into the fire and, without -using the pincers, drew out a piece of molten iron from the furnace. On -seeing this the apprentice fainted. When Abú Ḥafṣ came to himself he -left his shop and no longer earned his livelihood. It is related that he -said: “I left work and returned to it; then work left me and I never -returned to it again,” because when anyone leaves a thing by one’s own -act and effort, the leaving of it is no better than the taking of it, -inasmuch as all acquired acts (_aksáb_) are contaminated, and derive -their value from the spiritual influence which flows from the Unseen -without effort on our part; which influence, wherever it descends, is -united with the choice of Man and loses its pure spirituality. Therefore -Man cannot properly take or leave anything; it is God who in His -providence gives and takes away, and Man only takes what God has given -or leaves what God has taken away. Though a disciple should strive a -thousand years to win the favour of God, it would be worth less than if -God received him into favour for a single moment, since everlasting -future happiness is involved in the favour of past eternity, and Man has -no means of escape except by the unalloyed bounty of God. Honoured, -then, is he from whose state the Causer has removed all secondary -causes. - - 27. ABÚ ṢÁLIḤ ḤAMDÚN B. AḤMAD B. `UMÁRA AL-QAṢṢÁR. - -He belonged to the ancient Shaykhs, and was one of those who were -scrupulously devout. He attained the highest rank in jurisprudence and -divinity, in which sciences he was a follower of Thawrí.[77] In Ṣúfiism -he was a disciple of Abú Turáb Nakhshabí and `Alí Naṣrábádí. When he -became renowned as a theologian, the Imáms and notables of Níshápúr -urged him to mount the pulpit and preach to the people, but he refused, -saying: “My heart is still attached to the world, and therefore my words -will make no impression on the hearts of others. To speak unprofitable -words is to despise theology and deride the sacred law. Speech is -permissible to him alone whose silence is injurious to religion, and -whose speaking would remove the injury.” On being asked why the sayings -of the early Moslems were more beneficial than those of his -contemporaries to men’s hearts, he replied: “Because they discoursed for -the glory of Islam and the salvation of souls and the satisfaction of -the Merciful God, whereas we discourse for the glory of ourselves and -the quest of worldly gain and the favour of mankind.” Whoever speaks in -accordance with God’s will and by Divine impulsion, his words have a -force and vigour that makes an impression on the wicked, but if anyone -speaks in accordance with his own will, his words are weak and tame and -do not benefit his hearers. - -Footnote 77: - - The words _madhhab-i Thawrí dásht_ may refer either to Abú Thawr - Ibráhím b. Khálid, a pupil of al-Sháfi`í, who died in 246 _A.H._, or - to Sufyán al-Thawrí. See Ibn Khallikán, No. 143. - - - 28. ABU ´L-SARÍ MANṢÚR B. `AMMÁR. - -He belonged to the school of `Iráq, but was approved by the people of -Khurásán. His sermons were unequalled for beauty of language and -elegance of exposition. He was learned in all the branches of divinity, -in traditions, sciences, principles, and practices. Some aspirants to -Ṣúfiism exaggerate his merits beyond measure. It is related that he -said: “Glory be to Him who hath made the hearts of gnostics vessels of -praise (_dhikr_), and the hearts of ascetics vessels of trust -(_tawakkul_), and the hearts of those who trust (_mutawakkilín_) vessels -of acquiescence (_riḍá_), and the hearts of dervishes (_fuqará_) vessels -of contentment, and the hearts of worldlings vessels of covetousness!” -It is worth while to consider that whereas God has placed in every -member of the body and in every sense a homogeneous quality, e.g., in -the hands that of seizing, in the feet that of walking, in the eye -seeing, in the ear hearing, He has placed in each individual heart a -diverse quality and a different desire, so that one is the seat of -knowledge, another of error, another of contentment, another of -covetousness, and so on: hence the marvels of Divine action are in -nothing manifested more clearly than in human hearts. And it is related -that he said: “All mankind may be reduced to two types—the man who knows -himself, and whose business is self-mortification and discipline, and -the man who knows his Lord, and whose business is to serve and worship -and please Him.” Accordingly, the worship of the former is discipline -(_riyáḍat_), while the worship of the latter is sovereignty (_riyásat_): -the former practises devotion in order that he may attain a high degree, -but the latter practises devotion having already attained all. What a -vast difference between the two! One subsists in self-mortification -(_mujáhadat_), the other in contemplation (_musháhadat_). And it is -related that he said: “There are two classes of men: those who have need -of God—and they hold the highest rank from the standpoint of the sacred -law—and those who pay no regard to their need of God, because they know -that God has provided for their creation and livelihood and death and -life and happiness and misery: they need God alone, and having him are -independent of all else.” The former, through seeing their own need, are -veiled from seeing the Divine providence, whereas the latter, through -not seeing their own need, are unveiled and independent. The former -enjoy felicity, but the latter enjoy the Giver of felicity. - - 29. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH AḤMAD B. `ÁṢIM AL-INṬÁKÍ. - -He lived to a great age and associated with the ancient Shaykhs, and was -acquainted with those who belonged to the third generation after the -Prophet (_atbá` al-tábi`ín_). He was a contemporary of Bishr and Sarí, -and a pupil of Ḥárith Muḥásibí. He had seen Fuḍayl and consorted with -him. It is related that he said: “The most beneficial poverty is that -which you regard as honourable, and with which you are well pleased,” -i.e., the honour of the vulgar consists in affirmation of secondary -causes, but the honour of the dervish consists in denying secondary -causes and in affirming the Causer, and in referring everything to Him, -and in being well pleased with His decrees. Poverty is the non-existence -of secondary causes, whereas wealth is the existence of secondary -causes. Poverty detached from a secondary cause is with God, and wealth -attached to a secondary cause is with itself. Therefore secondary causes -involve the state of being veiled (from God), while their absence -involves the state of unveiledness. This is a clear explanation of the -superiority of poverty to wealth. - - 30. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD `ABDALLÁH B. KHUBAYQ. - -He was an ascetic and scrupulously devout. He has related trustworthy -traditions, and in jurisprudence, as well as in the practice and theory -of divinity, he followed the doctrine of Thawrí, with whose pupils he -had associated. It is recorded that he said: “Whoever desires to be -living in his life, let him not admit covetousness to dwell in his -heart,” because the covetous man is dead in the toils of his -covetousness, which is like a seal on his heart; and the sealed heart is -dead. Blessed is the heart that dies to all save God and lives through -God, inasmuch as God has made His praise (_dhikr_) the glory of men’s -hearts, and covetousness their disgrace; and to this effect is the -saying of `Abdalláh b. Khubayq: “God created men’s hearts to be the -homes of His praise, but they have become the homes of lust; and nothing -can clear them of lust except an agitating fear or a restless desire.” -Fear and desire (_shawq_) are the two pillars of faith. When faith is -settled in the heart, praise and contentment accompany it, not -covetousness and heedlessness. Lust and covetousness are the result of -shunning the society of God. The heart that shuns the society of God -knows nothing of faith, since faith is intimate with God and averse to -associate with aught else. - - 31. ABU ´L-QÁSIM AL-JUNAYD B. MUḤAMMAD B. AL-JUNAYD AL-BAGHDÁDÍ. - -He was approved by externalists and spiritualists alike. He was perfect -in every branch of science, and spoke with authority on theology, -jurisprudence, and ethics. He was a follower of Thawrí. His sayings are -lofty and his inward state perfect, so that all Ṣúfís unanimously -acknowledge his leadership. His mother was the sister of Sarí Saqaṭí, -and Junayd was the disciple of Sarí. One day Sarí was asked whether the -rank of a disciple is ever higher than that of his spiritual director. -He replied: “Yes; there is manifest proof of this: the rank of Junayd is -above mine.” It was the humility and insight of Sarí that caused him to -say this. As is well known, Junayd refused to discourse to his disciples -so long as Sarí was alive, until one night he dreamed that the Apostle -said to him: “O Junayd, speak to the people, for God hath made thy words -the means of saving a multitude of mankind.” When he awoke the thought -occurred to him that his rank was superior to that of Sarí, since the -Apostle had commanded him to preach. At daybreak Sarí sent a disciple to -Junayd with the following message: “You would not discourse to your -disciples when they urged you to do so, and you rejected the -intercession of the Shaykhs of Baghdád and my personal entreaty. Now -that the Apostle has commanded you, obey his orders.” Junayd said: “That -fancy went out of my head. I perceived that Sarí was acquainted with my -outward and inward thoughts in all circumstances, and that his rank was -higher than mine, since he was acquainted with my secret thoughts, -whereas I was ignorant of his state. I went to him and begged his -pardon, and asked him how he knew that I had dreamed of the Apostle. He -answered: ‘I dreamed of God, who told me that He had sent the Apostle to -bid you preach.’” This anecdote contains a clear indication that -spiritual directors are in every case acquainted with the inward -experiences of their disciples. - -It is related that he said: “The speech of the prophets gives -information concerning presence (_ḥuḍúr_), while the speech of the -saints (_ṣiddíqín_) alludes to contemplation (_musháhadat_).” True -information is derived from sight, and it is impossible to give true -information of anything that one has not actually witnessed, whereas -allusion (_ishárat_) involves reference to another thing. Hence the -perfection and ultimate goal of the saints is the beginning of the state -of the prophets. The distinction between prophet (_nabí_) and saint -(_walí_), and the superiority of the former to the latter, is plain, -notwithstanding that two heretical sects declare the saints to surpass -the prophets in excellence. It is related that he said: “I was eagerly -desirous of seeing Iblís. One day, when I was standing in the mosque, an -old man came through the door and turned his face towards me. Horror -seized my heart. When he came near I said to him, ‘Who art thou? for I -cannot bear to look on thee, or think of thee.’ He answered, ‘I am he -whom you desired to see.’ I exclaimed, ‘O accursed one! what hindered -thee from bowing down to Adam?’ He answered, ‘O Junayd, how can you -imagine that I should bow down to anyone except God?’ I was amazed at -his saying this, but a secret voice whispered: ‘Say to him, _Thou liest. -Hadst thou been an obedient servant thou wouldst not have transgressed -His command._’ Iblís heard the voice in my heart. He cried out and said, -‘By God, you have burnt me!’ and vanished.” This story shows that God -preserves His saints in all circumstances from the guile of Satan. One -of Junayd’s disciples bore him a grudge, and after leaving him returned -one day with the intention of testing him. Junayd was aware of this and -said, replying to his question: “Do you want a formal or a spiritual -answer?” The disciple said: “Both.” Junayd said: “The formal answer is -that if you had tested yourself you would not have needed to test me. -The spiritual answer is that I depose you from your saintship.” The -disciple’s face immediately turned black. He cried, “The delight of -certainty (_yaqín_) is gone from my heart,” and earnestly begged to be -forgiven, and abandoned his foolish self-conceit. Junayd said to him: -“Did not you know that God’s saints possess mysterious powers? You -cannot endure their blows.” He cast a breath at the disciple, who -forthwith resumed his former purpose and repented of criticizing the -Shaykhs. - - - 32. ABU ´L-ḤASAN AḤMAD B. MUḤAMMAD AL-NÚRÍ. - -He has a peculiar doctrine in Ṣúfiism and is the model of a number of -aspirants to Ṣúfiism, who follow him and are called Núrís. The whole -body of aspirants to Ṣúfiism is composed of twelve sects, two of which -are condemned (_mardúd_), while the remaining ten are approved -(_maqbúl_). The latter are the Muḥásibís, the Qaṣṣárís, the Ṭayfúrís, -the Junaydís, the Núrís, the Sahlís, the Ḥakímís, the Kharrázís, the -Khafífís, and the Sayyárís. All these assert the truth and belong to the -mass of orthodox Moslems. The two condemned sects are, firstly, the -Ḥulúlís,[78] who derive their name from the doctrine of incarnation -(_ḥulúl_) and incorporation (_imtizáj_), and with whom are connected the -Sálimí sect of anthropomorphists;[79] and secondly, the Ḥallájís, who -have abandoned the sacred law and have adopted heresy, and with whom are -connected the Ibáḥatís[80] and the Fárisís.[81] I shall include in this -book a chapter on the twelve sects and shall explain their different -doctrines. - -Footnote 78: - - B. has “the Ḥulmánís”, i.e. the followers of Abú Ḥulmán of Damascus. - See Shahristání, Haarbrücker’s translation, ii, 417. - -Footnote 79: - - The Sálimís are described (ibid.) as “a number of scholastic - theologians (_mutakallimún_) belonging to Baṣra”. - -Footnote 80: - - “Ibáḥatí” or “Ibáḥí” signifies “one who regards everything as - permissible”. - -Footnote 81: - - See the eleventh section of the fourteenth chapter. - -Núrí took a praiseworthy course in rejecting flattery and indulgence and -in being assiduous in self-mortification. It is related that he said: “I -came to Junayd and found him seated in the professorial chair -(_muṣaddar_). I said to him: ‘O Abu ´l-Qásim, thou hast concealed the -truth from them and they have put thee in the place of honour; but I -have told them the truth and they have pelted me with stones,’” because -flattery is compliance with one’s desire and sincerity is opposition to -it, and men hate anyone who opposes their desires and love anyone who -complies with their desires. Núrí was the companion of Junayd and the -disciple of Sarí. He had associated with many Shaykhs, and had met Aḥmad -b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí. He is the author of subtle precepts and fine sayings -on various branches of the mystical science. It is related that he said: -“Union with God is separation from all else, and separation from all -else is union with Him,” i.e., anyone whose mind is united with God is -separated from all besides, and _vice versâ_: therefore union of the -mind with God is separation from the thought of created things, and to -be rightly turned away from phenomena is to be rightly turned towards -God. I have read in the Anecdotes that once Núrí stood in his chamber -for three days and nights, never moving from his place or ceasing to -wail. Junayd went to see him and said: “O Abu ´l-Ḥasan, if thou knowest -that crying aloud to God is of any use, tell me, in order that I too may -cry aloud; but if thou knowest that it avails naught, surrender thyself -to acquiescence in God’s will, in order that thy heart may rejoice.” -Núrí stopped wailing and said: “Thou teachest me well, O Abu ´l-Qásim!” -It is related that he said: “The two rarest things in our time are a -learned man who practises what he knows and a gnostic who speaks from -the reality of his state,” i.e., both learning and gnosis are rare, -since learning is not learning unless it is practised, and gnosis is not -gnosis unless it has reality. Núrí referred to his own age, but these -things are rare at all times, and they are rare to-day. Anyone who -should occupy himself in seeking for learned men and gnostics would -waste his time and would not find them. Let him be occupied with himself -in order that he may see learning everywhere, and let him turn from -himself to God in order that he may see gnosis everywhere. Let him seek -learning and gnosis in himself, and let him demand practice and reality -from himself. It is related that Núrí said: “Those who regard things as -determined by God turn to God in everything,” because they find rest in -regarding the Creator, not created objects, whereas they would always be -in tribulation if they considered things to be the causes of actions. To -do so is polytheism, for a cause is not self-subsistent, but depends on -the Causer. When they turn to Him they escape from trouble. - - - 33. ABÚ `UTHMÁN SA`ÍD B. ISMÁ`ÍL AL-ḤÍRÍ. - -He is one of the eminent Ṣúfís of past times. At first he associated -with Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh; then he consorted for a while with Sháh Shujá` of -Kirmán, and accompanied him to Níshápúr on a visit to Abú Ḥafṣ, with -whom he remained to the end of his life. It is related on trustworthy -authority that he said: “In my childhood I was continually seeking the -Truth, and the externalists inspired me with a feeling of abhorrence. I -perceived that the sacred law concealed a mystery under the superficial -forms which are followed by the vulgar. When I grew up I happened to -hear a discourse by Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh of Rayy, and I found there the -mystery that was the object of my search. I continued to associate with -Yaḥyá until, on hearing reports of Sháh Shujá` Kirmání from a number of -persons who had been in his company, I felt a longing to visit him. -Accordingly I quitted Rayy and set out for Kirmán. Sháh Shujá`, however, -would not admit me to his society. ‘You have been nursed,’ said he, ‘in -the doctrine of hope (_rajá_), on which Yaḥyá takes his stand. No one -who has imbibed this doctrine can tread the path of purgation, because a -mechanical belief in hope produces indolence.’ I besought him earnestly, -and lamented and stayed at his door for twenty days. At length he -admitted me, and I remained in his society until he took me with him to -visit Abú Ḥafṣ at Níshápúr. On this occasion Sháh Shujá` was wearing a -coat (_qabá_). When Abú Ḥafṣ saw him he rose from his seat and advanced -to meet him, saying, ‘I have found in the coat what I sought in the -cloak (_`abá_).’ During our residence in Níshápúr I conceived a strong -desire to associate with Abú Ḥafṣ, but was restrained from devoting -myself to attendance on him by my respect for Sháh Shujá`. Meanwhile I -was imploring God to make it possible for me to enjoy the society of Abú -Ḥafṣ without hurting the feelings of Sháh Shujá`, who was a jealous man; -and Abú Ḥafṣ was aware of my wishes. On the day of our departure I -dressed myself for the journey, although I was leaving my heart with Abú -Ḥafṣ. Abú Ḥafṣ said familiarly to Sháh Shujá`, ‘I am pleased with this -youth; let him stay here.’ Sháh Shujá` turned to me and said, ‘Do as the -Shaykh bids thee.’ So I remained with Abú Ḥafṣ and experienced many -wonderful things in his company.” God caused Abú `Uthmán to pass through -three “stations” by means of three spiritual directors, and these -“stations”, which he indicated as belonging to them, he also made his -own: the “station” of hope through associating with Yaḥyá, the “station” -of jealousy through associating with Sháh Shujá`, and the “station” of -affection (_shafaqat_) through associating with Abú Ḥafṣ. It is -allowable for a disciple to associate with five or six or more directors -and to have a different “station” revealed to him by each one of them, -but it is better that he should not confuse his own “station” with -theirs. He should point to their perfection in that “station” and say: -“I gained this by associating with them, but they were superior to it.” -This is more in accordance with good manners, for spiritual adepts have -nothing to do with “stations” and “states”. - -To Abú `Uthmán was due the divulgation of Ṣúfiism in Níshápúr and -Khurásán. He consorted with Junayd, Ruwaym, Yúsuf b. al-Ḥusayn, and -Muḥammad b. Faḍl al-Balkhí, and no Shaykh ever derived as much spiritual -advantage from his directors as he did. The people of Níshápúr set up a -pulpit that he might discourse to them on Ṣúfiism. He is the author of -sublime treatises on various branches of this science. It is related -that he said: “It behoves one whom God hath honoured with gnosis not to -dishonour himself by disobedience to God.” This refers to actions -acquired by Man and to his continual effort to keep the commandments of -God, because, even though you recognize that it is worthy of God not to -dishonour by disobedience anyone whom He has honoured with gnosis, yet -gnosis is God’s gift and disobedience is Man’s act. It is impossible -that one who is honoured with God’s gift should be dishonoured by his -own act. God honoured Adam with knowledge: He did not dishonour him on -account of his sin. - - - 34. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH AḤMAD B. YAḤYÁ AL-JALLÁ. - -He associated with Junayd and Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí and other great Shaykhs. -It is recorded that he said: “The mind of the gnostic is fixed on his -Lord; he does not pay attention to anything else,” because the gnostic -knows nothing except gnosis, and since gnosis is the whole capital of -his heart, his thoughts are entirely bent on vision (of God), for -distraction of thought produces cares, and cares keep one back from God. -He tells the following story: “One day I saw a beautiful Christian boy. -I was amazed at his loveliness and stood still opposite him. Junayd -passed by me. I said to him, ‘O master, will God burn a face like this -in Hell-fire?’ He answered: ‘O my son, this is a trick of the flesh, not -a look by which one takes warning. If you look with due consideration, -the same marvel is existent in every atom of the universe. You will soon -be punished for this want of respect.’ When Junayd turned away from me I -immediately forgot the Koran, and it did not come back to my memory -until I had for years implored God to help me and had repented of my -sin. Now I dare not pay heed to any created object or waste my time by -looking at things.” - - - 35. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD RUWAYM B. AḤMAD. - -He was an intimate friend of Junayd. In jurisprudence he followed -Dáwud.[82] and he was deeply versed in the sciences relating to the -interpretation and reading of the Koran. He was famed for the loftiness -of his state and the exaltedness of his station, and for his journeys in -detachment from the world (_tajríd_), and for his severe austerities. -Towards the end of his life he hid himself among the rich and gained the -Caliph’s confidence, but such was the perfection of his spiritual rank -that he was not thereby veiled from God. Hence Junayd said: “We are -devotees occupied (with the world), and Ruwaym is a man occupied (with -the world) who is devoted (to God).” He wrote several works on Ṣúfiism, -one of which, entitled _Ghalaṭ al-Wájidín_,[83] deserves particular -mention. I am exceedingly fond of it. One day he was asked, “How are -you?” He replied: “How is he whose religion is his lust and whose -thought is (fixed on) his worldly affairs, who is neither a pious -God-fearing man nor a gnostic and one of God’s elect?” This refers to -the vices of the soul that is subject to passion and regards lust as its -religion. Sensual men consider anyone to be devout who complies with -their inclinations, even though he be a heretic, and anyone to be -irreligious who thwarts their desires, even though he be a pietist. This -is a widely spread disease at the present time. God save us from -associating with any such person! Ruwaym doubtless gave this answer in -reference to the inward state of the questioner, which he truly -diagnosed, or it may be that God had temporarily allowed him to fall -into that condition, and that he described himself as he then was in -reality. - -Footnote 82: - - Dáwud of Iṣfahán, the founder of the Ẓáhirite school (Brockelmann, i, - 183). - -Footnote 83: - - i.e. “The Error of Ecstatic Persons”. - - - 36. ABÚ YA`QÚB YÚSUF B. AL-ḤUSAYN AL-RÁZÍ. - -He was one of the ancient Shaykhs and great Imáms of his age. He was a -disciple of Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian, and consorted with a large number -of Shaykhs and performed service to them all. It is related that he -said: “The meanest of mankind is the covetous dervish and he who loves -his beloved, and the noblest of them is the veracious (_al-ṣiddíq_).” -Covetousness renders the dervish ignominious in both worlds, because he -is already despicable in the eyes of worldlings, and only becomes more -despicable if he builds any hopes on them. Wealth with honour is far -more perfect than poverty with disgrace. Covetousness causes the dervish -to incur the imputation of sheer mendacity. Again, he who loves his -beloved is the meanest of mankind, since the lover acknowledges himself -to be very despicable in comparison with his beloved and abases himself -before her, and this also is the result of desire. So long as Zulaykhá -desired Yúsuf, she became every day more mean: when she cast desire -away, God gave her beauty and youth back to her. It is a law that when -the lover advances, the beloved retires. If the lover is satisfied with -love alone, then the beloved draws near. In truth, the lover has honour -only while he has no desire for union. Unless his love diverts him from -all thought of union or separation, his love is weak. - - - 37. ABU ´L-ḤASAN SUMNÚN B. `ABDALLÁH AL-KHAWWÁṢ. - -He was held in great esteem by all the Shaykhs. They called him Sumnún -the Lover (_al-Muḥibb_), but he called himself Sumnún the Liar -(_al-Kadhdháb_). He suffered much persecution at the hands of Ghulám -al-Khalíl,[84] who had made himself known to the Caliph and courtiers by -his pretended piety and Ṣúfiism. This hypocrite spoke evil of the -Shaykhs and dervishes, hoping to bring about their banishment from Court -and to establish his own power. Fortunate indeed were Sumnún and those -Shaykhs to have only one adversary of this sort. In the present day -there are a hundred Ghulám al-Khalíls for every true spiritualist, but -what matter? Carrion is fit food for vultures. When Sumnún gained -eminence and popularity in Baghdád, Ghulám al-Khalíl began to intrigue. -A woman had fallen in love with Sumnún and made proposals to him, which -he refused. She went to Junayd, begging him to advise Sumnún to marry -her. On being sent away by Junayd, she came to Ghulám al-Khalíl and -accused Sumnún of having attempted her virtue. He listened eagerly to -her slanders, and induced the Caliph to command that Sumnún should be -put to death. When the Caliph was about to give the word to the -executioner his tongue stuck in his throat. The same night he dreamed -that his empire would last no longer than Sumnún’s life. Next day he -asked his pardon and restored him to favour. Sumnún is the author of -lofty sayings and subtle indications concerning the real nature of love. -On his way from the Ḥijáz the people of Fayd requested him to discourse -to them about this subject. He mounted the pulpit, but while he was -speaking all his hearers departed. Sumnún turned to the lamps and said: -“I am speaking to you.” Immediately all the lamps collapsed and broke -into small bits. It is related that he said: “A thing can be explained -only by what is more subtle than itself: there is nothing subtler than -love: by what, then, shall love be explained?” The meaning of this is -that love cannot be explained because explanation is an attribute of the -explainer. Love is an attribute of the Beloved, therefore no explanation -of its real nature is possible. - -Footnote 84: - - Abú `Abdalláh Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Ghálib b. Khálid al-Baṣrí - al-Báhilí, generally known as Ghulám Khalíl, died in 275 A.H. He is - described by Abu ´l-Maḥásin (_Nujúm_, ii, 79, 1 ff.) as a - traditionist, ascetic, and saint. According to the _Tadhkirat - al-Awliyá_ (ii, 48, 4 ff.), he represented to the Caliph that Junayd, - Núrí, Shiblí, and other eminent Ṣúfís were freethinkers and heretics, - and urged him to put them to death. - - - 38. ABU ´L-FAWÁRIS SHÁH SHUJÁ` AL-KIRMÁNÍ. - -He was of royal descent. He associated with Abú Turáb Nakhshabí and many -other Shaykhs. Something has been said of him in the notice of Abú -`Uthmán al-Ḥírí. He composed a celebrated treatise on Ṣúfiism as well as -a book entitled _Mir´át al-Ḥukamá_.[85] It is recorded that he said: -“The eminent have eminence until they see it, and the saints have -saintship until they see it,” i.e., whoever regards his eminence loses -its reality, and whoever regards his saintship loses its reality. His -biographers relate that for forty years he never slept; then he fell -asleep and dreamed of God. “O Lord,” he cried, “I was seeking Thee in -nightly vigils, but I have found Thee in sleep.” God answered: “O Sháh, -you have found Me by means of those nightly vigils: if you had not -sought Me there, you would not have found Me here.” - -Footnote 85: - - i.e. “The Mirror of the Sages”. - - - 39. `AMR B. `UTHMÁN AL-MAKKÍ. - -He was one of the principal Ṣúfís, and is the author of celebrated works -on the mystical sciences. He became a disciple of Junayd after he had -seen Abú Sa`íd Kharráz and had associated with Nibájí.[86] He was the -Imám of his age in theology. It is related that he said: “Ecstasy does -not admit of explanation, because it is a secret between God and the -true believers.” Let men seek to explain it as they will, their -explanation is not that secret, inasmuch as all human power and effort -is divorced from the Divine mysteries. It is said that when `Amr came to -Iṣfahán a young man associated with him against the wish of his father. -The young man fell into a sickness. One day the Shaykh with a number of -friends came to visit him. He begged the Shaykh to bid the singer -(_qawwál_) chant a few verses, whereupon `Amr desired the singer to -chant— - - _Má lí mariḍtu wa-lam ya`udní `á´id - Minkum wa-yamraḍu `abdukum fa-a`údu._ - - “How is it that when I fell ill none of you visited me, - Though I visit your slave when he falls ill?” - -On hearing this the invalid left his bed and sat down, and the violence -of his malady was diminished. He said: “Give me some more.” So the -singer chanted— - - _Wa-ashaddu min maraḍí `alayya ṣudúdukum - Wa-ṣudúdu `abdikumú `alayya shadídu._ - - “Your neglect is more grievous to me than my sickness; - It would grieve me to neglect your slave.” - -The young man’s sickness departed from him. His father permitted him to -associate with `Amr and repented of the suspicion which he had harboured -in his heart, and the youth became an eminent Ṣúfí. - -Footnote 86: - - Sa`íd (Abú `Abdalláh) b. Yazíd al-Nibájí. See _Nafaḥát_, No. 86. - - - 40. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD SAHL B. `ABDALLÁH AL-TUSTARÍ. - -His austerities were great and his devotions excellent. He has fine -sayings on sincerity and the defects of human actions. The formal -divines say that he combined the Law and the Truth (_jama`a bayn -al-sharí`at wa ´l-ḥaqíqat_). This statement is erroneous, for the two -things have never been divided. The Law is the Truth, and the Truth is -the Law. Their assertion is founded on the fact that the sayings of this -Shaykh are more intelligible and easy to apprehend than is sometimes the -case. Inasmuch as God has joined the Law to the Truth, it is impossible -that His saints should separate them. If they be separated, one must -inevitably be rejected and the other accepted. Rejection of the Law is -heresy, and rejection of the Truth is infidelity and polytheism. Any -(proper) separation between them is made, not to establish a difference -of meaning, but to affirm the Truth, as when it is said: “The words -_there is no god save Allah_ are Truth, and the words _Muḥammad is the -Apostle of Allah_ are Law.” No one can separate the one from the other -without impairing his faith, and it is vain to wish to do so. In short, -the Law is a branch of the Truth: knowledge of God is Truth, and -obedience to His command is Law. These formalists deny whatever does not -suit their fancy, and it is dangerous to deny one of the fundamental -principles of the Way to God. Praise be to Allah for the faith which He -has given us! And it is related that he said: “The sun does not rise or -set upon anyone on the face of the earth who is not ignorant of God, -unless he prefers God to his own soul and spirit and to his present and -future life,” i.e., if anyone cleaves to self-interest, that is a proof -that he is ignorant of God, because knowledge of God requires -abandonment of forethought (_tadbír_), and abandonment of forethought is -resignation (_taslím_), whereas perseverance in forethought arises from -ignorance of predestination. - - - 41. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD B. AL-FAḌL AL-BALKHÍ. - -He was approved by the people of `Iráq as well as by those of Khurásán. -He was a pupil of Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya, and Abú `Uthmán of Ḥíra had a great -affection for him. Having been expelled from Balkh by fanatics on -account of his love of Ṣúfiism, he went to Samarcand, where he passed -his life. It is related that he said: “He that has most knowledge of God -is he that strives hardest to fulfil His commandments, and follows most -closely the custom of His Prophet.” The nearer one is to God the more -eager one is to do His bidding, and the farther one is from God the more -averse one is to follow His Apostle. It is related that he said: “I -wonder at those who cross deserts and wildernesses to reach His House -and Sanctuary, because the traces of His prophets are to be found there: -why do not they cross their own passions and lusts to reach their -hearts, where they will find the traces of their Lord?” That is to say, -the heart is the seat of knowledge of God and is more venerable than the -Ka`ba, to which men turn in devotion. Men are ever looking towards the -Ka`ba, but God is ever looking towards the heart. Wherever the heart is, -my Beloved is there; wherever His decree is, my desire is there; -wherever the traces of my prophets[87] are, the eyes of those whom I -love are directed there. - -Footnote 87: - - So in all the texts. - - - 42. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD B. `ALÍ AL-TIRMIDHÍ. - -He is the author of many excellent books which, by their eloquence, -declare the miracles vouchsafed to him, e.g., the _Khatm -al-Wiláyat_,[88] the _Kitáb al-Nahj_,[89] the _Nawádir al-Uṣúl_,[90] and -many more, such as the _Kitáb al-Tawḥíd_[91] and the _Kitáb `Adháb -al-Qabr_[92]: it would be tedious to mention them all. I hold him in -great veneration and am entirely devoted to him. My Shaykh said: -“Muḥammad is a union pearl that has no like in the whole world.” He has -also written works on the formal sciences, and is a trustworthy -authority for the traditions of the Prophet which he related. He began a -commentary on the Koran, but did not live long enough to finish it. The -completed portion is widely circulated among theologians. He studied -jurisprudence with an intimate friend of Abú Ḥanífa. The inhabitants of -Tirmidh call him Muḥammad Ḥakím, and the Ḥakímís, a Ṣúfí sect in that -region, are his followers. Many remarkable stories are told of him, as -for instance that he associated with the Apostle Khiḍr. His disciple, -Abú Bakr Warráq, relates that Khiḍr used to visit him every Sunday, and -that they conversed with each other. It is recorded that he said: -“Anyone who is ignorant of the nature of servantship (_`ubúdiyyat_) is -yet more ignorant of the nature of lordship (_rubúbiyyat_),” i.e., -whoever does not know the way to knowledge of himself does not know the -way to knowledge of God, and whoever does not recognize the -contamination of human qualities does not recognize the purity of the -Divine attributes, inasmuch as the outward is connected with the inward, -and he who claims to possess the former without the latter makes an -absurd assertion. Knowledge of the nature of lordship depends on having -right principles of servantship, and is not perfect without them. This -is a very profound and instructive saying. It will be fully explained in -the proper place. - -Footnote 88: - - “The Seal of Saintship.” - -Footnote 89: - - “The Book of the Highway.” - -Footnote 90: - - “Choice Principles.” - -Footnote 91: - - “The Book of Unification.” - -Footnote 92: - - “The Book of the Torment of the Tomb.” - - - 43. ABÚ BAKR MUḤAMMAD B. `UMAR AL-WARRÁQ. - -He was a great Shaykh and ascetic. He had seen Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya and -associated with Muḥammad b. `Alí. He is the author of books on rules of -discipline and ethics. The Ṣúfí Shaykhs have called him “The Instructor -of the Saints” (_mu´addib al-awliyá_). He relates the following story: -“Muḥammad b. `Alí handed to me some of his writings with the request -that I should throw them into the Oxus. I had not the heart to do so, -but placed them in my house and came to him and told him that I had -carried out his order. He asked me what I had seen. I replied, -‘Nothing.‘ He said, ‘You have not obeyed me; return and throw them into -the river.’ I returned, doubting the promised sign, and cast them into -the river. The waters parted and a chest appeared, with its lid open. As -soon as the papers fell into it, the lid closed and the waters joined -again and the chest vanished. I went back to him and told him what had -occurred. He answered, ‘Now you have thrown them in.’ I begged him to -explain the mystery. He said: ‘I composed a work on theology and -mysticism which could hardly be comprehended by the intellect. My -brother Khiḍr desired it of me, and God bade the waters bring it to -him.’” - -It is related that Abú Bakr Warráq said: “There are three classes of -men—divines (_`ulamá_) and princes (_umará_) and dervishes (_fuqará_). -When the divines are corrupt, piety and religion are vitiated; when the -princes are corrupt, men’s livelihood is spoiled; and when the dervishes -are corrupt, men’s morals are depraved.” Accordingly, the corruption of -the divines consists in covetousness, that of the princes in injustice, -and that of the dervishes in hypocrisy. Princes do not become corrupt -until they turn their backs on divines, and divines do not become -corrupt until they associate with princes, and dervishes do not become -corrupt until they seek ostentation, because the injustice of princes is -due to want of knowledge, and the covetousness of divines is due to want -of piety, and the hypocrisy of dervishes is due to want of trust in God. - - - 44. ABÚ SA`ID AḤMAD B. `ÍSÁ AL-KHARRÁZ. - -He was the first who explained the doctrine of annihilation (_faná_) and -subsistence (_baqá_). He is the author of brilliant compositions and -sublime sayings and allegories. He had met Dhu ´l-Nún of Egypt, and -associated with Bishr and Sarí. It is related that concerning the words -of the Apostle, “Hearts are naturally disposed to love him who acts -kindly towards them,” he said: “Oh! I wonder at him who sees none acting -kindly towards him except God, how he does not incline to God with his -whole being,” inasmuch as true beneficence belongs to the Lord of -phenomenal objects and is conferred only upon those who have need of it; -how can he who needs beneficence from others bestow it upon anyone? God -is the King and Lord of all and hath need of none. Recognizing this, the -friends of God behold in every gift and benefit the Giver and -Benefactor. Their hearts are wholly taken captive by love of Him and -turned away from everything else. - - - 45. ABU ´L-ḤASAN `ALÍ B. MUḤAMMAD AL-IṢFAHÁNÍ. - -According to others, his name is `Alí b. Sahl. He was a great Shaykh. -Junayd and he wrote exquisite letters to one another, and `Amr b. -`Uthmán Makkí went to Iṣfahán to visit him. He consorted with Abú Turáb -and Junayd. He followed a praiseworthy Path in Ṣúfiism and one that was -peculiarly his own. He was adorned with acquiescence in God’s will and -self-discipline, and was preserved from mischiefs and contaminations. He -spoke eloquently on the theory and practice of mysticism, and lucidly -explained its difficulties and symbolical allusions. It is related that -he said: “Presence (_ḥuḍúr_) is better than certainty (_yaqín_), because -presence is an abiding state (_waṭanát_), whereas certainty is a -transient one (_khaṭarát_),” i.e., presence makes its abode in the heart -and does not admit forgetfulness, while certainty is a feeling that -comes and goes: hence those who are “present” (_ḥáḍirán_) are in the -sanctuary, and those who have certainty (_múqinán_) are only at the -gate. The subject of “absence” and “presence” will be discussed in a -separate chapter of this book. - -And he said also: “From the time of Adam to the Resurrection people cry, -‘The heart, the heart!’ and I wish that I might find some one to -describe what the heart is or how it is, but I find none. People in -general give the name of ‘heart’ (_dil_) to that piece of flesh which -belongs to madmen and ecstatics and children, who really are without -heart (_bédil_). What, then, is this heart, of which I hear only the -name?” That is to say, if I call intellect the heart, it is not the -heart; and if I call spirit the heart, it is not the heart; and if I -call knowledge the heart, it is not the heart. All the evidences of the -Truth subsist in the heart, yet only the name of it is to be found. - - - 46. ABU ´L-ḤASAN MUḤAMMAD B. ISMÁ`ÍL KHAYR AL-NASSÁJ. - -He was a great Shaykh, and in his time discoursed with eloquence on -ethics and preached excellent sermons. He died at an advanced age. Both -Shiblí and Ibráhím Khawwáṣ were converted in his place of meeting. He -sent Shiblí to Junayd, wishing to observe the respect due to the latter. -He was a pupil of Sarí, and was contemporary with Junayd and Abu -´l-Ḥasan Núrí. Junayd held him in high regard, and Abú Ḥamza of Baghdád -treated him with the utmost consideration. It is related that he was -called Khayr al-Nassáj from the following circumstance. He left Sámarrá, -his native town, with the intention of performing the pilgrimage. At the -gate of Kúfa, which lay on his route, he was seized by a weaver of silk, -who cried out: “You are my slave, and your name is Khayr.” Deeming this -to come from God, he did not contradict the weaver, and remained many -years in his employment. Whenever his master said “Khayr!” he answered, -“At thy service” (_labbayk_), until the man repented of what he had done -and said to Khayr: “I made a mistake; you are not my slave.” So he -departed and went to Mecca, where he attained to such a degree that -Junayd said: “Khayr is the best of us” (_Khayr khayruná_). He used to -prefer to be called Khayr, saying: “It is not right that I should alter -a name which has been bestowed on me by a Moslem.” They relate that when -the hour of his death approached, it was time for the evening prayer. He -opened his eyes and looked at the Angel of Death and said: “Stop! God -save thee! Thou art only a servant who has received His orders, and I am -the same. That which thou art commanded to do (viz. to take my life) -will not escape thee, but that which I am commanded to do (viz. to -perform the evening prayer) will escape me: therefore let me do as I am -bidden, and then do as thou art bidden.” He then called for water and -cleansed himself, and performed the evening prayer and gave up his life. -On the same night he was seen in a dream and was asked: “What has God -done to thee?” He answered: “Do not ask me of this, but I have gained -release from your world.” - -It is related that he said in his place of meeting: “God hath expanded -the breasts of the pious with the light of certainty, and hath opened -the eyes of the possessors of certainty with the light of the verities -of faith.” Certainty is indispensable to the pious, whose hearts are -expanded with the light of certainty, and those who have certainty -cannot do without the verities of faith, inasmuch as their intellectual -vision consists in the light of faith. Accordingly, where faith is -certainty is there, and where certainty is piety is there, for they go -hand in hand with each other. - - - 47. ABÚ ḤAMZA AL-KHURÁSÁNÍ. - -He is one of the ancient Shaykhs of Khurásán. He associated with Abú -Turáb, and had seen Kharráz.[93] He was firmly grounded in trust in God -(_tawakkul_). It is a well-known story that one day he fell into a pit. -After three days had passed a party of travellers approached. Abú Ḥamza -said to himself: “I will call out to them.” Then he said: “No; it is not -good that I seek aid from anyone except God, and I shall be complaining -of God if I tell them that my God has cast me into a pit and implore -them to rescue me.” When they came up and saw an open pit in the middle -of the road, they said: “For the sake of obtaining Divine recompense -(_thawáb_) we must cover this pit lest anyone should fall into it.” Abú -Ḥamza said: “I became deeply agitated and abandoned hope of life. After -they blocked the mouth of the pit and departed, I prayed to God and -resigned myself to die, and hoped no more of mankind. When night fell I -heard a movement at the top of the pit. I looked attentively. The mouth -of the pit was open, and I saw a huge animal like a dragon, which let -down its tail. I knew that God had sent it and that I should be saved in -this way. I took hold of its tail and it dragged me out. A heavenly -voice cried to me, ‘This is an excellent escape of thine, O Abú Ḥamza! -We have saved thee from death by means of a death’” (i.e. a deadly -monster). - -Footnote 93: - - See No. 44. - -He was asked, “Who is the stranger (_gharíb_)?” He replied, “He who -shuns society,” because the dervish has no home or society either in -this world or the next, and when he is dissociated from phenomenal -existence he shuns everything, and then he is a stranger; and this is a -very lofty degree. - - - 48. ABU ´L-`ABBÁS AḤMAD B. MASRÚQ. - -He was one of the great men of Khurásán, and the Saints of God are -unanimously agreed that he was one of the _Awtád_. He associated with -the _Quṭb_, who is the pivot of the universe. On being asked to say who -the _Quṭb_ was, he did not declare his name but hinted that Junayd was -that personage. He had done service to the Forty who possess the rank of -fixity (_ṣáḥib tamkín_) and received instruction from them. It is -related that he said: “If anyone takes joy in aught except God, his joy -produces sorrow, and if anyone is not intimate with the service of his -Lord, his intimacy produces loneliness (_waḥshat_),” i.e., all save Him -is perishable, and whoever rejoices in what is perishable, when that -perishes becomes stricken with sorrow; and except His service all else -is vain, and when the vileness of created objects is made manifest, his -intimacy (with them) is wholly turned to loneliness: hence, the sorrow -and loneliness of the entire universe consist in regarding that which is -other (than God). - - - 49. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD[94] B. ISMÁ`ÍL AL-MAGHRIBÍ. - -In his time he was an approved teacher and a careful guardian of his -disciples. Both Ibráhím Khawwáṣ and Ibráhím Shaybání were pupils of his. -He has lofty sayings and shining evidences, and he was perfectly -grounded in detachment from this world. It is related that he said: “I -never saw anyone more just than the world: if you serve her she will -serve you, and if you leave her she will leave you,” i.e. as long as you -seek her she will seek you, but when you turn away from her and seek God -she will flee from you, and worldly thoughts will no more cling to your -heart. - -Footnote 94: - - LB. have “Aḥmad”. - - - 50. ABÚ `ALÍ AL-ḤASAN B. `ALÍ AL-JÚZAJÁNÍ. - -He wrote brilliant works on the science of ethics and the detection of -spiritual cankers. He was a pupil of Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, and a -contemporary of Abú Bakr Warráq. Ibráhím Samarqandí was a pupil of his. -It is related that he said: “All mankind are galloping on the -race-courses of heedlessness, relying upon idle fancies, while they -suppose themselves to be versed in the Truth and to be speaking from -Divine revelation.” This saying alludes to natural self-conceit and to -the pride of the soul. Men, though they are ignorant, have a firm belief -in their ignorance, especially ignorant Ṣúfí’s, who are the vilest -creatures of God, just as wise Ṣúfís are the noblest. The latter possess -the Truth and are without conceit, whereas the former possess conceit -and are without the Truth. They graze in the fields of heedlessness and -imagine that it is the field of saintship. They rely on fancy and -suppose it to be certainty. They go about with form and think it is -reality. They speak from their own lust and think it is a Divine -revelation. This they do because conceit is not expelled from a man’s -head save by vision of the majesty or the beauty of God: for in the -manifestation of His beauty they see Him alone, and their conceit is -annihilated, while in the revelation of His majesty they do not see -themselves, and their conceit does not intrude. - - - 51. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD AḤMAD B. AL-ḤUSAYN AL-JURAYRÍ. - -He was an intimate friend of Junayd, and also associated with Sahl b. -`Abdalláh. He was learned in every branch of science and was the Imám of -his day in jurisprudence, besides being well acquainted with theology. -His rank in Ṣúfiism was such that Junayd said to him: “Teach my pupils -discipline and train them!” He succeeded Junayd and sat in his chair. It -is related that he said: “The permanence of faith and the subsistence of -religions and the health of bodies depend on three qualities: -satisfaction (_iktifá_) and piety (_ittiqá_) and abstinence (_iḥtimá_): -if one is satisfied with God, his conscience becomes good; and if one -guards himself from what God has forbidden, his character becomes -upright; and if one abstains from what does not agree with him, his -constitution is brought into good order. The fruit of satisfaction is -pure knowledge of God, and the result of piety is excellence of moral -character, and the end of abstinence is equilibrium of constitution.” -The Apostle said, “He that prays much by night, his face is fair by -day,” and he also said that the pious shall come at the Resurrection -“with resplendent faces on thrones of light”. - - - 52. ABU ´L-`ABBÁS AḤMAD B. MUḤAMMAD B. SAHL AL-ÁMULÍ. - -He was always held in great respect by his contemporaries. He was versed -in the sciences of Koranic exegesis and criticism, and expounded the -subtleties of the Koran with an eloquence and insight peculiar to -himself. He was an eminent pupil of Junayd, and had associated with -Ibráhím Máristání. Abú Sa`íd Kharráz regarded him with the utmost -veneration, and used to declare that no one deserved the name of Ṣúfí -except him. It is related that he said: “Acquiescence in natural habits -prevents a man from attaining to the exalted degrees of spirituality,” -because natural dispositions are the instruments and organs of the -sensual part (_nafs_), which is the centre of “veiling” (_ḥijáb_) -whereas the spiritual part (_ḥaqíqat_) is the centre of revelation. -Natural dispositions become attached to two things: firstly, to this -world and its accessories, and secondly, to the next world and its -circumstances: to the former in virtue of homogeneousness, and to the -latter through imagination and in virtue of heterogeneousness and -non-cognition. Therefore they are attached to the notion of the next -world, not to its true idea, for if they knew it in reality, they would -break off connexion with this world, and nature would then have lost all -her power and spiritual things would be revealed. There can be no -harmony between the next world and human nature until the latter is -annihilated, because “in the next world is that which the heart of man -never conceived”. The worth (_khaṭar_) of the next world lies in the -fact that the way to it is full of danger (_khaṭar_). A thing that only -comes into one’s thoughts (_khawáṭir_) has little worth; and inasmuch as -the imagination is incapable of knowing the reality of the next world, -how can human nature become familiar with the true idea (_`ayn_) -thereof? It is certain that our natural faculties can be acquainted only -with the notion (_pindásht_) of the next world. - - - 53. ABU ´L-MUGHÍTH AL-ḤUSAYN B. MANṢÚR AL-ḤALLÁJ. - -He was an enamoured and intoxicated votary of Ṣúfiism. He had a strong -ecstasy and a lofty spirit. The Ṣúfí Shaykhs are at variance concerning -him. Some reject him, while others accept him. Among the latter class -are `Amr b. `Uthmán al-Makkí, Abú Ya`qúb Nahrajúrí, Abú Ya`qúb Aqṭa`, -`Alí b. Sahl Iṣfahání, and others. He is accepted, moreover, by Ibn -`Aṭá, Muḥammad b. Khafíf, Abu ´l-Qásim Naṣrábádí, and all the moderns. -Others, again, suspend their judgment about him, e.g. Junayd and Shiblí -and Jurayrí and Ḥuṣrí. Some accuse him of magic and matters coming under -that head, but in our days the Grand Shaykh Abú Sa`íd b. Abi ´l-Khayr -and Shaykh Abu ´l-Qásim Gurgání and Shaykh Abu ´l-`Abbás Shaqání looked -upon him with favour, and in their eyes he was a great man. The Master -Abu ´l-Qásim Qushayrí remarks that if al-Ḥalláj was a genuine -spiritualist he is not to be banned on the ground of popular -condemnation, and if he was banned by Ṣúfiism and rejected by the Truth -he is not to be approved on the ground of popular approval. Therefore we -leave him to the judgment of God, and honour him according to the tokens -of the Truth which we have found him to possess. But of all these -Shaykhs only a few deny the perfection of his merit and the purity of -his spiritual state and the abundance of his ascetic practices. It would -be an act of dishonesty to omit his biography from this book. Some -persons pronounce his outward behaviour to be that of an infidel, and -disbelieve in him and charge him with trickery and magic, and suppose -that Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr Ḥalláj is that heretic of Baghdád who was the -master of Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá[95] and the companion of Abú Sa`íd the -Carmathian; but this Ḥusayn whose character is in dispute was a Persian -and a native of Bayḍá, and his rejection by the Shaykhs was due, not to -any attack on religion and doctrine, but to his conduct and behaviour. -At first he was a pupil of Sahl b. `Abdalláh, whom he left, without -asking permission, in order to attach himself to `Amr b. `Uthmán Makkí. -Then he left `Amr b. `Uthmán, again without asking permission, and -sought to associate with Junayd, but Junayd would not receive him. This -is the reason why he is banned by all the Shaykhs. Now, one who is -banned on account of his conduct is not banned on account of his -principles. Do you not see that Shiblí said: “Al-Ḥalláj and I are of one -belief, but my madness saved me, while his intelligence destroyed him”? -Had his religion been suspected, Shiblí would not have said: “Al-Ḥalláj -and I are of one belief.” And Muḥammad b. Khafíf said: “He is a divinely -learned man” (_`álim-i rabbání_). Al-Ḥalláj is the author of brilliant -compositions and allegories and polished sayings in theology and -jurisprudence. I have seen fifty works by him at Baghdád and in the -neighbouring districts, and some in Khúzistán and Fárs and Khurásán. All -his sayings are like the first visions of novices; some of them are -stronger, some weaker, some easier, some more unseemly than others. When -God bestows a vision on anyone, and he endeavours to describe what he -has seen with the power of ecstasy and the help of Divine grace, his -words are obscure, especially if he expresses himself with haste and -self-admiration: then they are more repugnant to the imaginations, and -incomprehensible to the minds, of those who hear them, and then people -say, “This is a sublime utterance,” either believing it or not, but -equally ignorant of its meaning whether they believe or deny. On the -other hand, when persons of true spirituality and insight have visions, -they make no effort to describe them, and do not occupy themselves with -self-admiration on that account, and are careless of praise and blame -alike, and are undisturbed by denial and belief. - -Footnote 95: - - The famous physician Abú Bakr Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá al-Rází, who died - about 320 A.H. See Brockelmann, i, 233. - -It is absurd to charge al-Ḥalláj with being a magician. According to the -principles of Muḥammadan orthodoxy, magic is real, just as miracles are -real; but the manifestation of magic in the state of perfection is -infidelity, whereas the manifestation of miracles in the state of -perfection is knowledge of God (_ma`rifat_), because the former is the -result of God’s anger, while the latter is the corollary of His being -well pleased. I will explain this more fully in the chapter on the -affirmation of miracles. By consent of all Sunnites who are endowed with -perspicacity, no Moslem can be a magician and no infidel can be held in -honour, for contraries never meet. Ḥusayn, as long as he lived, wore the -garb of piety, consisting in prayer and praise of God and continual -fasts and fine sayings on the subject of Unification. If his actions -were magic, all this could not possibly have proceeded from him. -Consequently, they must have been miracles, and miracles are vouchsafed -only to a true saint. Some orthodox theologians reject him on the ground -that his sayings are pantheistic (_ba-ma`ni-yi imtizáj ú ittiḥád_), but -the offence lies solely in the expression, not in the meaning. A person -overcome with rapture has not the power of expressing himself correctly; -besides, the meaning of the expression may be difficult to apprehend, so -that people mistake the writer’s intention, and repudiate, not his real -meaning, but a notion which they have formed for themselves. I have seen -at Baghdád and in the adjoining districts a number of heretics who -pretend to be the followers of al-Ḥalláj and make his sayings an -argument for their heresy (_zandaqa_) and call themselves Ḥallájís. They -spoke of him in the same terms of exaggeration (_ghuluww_) as the -Ráfiḍís (Shí`ites) apply to `Alí. I will refute their doctrines in the -chapter concerning the different Ṣúfí sects. In conclusion, you must -know that the sayings of al-Ḥalláj should not be taken as a model, -inasmuch as he was an ecstatic (_maghlúb andar ḥál-i khud_), not firmly -settled (_mutamakkin_), and a man needs to be firmly settled before his -sayings can be considered authoritative. Therefore, although he is dear -to my heart, yet his “path” is not soundly established on any principle, -and his state is not fixed in any position, and his experiences are -largely mingled with error. When my own visions began I derived much -support from him, that is to say, in the way of evidences (_baráhín_). -At an earlier time I composed a book in explanation of his sayings and -demonstrated their sublimity by proofs and arguments. Furthermore, in -another work, entitled _Minháj_, I have spoken of his life from -beginning to end; and now I have given some account of him in this -place. How can a doctrine whose principles require to be corroborated -with so much caution be followed and imitated? Truth and idle fancy -never agree. He is continually seeking to fasten upon some erroneous -theory. It is related that he said: _Al-alsinat mustanṭiqát taḥta -nuṭqihá mustahlikát_,[96] i.e. “speaking tongues are the destruction of -silent hearts”. Such expressions are entirely mischievous. Expression of -the meaning of reality is futile. If the meaning exists it is not lost -by expression, and if it is non-existent it is not created by -expression. Expression only produces an unreal notion and leads the -student mortally astray by causing him to imagine that the expression is -the real meaning. - -Footnote 96: - - Literally, “The tongues desire to speak, (but) under their speech they - desire to perish.” - - - 54. ABÚ ISḤÁQ IBRÁHÍM B. AḤMAD AL-KHAWWÁṢ. - -He attained a high degree in the doctrine of trust in God (_tawakkul_). -He met many Shaykhs, and many signs and miracles were vouchsafed to him. -He is the author of excellent works on the ethics of Ṣúfiism. It is -related that he said: “All knowledge is comprised in two sentences: ‘do -not trouble yourself with anything that is done for you, and do not -neglect anything that you are bound to do for yourself,’” i.e., do not -trouble yourself with destiny, for what is destined from eternity will -not be changed by your efforts, and do not neglect His commandment, for -you will be punished if you neglect it. He was asked what wonders he had -seen. “Many wonders,” he replied, “but the most wonderful was that the -Apostle Khiḍr begged me to let him associate with me, and I refused. Not -that I desired any better companion, but I feared that I should depend -on him rather than on God, and that my trust in God would be impaired by -consorting with him, and that in consequence of performing a work of -supererogation I should fail to perform a duty incumbent on me.” This is -the degree of perfection. - - - 55. ABÚ ḤAMZA AL-BAGHDÁDÍ AL-BAZZÁZ. - -He was one of the principal Ṣúfí scholastic theologians -(_mutakallimán_). He was a pupil of Ḥárith Muḥásibí, and associated with -Sarí and was contemporary with Núrí and Khayr Nassáj. He used to preach -in the Ruṣáfa mosque at Baghdád. He was versed in Koranic exegesis and -criticism, and related Apostolic Traditions on trustworthy authority. It -was he who was with Núrí when the latter was persecuted and when God -delivered the Ṣúfís from death. I will tell this story in the place -where Núrí’s doctrine is explained. It is recorded that Abú Ḥamza said: -“If thy ‘self’ (_nafs_) is safe from thee, thou hast done all that is -due to it; and if mankind are safe from thee, thou hast paid all that is -due to them,” i.e., there are two obligations, one which thou owest to -thy “self” and one which thou owest to others. If thou refrain thy -“self” from sin and seek for it the path of future salvation, thou hast -fulfilled thy obligation towards it; and if thou make others secure from -thy wickedness and do not wish to injure them, thou hast fulfilled thy -obligation towards them. Endeavour that no evil may befall thy “self” or -others from thee: then occupy thyself with fulfilling thy obligation to -God. - - - 56. ABÚ BAKR MUḤAMMAD B. MÚSÁ AL-WÁSIṬÍ. - -He was a profound theosophist, praiseworthy in the eyes of all the -Shaykhs. He was one of the early disciples of Junayd. His abstruse -manner of expression caused his sayings to be regarded with suspicion by -formalists (_ẕáḥiriyán_). He found peace in no city until he came to -Merv. The inhabitants of Merv welcomed him on account of his amiable -disposition—for he was a virtuous man—and listened to his sayings; and -he passed his life there. It is related that he said: “Those who -remember their praise of God (_dhikr_) are more heedless than those who -forget their praise,” because if anyone forgets the praise, it is no -matter; but it does matter if he remembers the praise and forgets God. -Praise is not the same thing as the object of praise. Neglect of the -object of praise combined with thought of the praise approximates to -heedlessness more closely than neglect of the praise without thought. He -who forgets, in his forgetfulness and absence, does not think that he is -present (with God), but he who remembers, in his remembrance and absence -from the object of praise, thinks that he is present (with God). -Accordingly, to think that one is present when one is not present comes -nearer to heedlessness than to be absent without thinking that one is -present, for conceit (_pindásht_) is the ruin of those who seek the -Truth. The more conceit, the less reality, and _vice versâ_. Conceit -really springs from the suspiciousness (_tuhmat_) of the intellect, -which is produced by the insatiable desire (_nahmat_) of the lower soul; -and holy aspiration (_himmat_) has nothing in common with either of -these qualities. The fundamental principle of remembrance of God -(_dhikr_) is either in absence (_ghaybat_) or in presence (_ḥuḍúr_). -When anyone is absent from himself and present with God, that state is -not presence, but contemplation (_musháhadat_); and when anyone is -absent from God and present with himself, that state is not remembrance -of God (_dhikr_), but absence; and absence is the result of heedlessness -(_ghaflat_). The truth is best known to God. - - - 57. ABÚ BAKR B. DULAF B. JAḤDAR AL-SHIBLÍ. - -He was a great and celebrated Shaykh. He had a blameless spiritual life -and enjoyed perfect communion with God. He was subtle in the use of -symbolism, wherefore one of the moderns says: “The wonders of the world -are three: the symbolical utterances (_ishárát_) of Shiblí, and the -mystical sayings (_nukat_) of Murta`ish, and the anecdotes (_ḥikáyát_) -of Ja`far.“[97] At first he was chief chamberlain to the Caliph, but he -was converted in the assembly-room (_majlis_) of Khayr al-Nassáj and -became a disciple of Junayd. He made the acquaintance of a large number -of Shaykhs. It is related that he explained the verse ”_Tell the -believers to refrain their eyes_” (Kor. xxiv, 30) as follows: “O -Muḥammad, tell the believers to refrain their bodily eyes from what is -unlawful, and to refrain their spiritual eyes from everything except -God,” i.e. not to look at lust and to have no thought except the vision -of God. It is a mark of heedlessness to follow one’s lusts and to regard -unlawful things, and the greatest calamity that befalls the heedless is -that they are ignorant of their own faults; for anyone who is ignorant -here shall also be ignorant hereafter: “_Those who are blind in this -world shall be blind in the next world_” (Kor. xvii, 74). In truth, -until God clears the desire of lust out of a man’s heart the bodily eye -is not safe from its hidden dangers, and until God establishes the -desire of Himself in a man’s heart the spiritual eye is not safe from -looking at other than Him. - -Footnote 97: - - See No. #58:. - -It is related that one day when Shiblí came into the bazaar, the people -said, “This is a madman.” He replied: “You think I am mad, and I think -you are sensible: may God increase my madness and your sense!” i.e., -inasmuch as my madness is the result of intense love of God, while your -sense is the result of great heedlessness, may God increase my madness -in order that I may become nearer and nearer to Him, and may He increase -your sense in order that you may become farther and farther from Him. -This he said from jealousy (_ghayrat_) that anyone should be so beside -one’s self as not to separate love of God from madness and not to -distinguish between them in this world or the next. - - - 58. ABÚ MUḤAMMAD JA`FAR B. NUṢAYR AL-KHULDÍ. - -He is the well-known biographer of the Saints. One of the most eminent -and oldest of Junayd’s pupils, he was profoundly versed in the various -branches of Ṣúfiism and paid the utmost respect to the Shaykhs. He has -many sublime sayings. In order to avoid spiritual conceit, he attributed -to different persons the anecdotes which he composed in illustration of -each topic. It is related that he said: “Trust in God is equanimity -whether you find anything or no,” i.e., you are not made glad by having -daily bread or sorrowful by not having it, because it is the property of -the Lord, who has a better right than you either to preserve or to -destroy: do not interfere, but let the Lord dispose of His own. Ja`far -relates that he went to Junayd and found him suffering from a fever. “O -Master,” he cried, “tell God in order that He may restore thee to -health.” Junayd said: “Last night I was about to tell Him, but a voice -whispered in my heart, ‘Thy body belongs to Me: I keep it well or ill, -as I please. Who art thou, that thou shouldst interfere with My -property.’” - - - 59. ABÚ `ALÍ MUḤAMMAD B. AL-QÁSIM AL-RÚDBÁRÍ. - -He was a great Ṣúfí and of royal descent. Many signs and virtues were -vouchsafed to him. He discoursed lucidly on the arcana of Ṣúfiism. It is -related that he said: “He who desires (_muríd_) desires for himself only -what God desires for him, and he who is desired (_murád_) does not -desire anything in this world or the next except God.” Accordingly, he -who is satisfied with the will of God must abandon his own will in order -that he may desire, whereas the lover has no will of his own that he -should have any object of desire. He who desires God desires only what -God desires, and he whom God desires desires only God. Hence -satisfaction (_riḍá_) is one of the “stations” (_maqámát_) of the -beginning, and love (_maḥabbat_) is one of the “states” (_aḥwál_) of the -end. The “stations” are connected with the realization of servantship -(_`ubúdiyyat_), while ecstasy (_mashrab_) leads to the corroboration of -Lordship (_rubúbiyyat_). This being so, the desirer (_muríd_) subsists -in himself, and the desired (_murád_) subsists in God. - - - 60. ABU ´L-`ABBÁS QÁSIM B. AL-MAHDÍ[98] AL-SAYYÁRÍ. - -He associated with Abú Bakr Wásiṭí and derived instruction from many -Shaykhs. He was the most accomplished (_aẕraf_) of the Ṣúfís in -companionship (_ṣuḥbat_) and the most sparing (_azhad_) of them in -friendship (_ulfat_). He is the author of lofty sayings and praiseworthy -compositions. It is related that he said: “Unification (_al-tawḥíd_) is -this: that nothing should occur to your mind except God.” He belonged to -a learned and influential family of Merv. Having inherited a large -fortune from his father, he gave the whole of it in return for two of -the Apostle’s hairs. Through the blessing of those hairs God bestowed on -him a sincere repentance. He fell into the company of Abú Bakr Wásiṭí, -and attained such a high degree that he became the leader of a Ṣúfí -sect. When he was on the point of death, he gave directions that those -hairs should be placed in his mouth. His tomb is still to be seen at -Merv, and people come thither to seek what they desire; and their -prayers are granted. - -Footnote 98: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 167, has “Qásim b. al-Qásim al-Mahdí”. - - - 61. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD B. KHAFÍF. - -He was the Imám of his age in diverse sciences. He was renowned for his -mortifications and for his convincing elucidation of mystical truths. -His spiritual attainments are clearly shown by his compositions. He was -acquainted with Ibn `Aṭá and Shiblí and Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr and Jurayrí, -and associated at Mecca with Abú Ya`qúb Nahrajúrí. He made excellent -journeys in detachment from the world (_tajríd_). He was of royal -descent, but God bestowed on him repentance, so that he turned his back -on the glories of this world. He is held in high esteem by -spiritualists. It is related that he said: “Unification consists in -turning away from nature,” because the natures of mankind are all veiled -from the bounties and blind to the beneficence of God. Hence no one can -turn to God until he has turned away from nature, and the “natural” man -(_ṣáḥib ṭab`_) is unable to apprehend the reality of Unification, which -is revealed to you only when you see the corruption of your own nature. - - - 62. ABÚ `UTHMÁN SA`ÍD B. SALLÁM AL-MAGHRIBÍ. - -He was an eminent spiritualist of the class who have attained “fixity” -(_ahl-i tamkín_), and was profoundly versed in various departments of -knowledge. He practised austerities, and is the author of many notable -sayings and excellent proofs concerning the observation of spiritual -blemishes (_ru´yat-i áfát_). It is related that he said: “Whenever -anyone prefers association with the rich to sitting with the poor God -afflicts him with spiritual death.” The terms “association” (_ṣuḥbat_) -and “sitting with” (_mujálasat_) are employed, because a man turns away -from the poor only when he has sat with them, not when he has associated -with them; for there is no turning away in association. When he leaves -off sitting with the poor in order to associate with the rich, his heart -becomes dead to supplication (_niyáz_) and his body is caught in the -toils of covetousness (_áz_). Since the result of turning away from -_mujálasat_ is spiritual death, how should there be any turning away -from _ṣuḥbat_? The two terms are clearly distinguished from each other -in this saying. - - 63.ABU ´L-QÁSIM IBRÁHÍM B. MUḤAMMAD B. MAḤMÚD AL-NAṢRÁBÁDÍ. - -He was like a king in Níshápúr, save that the glory of kings is in this -world, while his was in the next world. Original sayings and exalted -signs were vouchsafed to him. Himself a pupil of Shiblí, he was the -master of the later Shaykhs of Khurásán. He was the most learned and -devout man of his age. It is recorded that he said: “Thou art between -two relationships: one to Adam, the other to God. If thou claim -relationship to Adam, thou wilt enter the arenas of lust and the places -of corruption and error; for by this claim thou seekest to realize thy -humanity (_bashariyyat_). God hath said: ‘_Verily, he was unjust and -foolish_’ (Kor. xxxiii, 72). If, however, thou claim relationship to -God, thou wilt enter the stations of revelation and evidence and -protection (from sin) and saintship; for by this claim thou seekest to -realize thy servantship (_`ubúdiyyat_). God hath said: ‘_The servants of -the Merciful are those who walk on the earth meekly_’ (Kor. xxv, 64).“ -Relationship to Adam ends at the Resurrection, whereas the relationship -of being a servant of God subsists always and is unalterable. When a man -refers himself to himself or to Adam, the utmost that he can reach is to -say: ”_Verily, I have injured myself_“ (Kor. xxviii, 15); but when he -refers himself to God, the son of Adam is in the same case as those of -whom God hath said: ”_O My servants, there is no fear for you this day_” -(Kor. xliii, 68). - - 64. ABU ´L-ḤASAN `ALÍ B. IBRÁHÍM AL-ḤUṢRÍ. - -He is one of the great Imáms of the Ṣúfís and was unrivalled in his -time. He has lofty sayings and admirable explanations in all spiritual -matters. It is related that he said: “Leave me alone in my affliction! -Are not ye children of Adam, whom God formed with His own hand and -breathed a spirit into him and caused the angels to bow down to him? -Then He commanded him to do something, and he disobeyed. If the first of -the wine-jar is dregs, what will its last be?” That is to say: “When a -man is left to himself he is all disobedience, but when Divine favour -comes to his help he is all love. Now regard the beauty of Divine favour -and compare with it the ugliness of thy behaviour, and pass thy whole -life in this.” - -I have mentioned some of the ancient Ṣúfís whose example is -authoritative. If I had noticed them all and had set forth their lives -in detail and had included the anecdotes respecting them, my purpose -would not have been accomplished, and this book would have run to great -length. Now I will add some account of the modern Ṣúfís. - - - - - CHAPTER XII. - CONCERNING THE PRINCIPAL ṢÚFÍS OF RECENT TIMES. - -You must know that in our days there are some persons who cannot endure -the burden of discipline (_riyáḍat_) and seek authority (_riyásat_) -without discipline, and think that all Ṣúfís are like themselves; and -when they hear the sayings of those who have passed away and see their -eminence and read of their devotional practices they examine themselves, -and finding that they are far inferior to the Shaykhs of old they no -longer attempt to emulate them, but say: “We are not as they, and there -is none like them in our time.” Their assertion is absurd, for God never -leaves the earth without a proof (_ḥujjat_) or the Moslem community -without a saint, as the Apostle said: “One sect of my people shall -continue in goodness and truth until the hour of the Resurrection.” And -he said also: “There shall always be in my people forty who have the -nature of Abraham.” - -Some of those whom I shall mention in this chapter are already deceased, -and some are still living. - - - 1. ABU ´L-`ABBÁS AḤMAD B. MUḤAMMAD AL-QAṢṢÁB. - -He associated with the leading Shaykhs of Transoxania. He was famed for -his lofty spiritual endowments, his true sagacity, his abundant -evidences, ascetic practices, and miracles. Abú `Abdalláh Khayyáṭí, the -Imám of Ṭabaristán, says of him: “It is one of God’s bounties that He -has made a person who was never taught able to answer our questions -about any difficulty touching the principles of religion and the -subtleties of Unification.” Although Abu ´l-Abbás Qaṣṣáb was illiterate -(_ummí_), he discoursed in sublime fashion concerning the science of -Ṣúfiism and theology. I have heard many stories of him, but my rule in -this book is brevity. One day a camel, with a heavy burden, was going -through the market-place at Ámul, which is always muddy. The camel fell -and broke its leg. While the lad in charge of it was lamenting and -lifting his hands to implore the help of God, and the people were about -to take the load off its back, the Shaykh passed by, and asked what was -the matter. On being informed, he seized the camel’s bridle and turned -his face to the sky and said: “O Lord! make the leg of this camel whole. -If Thou wilt not do so, why hast Thou let my heart be melted by the -tears of a lad?” The camel immediately got up and went on its way. - -It is stated that he said: “All mankind, whether they will or no, must -reconcile themselves to God, or else they will suffer pain,” because, -when you are reconciled to Him in affliction, you see only the Author of -affliction, and the affliction itself does not come; and if you are not -reconciled to Him, affliction comes and your heart is filled with -anguish. God having predestined our satisfaction and dissatisfaction, -does not alter His predestination: therefore our satisfaction with His -decrees is a part of our pleasure. Whenever anyone reconciles himself to -Him, that man’s heart is rejoiced; and whenever anyone turns away from -Him, that man is distressed by the coming of destiny. - - - 2. ABÚ `ALÍ ḤASAN B. MUḤAMMAD AL-DAQQÁQ. - -He was the leading authority in his department (of science) and had no -rival among his contemporaries. He was lucid in exposition and eloquent -in speech as regards the revelation of the way to God. He had seen many -Shaykhs and associated with them. He was a pupil of Naṣrábádi[99] and -used to be a preacher (_tadhkír kardí_). It is related that he said: -“Whoever becomes intimate with anyone except God is weak in his -(spiritual) state, and whoever speaks of anyone except God is false in -his speech,” because intimacy with anyone except God springs from not -knowing God sufficiently, and intimacy with Him is friendlessness in -regard to others, and the friendless man does not speak of others. - -Footnote 99: - - See Chapter XI, No. 63. - -I heard an old man relate that one day he went to the place where -al-Daqqáq held his meetings, with the intention of asking him about the -state of those who trust in God (_mutawakkilán_). Al-Daqqáq was wearing -a fine turban manufactured in Ṭabaristán, which the old man coveted. He -said to al-Daqqáq: “What is trust in God?” The Shaykh replied: “To -refrain from coveting people’s turbans.” With these words he flung his -turban in front of the questioner. - - - 3. ABU ´L-ḤASAN `ALÍ B. AḤMAD AL-KHURQÁNÍ. - -He was a great Shaykh and was praised by all the Saints in his time. -Shaykh Abú Sa`íd visited him, and they conversed with each other on -every topic. When he was about to take leave he said to al-Khurqání: “I -choose you to be my successor.” I have heard from Ḥasan Mu´addib, who -was the servant of Abú Sa`íd, that when Abú Sa`íd came into the presence -of al-Khurqání, he did not speak another word, but listened and only -spoke by way of answering what was said by the latter. Ḥasan asked him -why he had been so silent. He replied: “One interpreter is enough for -one theme.” And I heard the Master, Abu ´l-Qásim Qushayrí, say: “When I -came to Khurqán, my eloquence departed and I no longer had any power to -express myself, on account of the veneration with which that spiritual -director inspired me; and I thought that I had been deposed from my own -saintship.” - -It is related that he said: “There are two ways, one wrong and one -right. The wrong way is Man’s way to God, and the right way is God’s way -to Man. Whoever says he has attained to God has not attained; but when -anyone says that he has been made to attain to God, know that he has -really attained.” It is not a question of attaining or not attaining, -and of salvation or non-salvation, but one of being _caused_ to attain -or not to attain, and of being _given_ salvation or being not given -salvation. - - - 4. ABÚ `ABDALLÁH MUḤAMMAD B. `ALÍ, GENERALLY KNOWN AS AL-DÁSTÁNÍ. - -He resided at Bisṭám. He was learned in various branches of science, and -is the author of polished discourses and fine symbolical indications. He -found an excellent successor in Shaykh Sahlagí, who was the Imám of -those parts. I have heard from Sahlagí some of his spiritual utterances -(_anfás_), which are very sublime and admirable. He says, for example: -“Unification, coming from thee, is existent (_mawjúd_), but thou in -unification art non-existent (_mafqúd_),” i.e. unification, when it -proceeds from thee, is faultless (_durust_), but thou art faulty in -unification, because thou dost not fulfil its requirements. The lowest -degree in unification is the negation of thy personal control over -anything that thou hast, and the affirmation of thy absolute submission -to God in all thy affairs. Shaykh Sahlagí relates as follows: “Once the -locusts came to Bisṭám in such numbers that every tree and field was -black with them. The people cried aloud for help. The Shaykh asked me: -‘What is all this pother?’ I told him that the locusts had come and that -the people were distressed in consequence. He rose and went up to the -roof and looked towards heaven. The locusts immediately began to fly -away. By the hour of the afternoon prayer not one was left, and nobody -lost even a blade of grass.” - - - 5. ABÚ SA`ÍD FAḌLALLÁH B. MUḤAMMAD AL-MAYHANÍ. - -He was the sultan of his age and the ornament of the Mystic Path. All -his contemporaries were subject to him, some through their sound -perception, and some through their excellent belief, and some through -the strong influence of their spiritual feelings. He was versed in the -different branches of science. He had a wonderful religious experience -and an extraordinary power of reading men’s secret thoughts. Besides -this he had many remarkable powers and evidences, of which the effects -are manifest at the present day. In early life he left Mihna (Mayhana) -and came to Sarakhs in order to study. He attached himself to Abú `Alí -Záhir, from whom he learned in one day as much as is contained in three -lectures, and he used to spend in devotion the three days that he had -saved in this manner. The saint of Sarakhs at that time was Abu ´l-Faḍl -Ḥasan. One day, when Abú Sa`íd was walking by the river of Sarakhs, Abu -´l-Faḍl met him and said: “Your way is not that which you are taking: -take your own way.” The Shaykh did not attach himself to him, but -returned to his native town and engaged in asceticism and austerities -until God opened to him the door of guidance and raised him to the -highest rank. I heard the following story from Shaykh Abú Muslim Fárisí: -“I had always,” he said, “been on unfriendly terms with the Shaykh. Once -I set out to pay him a visit. My patched frock was so dirty that it had -become like leather. When I entered his presence, I found him sitting on -a couch, dressed in a robe of Egyptian linen. I said to myself: ‘This -man claims to be a dervish (_faqír_) with all these worldly encumbrances -(_`alá´iq_), while I claim to be a dervish with all this detachment from -the world (_tajríd_). How can I agree with this man?’ He read my -thoughts, and raising his head cried: ‘O Abú Muslim, in what _díwán_ -have you found that the name of dervish is applied to anyone whose heart -subsists in the contemplation of God?’ i.e. those who contemplate God -are rich in God, whereas dervishes (_fuqará_) are occupied with -self-mortification. I repented of my conceit and asked God to pardon me -for such an unseemly thought.” - -And it is related that he said: “Ṣúfiism is the subsistence of the heart -with God without any mediation.” This alludes to contemplation -(_musháhadat_), which is violence of love, and absorption of human -attributes in realizing the vision of God, and their annihilation by the -everlastingness of God. I will discuss the nature of contemplation in -the chapter which treats of the Pilgrimage. - -On one occasion Abú Sa`íd set out from Níshápúr towards Ṭús. While he -was passing through a mountainous ravine his feet felt cold in his -boots. A dervish who was then with him says: “I thought of tearing my -waist-cloth (_fúṭa_) into two halves and wrapping them round his feet; -but I could not bring myself to do it, as my _fúṭa_ was a very fine one. -When we arrived at Ṭús I attended his meeting and asked him to tell me -the difference between suggestions of the Devil (_waswás_) and Divine -inspiration (_ilhám_). He answered: ‘It was a Divine inspiration that -urged you to tear your _fúṭa_ into two pieces for the sake of warming my -feet; and it was a diabolic suggestion that hindered you from doing -so.’” He performed a whole series of miracles of this kind which are -wrought by spiritual adepts. - - - 6. ABU ´L-FAḌL MUḤAMMAD B. AL-ḤASAN AL-KHUTTALÍ. - -He is the teacher whom I follow in Ṣúfiism. He was versed in the science -of Koranic exegesis and in traditions (_riwáyát_). In Ṣúfiism he held -the doctrine of Junayd. He was a pupil of Ḥuṣrí[100] and a companion of -Sírawání, and was contemporary with Abú `Amr Qazwíní and Abu ´l-Ḥasan b. -Sáliba. He spent sixty years in sincere retirement from the world, for -the most part on Mount Lukám. He displayed many signs and proofs (of -saintship), but he did not wear the garb or adopt the external fashions -of the Ṣúfís, and he used to treat formalists with severity. I never saw -any man who inspired me with greater awe than he did. It is related that -he said: “The world is but a single day, in which we are fasting,” i.e., -we get nothing from it, and are not occupied with it, because we have -perceived its corruption and its “veils” and have turned our backs upon -it. Once I was pouring water on his hands in order that he might purify -himself. The thought occurred to me: “Inasmuch as everything is -predestined, why should free men make themselves the slaves of spiritual -directors in the hope of having miracles vouchsafed to them?” The Shaykh -said: “O my son, I know what you are thinking. Be assured that there is -a cause for every decree of Providence. When God wishes to bestow a -crown and a kingdom on a guardsman’s son (_`awán-bacha_), He gives him -repentance and employs him in the service of one of His friends, in -order that this service may be the means of his obtaining the gift of -miracles.” Many such fine sayings he uttered to me every day. He died at -Bayt al-Jinn, a village situated at the head of a mountain pass between -Bániyás[101] and the river of Damascus. While he lay on his death-bed, -his head resting on my bosom (and at that time I was feeling hurt, as -men often do, by the behaviour of a friend of mine), he said to me: “O -my son, I will tell thee one article of belief which, if thou holdest it -firmly, will deliver thee from all troubles. Whatever good or evil God -creates, do not in any place or circumstance quarrel with His action or -be aggrieved in thy heart.” He gave no further injunction, but yielded -up his soul. - -Footnote 100: - - See Chapter XI, No. 64. - -Footnote 101: - - L. Bániyán, IJ. Mániyán. - - - 7. ABU ´L-QÁSIM `ABD AL-KARÍM B. HAWÁZIN AL-QUSHAYRÍ. - -In his time he was a wonder. His rank is high and his position is great, -and his spiritual life and manifold virtues are well known to the people -of the present age. He is the author of many fine sayings and exquisite -works, all of them profoundly theosophical, in every branch of science. -God rendered his feelings and his tongue secure from anthropomorphism -(_ḥashw_). I have heard that he said: “The Ṣúfí is like the disease -called _birsám_, which begins with delirium and ends in silence; for -when you have attained ‘fixity’ you are dumb.“ Ṣúfiism (_ṣafwat_) has -two sides: ecstasy (_wajd_) and visions (_numúd_). Visions belong to -novices, and the expression of such visions is delirium (_hadhayán_). -Ecstasy belongs to adepts, and the expression of ecstasy, while the -ecstasy continues, is impossible. So long as they are only seekers they -utter lofty aspirations, which seem delirium even to those who aspire -(_ahl-i himmat_), but when they have attained they cease, and no more -express anything either by word or sign. Similarly, since Moses was a -beginner (_mubtadí_) all his desire was for vision of God; he expressed -his desire and said, ”_O Lord, show me that I may behold Thee_” (Kor. -vii, 139). This expression of an unattained desire seemed like delirium. -Our Apostle, however, was an adept (_muntahí_) and firmly established -(_mutamakkin_). When his person arrived at the station of desire his -desire was annihilated, and he said, “I cannot praise Thee duly.” - - - 8. ABU ´L-`ABBÁS AḤMAD B. MUḤAMMAD AL-ASHQÁNÍ. - -He was an Imám in every branch of the fundamental and derivative -sciences, and consummate in all respects. He had met a great number of -eminent Ṣúfís. His doctrine was based on “annihilation” (_faná_), and -his recondite manner of expression was peculiarly his own; but I have -seen some fools who imitated it and adopted his ecstatic phrases -(_shaṭḥhá_). It is not laudable to imitate even a spiritual meaning: -mark, then, how wrong it must be to imitate a mere expression! I was -very intimate with him, and he had a sincere affection for me. He was my -teacher in some sciences. During my whole life I have never seen anyone, -of any sect, who held the religious law in greater veneration than he. -He was detached from all created things, and only an Imám of profound -insight could derive instruction from him, on account of the subtlety of -his theological expositions. He always had a natural disgust of this -world and the next, and was constantly exclaiming: _Ashtahí `adam^{an} -lá wujúd lahu_, “I long for a non-existence that has no existence.” And -he used to say in Persian: “Every man has an impossible desire, and I -too have an impossible desire, which I surely know will never be -realized, namely, that God should bring me to a non-existence that will -never return to existence.” He wished this because “stations” and -miracles are all centres of veiling (i.e. they veil man from God). Man -has fallen in love with that which veils him. Non-existence in desire of -vision is better than taking delight in veils. Inasmuch as Almighty God -is a Being that is not subject to not-being, what loss would His kingdom -suffer if I become a nonentity that shall never be endowed with -existence? This is a sound principle in a real annihilation. - - 9. ABU ´L-QÁSIM B. `ALÍ B. `ABDALLÁH AL-GURGÁNÍ - (may God prolong his life for the benefit of us and of all Moslems!). - -In his time he was unique and incomparable. His beginning (_ibtidá_) was -very excellent and strong, and his journeys were performed with -punctilious observance (of the sacred law). At that time the hearts of -all initiates (_ahl-i dargáh_) were turned towards him, and all seekers -(_ṭálibán_) had a firm belief in him. He possessed a marvellous power of -revealing the inward experiences of novices (_kashf-i wáqi`a-i -murídán_), and he was learned in various branches of knowledge. All his -disciples are ornaments of the society in which they move. Please God, -he will have an excellent successor, whose authority the whole body of -Ṣúfís will recognize, namely, Abú `Alí al-Faḍl b. Muḥammad al-Fármadhí -(may God lengthen his days!),[102] who has not omitted to fulfil his -duty towards his master, and has turned his back on all (worldly) -things, and through the blessings of that (renunciation) has been made -by God the spiritual mouthpiece (_zabán-i ḥál_) of that venerable -Shaykh. - -Footnote 102: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 428. - -One day I was seated in the Shaykh’s presence and was recounting to him -my experiences and visions, in order that he might test them, for he had -unrivalled skill in this. He was listening kindly to what I said. The -vanity and enthusiasm of youth made me eager to relate those matters, -and the thought occurred to me that perhaps the Shaykh, in his -novitiate, did not enjoy such experiences, or he would not show so much -humility towards me and be so anxious to inquire concerning my spiritual -state. The Shaykh perceived what I was thinking. “My dear friend,” he -said, “you must know that my humility is not on account of you or your -experiences, but is shown towards Him who brings experiences to pass. -They are not peculiar to yourself, but common to all seekers of God.” On -hearing him say this I was utterly taken aback. He saw my confusion and -said: “O my son, Man has no further relation to this Path except that, -when he is attached to it, he imagines that he has found it, and when he -is deposed from it he clothes his imagination in words. Hence both his -negation and his affirmation, both his non-existence and existence, are -imagination. Man never escapes from the prison of imagination. It -behoves him to stand like a slave at the door and put away from himself -every relation (_nisbat_) except that of manhood and obedience.” -Afterwards I had much spiritual conversation with him, but if I were to -enter upon the task of setting forth his extraordinary powers my purpose -would be defeated. - - - 10. ABÚ AḤMAD AL-MUẔAFFAR B. AḤMAD B. ḤAMDÁN. - -While he was seated on the cushion of authority (_riyásat_), God opened -to him the door of this mystery (_Ṣúfiism_) and bestowed on him the -crown of miracles. He spoke eloquently and discoursed with sublimity on -annihilation and subsistence (_faná ú baqá_). The Grand Shaykh, Abú -Sa`íd, said: “I was led to the court (of God) by the way of servantship -(_bandagí_), but Khwája Muẕaffar was conducted thither by the way of -lordship and dominion (_khwájagí_),” i.e. “I attained contemplation -(_musháhadat_) by means of self-mortification (_mujáhadat_), whereas he -came from contemplation to self-mortification”. I have heard that he -said: “That which great mystics have discovered by traversing deserts -and wildernesses I have gained in the seat of power and pre-eminence -(_bálish ú ṣadr_).” Some foolish and conceited persons have attributed -this saying of his to arrogance, but it is never arrogant to declare -one’s true state, especially when the speaker is a spiritualist. At the -present time Muẕaffar has an excellent and honoured successor in Khwája -Aḥmad. One day, when I was in his company, a certain pretender of -Níshápúr happened to use the expression: “He becomes annihilated and -then becomes subsistent.” Khwája Muẕaffar said: “How can subsistence -(_baqá_) be predicated of annihilation (_faná_)? Annihilation means -‘not-being’, while subsistence refers to ‘being’: each term negates the -other. We know what annihilation is, but when it is not, if it becomes -‘being’, its identity (_`ayn_) is lost. Essences are not capable of -annihilation. Attributes, however, can be annihilated, and so can -secondary causes. Therefore, when attributes and secondary causes are -annihilated, the Object invested with attributes and the Author of -secondary causes continues to subsist: His essence does not admit of -annihilation.” I do not recollect the precise words in which Muẕaffar -expressed his meaning, but this was the purport of them. Now I will -explain more clearly what he intended, in order that it may be more -generally understood. A man’s will (_ikhtiyár_) is an attribute of -himself, and he is veiled by his will from the will of God. Therefore a -man’s attributes veil him from God. Necessarily, the Divine will is -eternal and the human will phenomenal, and what is eternal cannot be -annihilated. When the Divine will in regard to a man becomes subsistent -(_baqá yábad_), his will is annihilated and his personal initiative -disappears. But God knows best. - -One day I came into his presence, when the weather was extremely hot, -wearing a traveller’s dress and with my hair in disorder. He said to me: -“Tell me what you wish at this moment.” I replied that I wished to hear -some music (_samá`_). He immediately sent for a singer (_qawwál_) and a -number of musicians. Being young and enthusiastic and filled with the -ardour of a novice, I became deeply agitated as the strains of the music -fell on my ear. After a while, when my transports subsided, he asked me -how I liked it. I told him that I had enjoyed it very much. He answered: -“A time will come when this music will be no more to you than the -croaking of a raven. The influence of music only lasts so long as there -is no contemplation, and as soon as contemplation is attained music has -no power. Take care not to accustom yourself to this, lest it grow part -of your nature and keep you back from higher things.” - - - - - CHAPTER XIII. - A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE MODERN ṢÚFÍS IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES. - -I have not space enough to give biographies of them all, and if I omit -some the object of this book will not be accomplished. Now, therefore, I -will mention only the names of individual Ṣúfís and leading -spiritualists who have lived in my time or are still alive, excluding -the formalists (_ahl-i rusúm_). - - - 1. SYRIA AND `IRÁQ. - -Shaykh Zakí b. al-`Alá was an eminent Shaykh. I found him to be like a -flash of love. He was endowed with wonderful signs and evidences. - -Shaykh Abú Ja`far Muḥammad b. al-Miṣbáḥ al-Ṣaydalání was one of the -principal aspirants to Ṣúfiism. He discoursed eloquently on theosophy -and had a great fondness for Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj), some of whose -works I have read to him. - -Shaykh Abu ´l-Qásim Suddí[103] was a director who mortified himself and -led an excellent spiritual life. He cared tenderly for dervishes and had -a goodly belief in them. - -Footnote 103: - - IJ. Sudsí, B. Sundusí. - - - 2. FÁRS. - -The Grand Shaykh, Abu ´l-Ḥasan b. Sáliba,[104] spoke with the utmost -elegance on Ṣúfiism and with extreme lucidity on Unification (_tawḥíd_). -His sayings are well known. - -The Shaykh and Director (_murshid_) Abú Isḥáq b. Shahriyár was one of -the most venerable Ṣúfís and had complete authority. - -Shaykh Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Bakrán was a great _mutaṣawwif_, and Shaykh -Abú Muslim was highly esteemed in his time. - -Shaykh Abu ´l-Fatḥ b. Sáliba is an excellent and hopeful successor to -his father. - -Shaykh Abú Ṭálib was a man enraptured by the words of the Truth. - -I have seen all these except the Grand Shaykh, Abú Isḥáq. - -Footnote 104: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 347, where he is called Abu ´l-Ḥusayn Sáliba. - - - 3.QUHISTÁN, ÁDHARBÁYAJÁN, ṬABARISTÁN, AND KISH.[105] - -Shaykh Faraj,[106] known as Akhí Zanjání, was a man of excellent -disposition and admirable doctrine. - -Shaykh Badr al-Dín is one of the great men of this sect, and his good -deeds are many. - -Pádsháh-i Tá´ib was profoundly versed in mysticism. - -Shaykh Abú `Abdalláh Junaydí was a revered director. - -Shaykh Abú Ṭáhir Makshúf was one of the eminent of that time. - -Khwája Ḥusayn Simnán is an enraptured and hopeful man. - -Shaykh Sahlagí was one of the principal Ṣúfí paupers (_ṣa`álík_). - -Aḥmad, son of Shaykh Khurqání, was an excellent successor to his father. - -Adíb Kumandí was one of the chief men of the time. - -Footnote 105: - - B. Kumish. - -Footnote 106: - - The texts have فرح[**Arabic] or فرخ[**Arabic], but see _Nafaḥát_, No. - 171. - - - 4. KIRMÁN. - -Khwája `Alí b. al-Ḥusayn al-Sírgání was the wandering devotee (_sayyáḥ_) -of his age and made excellent journeys. His son, Ḥakím, is held in -honour. - -Shaykh Muḥammad b. Salama was among the eminent of the time. Before him -there have been hidden saints of God, and hopeful youths and striplings -are still to be found. - - - 5. KHURÁSÁN (where now is the shadow of God’s favour). - -The Shaykh and Mujtahid Abu ´l-`Abbás was the heart of spiritualism -(_sirr-i ma`ání_) and had a goodly life. - -Khwája Abú Ja`far Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Ḥawárí is one of the eminent -theosophists of this sect. - -Khwája Abú Ja`far Turshízí was highly esteemed. - -Khwája Maḥmúd of Níshápúr was regarded as an authority by his -contemporaries. He was eloquent in discourse. - -Shaykh Muḥammad Ma`shúq had an excellent spiritual state and was aglow -with love. - -Khwája Rashíd Muẕaffar, the son of Abú Sa`íd, will, it may be hoped, -become an example to all Ṣúfís and a point to which their hearts will -turn. - -Khwája Shaykh Aḥmad Ḥammádí of Sarakhs was the champion of the time. He -was in my company for a while, and I witnessed many wondrous experiences -that he had. - -Shaykh Aḥmad Najjár Samarqandí, who resided at Merv, was the sultan of -his age. - -Shaykh Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Abí `Alí al-Aswad was an excellent successor -to his father, and was unique in the sublimity of his aspiration and the -sagacity of his intelligence. - -It would be difficult to mention all the Shaykhs of Khurásán. I have met -three hundred in that province alone who had such mystical endowments -that a single man of them would have been enough for the whole world. -This is due to the fact that the sun of love and the fortune of the Ṣúfí -Path is in the ascendant in Khurásán. - - - 6. TRANSOXIANA. - -The Khwája and Imám, honoured by high and low, Abú Ja`far Muḥammad b. -al-Ḥusayn[107] al-Ḥaramí, is an ecstatic (_mustami`_) and enraptured -man, who has a great affection towards the seekers of God. - -Khwája Abú Muḥammad Bángharí[108] had an excellent spiritual life, and -there was no weakness in his devotional practices. - -Aḥmad Íláqí was the Shaykh of his time. He renounced forms and habits. - -Khwája `Árif was unparalleled in his day. - -`Alí b. Isḥáq was venerated and had an eloquent tongue. - -I have seen all these Shaykhs and ascertained the “station” of each of -them. They were all profound theosophists. - -Footnote 107: - - IJ. Al-Ḥasan. - -Footnote 108: - - This _nisba_ is variously written “Bángharí” and “Báyghazí”. - - 7.GHAZNA. - -Abu ´l-Faḍl b. al-Asadí was a venerable director, with brilliant -evidences and manifest miracles. He was like a flash of the fire of -love. His spiritual life was based on concealment (_talbís_). - -Ismá`íl al-Sháshí was a highly esteemed director. He followed the path -of “blame” (_malámat_). - -Shaykh Sálár-i Ṭabarí was one of the Ṣúfí divines and had an excellent -state. - -Shaykh Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. al-Ḥakím, known as Muríd, was a -God-intoxicated man, and was not rivalled by any contemporary in his own -line. His state was hidden from the vulgar, but his signs and evidences -were conspicuous, and his state was better in companionship (_ṣuḥbat_) -than in casual meeting (_dídár_). - -Shaykh Sa`íd b. Abí Sa`íd al-`Ayyár was a recorder (_ḥáfiẕ_) of -Apostolic Traditions. He had seen many Shaykhs and was a man of powerful -spirituality and great knowledge, but he took the way of concealment and -did not exhibit his true character. - -Khwája Abu ´l-`Alá `Abd al-Raḥím b. Aḥmad al-Sughdí is honoured by all -Ṣúfís, and my heart is well-disposed towards him. His spiritual state is -excellent, and he is acquainted with various branches of science. - -Shaykh Awḥad Qaswarat b. Muḥammad al-Jardízí has a boundless affection -for Ṣúfís and holds every one of them in reverence. He has seen many -Shaykhs. - -In consequence of the firm convictions of the people and divines of -Ghazna, I have good hope that hereafter persons will appear in whom we -shall believe, and that those wretches (_parágandagán_) who have found -their way into this city and have made the externals of Ṣúfiism -abominable will be cleared out, so that Ghazna will once more become the -abode of saints and venerable men. - - - - - CHAPTER XIV. - CONCERNING THE DOCTRINES HELD BY THE DIFFERENT SECTS OF ṢÚFÍS. - - -I have already stated, in the notice of Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí, that the -Ṣúfís are divided into twelve sects, of which two are reprobated and ten -are approved. Every one of these ten sects has an excellent system and -doctrine as regards both purgation (_mujáhadat_) and contemplation -(_musháhadat_). Although they differ from each other in their devotional -practices and ascetic disciplines, they agree in the fundamentals and -derivatives of the religious law and Unification. Abú Yazíd said: “The -disagreement of divines is a mercy except as regards the detachment -(_tajríd_)[109] of Unification”; and there is a famous tradition to the -same effect. The real essence of Ṣúfiism lies amidst the traditions -(_akhbár_) of the Shaykhs, and is divided only metaphorically and -formally. Therefore I will briefly divide their sayings in explanation -of Ṣúfiism and unfold the main principle on which the doctrine of each -one of them is based, in order that the student may readily understand -this matter. - -Footnote 109: - - i.e. the detachment of all phenomenal attributes from the Unity of - God. - - - 1.THE MUḤÁSIBÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú `Abdalláh Ḥárith b. Asad al-Muḥásibí, who -by consent of all his contemporaries was a man of approved spiritual -influence and mortified passions (_maqbúl al-nafas ú maqtúl al-nafs_), -versed in theology, jurisprudence, and mysticism. He discoursed on -detachment from the world and Unification, while his outward and inward -dealings (with God) were beyond reproach. The peculiarity of his -doctrine is this, that he does not reckon satisfaction (_riḍá_) among -the “stations” (_maqámát_), but includes it in the “states” (_aḥwál_). -He was the first to hold this view, which was adopted by the people of -Khurásán. The people of `Iráq, on the contrary, asserted that -satisfaction is one of the “stations”, and that it is the extreme of -trust in God (_tawakkul_). The controversy between them has gone on to -the present day.[110] - - _Discourse on the true nature of Satisfaction and the explanation of - this doctrine._ - -In the first place I will establish the true nature of satisfaction and -set forth its various kinds; then, secondly, I will explain the real -meaning of “station” (_maqám_) and “state” (_ḥál_) and the difference -between them. - -Satisfaction is of two kinds: (_a_) the satisfaction of God with Man, -and (_b_) the satisfaction of Man with God. Divine satisfaction really -consists in God’s willing that Man should be recompensed (for his good -works) and in His bestowing grace (_karámat_) upon him. Human -satisfaction really consists in Man’s performing the command of God and -submitting to His decree. Accordingly, the satisfaction of God precedes -that of Man, for until Man is divinely aided he does not submit to God’s -decree and does not perform His command, because Man’s satisfaction is -connected with God’s satisfaction and subsists thereby. In short, human -satisfaction is equanimity (_istiwá-yi dil_) towards Fate, whether it -withholds or bestows, and spiritual steadfastness (_istiqámat_) in -regarding events, whether they be the manifestation of Divine Beauty -(_jamál_) or of Divine Majesty (_jalál_), so that it is all one to a man -whether he is consumed in the fire of wrath or illuminated by the light -of mercy, because both wrath and mercy are evidences of God, and -whatever proceeds from God is good in His eyes. The Commander of the -Faithful, Husayn b. `Alí, was asked about the saying of Abú Dharr -Ghifárí: “I love poverty better than riches, and sickness better than -health.” Ḥusayn replied: “God have mercy on Abú Dharr! but I say that -whoever surveys the excellent choice made by God for him does not desire -anything except what God has chosen for him.” When a man sees God’s -choice and abandons his own choice, he is delivered from all sorrow. -This, however, does not hold good in absence from God (_ghaybat_); it -requires presence with God (_ḥuḍúr_), because “satisfaction expels -sorrows and cures heedlessness”, and purges the heart of thoughts -relating to other than God and frees it from the bonds of tribulation; -for it is characteristic of satisfaction to deliver (_rahánídan_). - -Footnote 110: - - According to Qushayrí (105, 21 ff.) the `Iráqís held the doctrine - which is here ascribed to the Khurásánís, and _vice versâ_. - -From the standpoint of ethics, satisfaction is the acquiescence of one -who knows that giving and withholding are in God’s knowledge, and firmly -believes that God sees him in all circumstances. There are four classes -of quietists: (1) those who are satisfied with God’s gift (_`aṭá_), -which is gnosis (_ma`rifat_); (2) those who are satisfied with happiness -(_nu`má_), which is this world; (3) those who are satisfied with -affliction (_balá_), which consists of diverse probations; and (4) those -who are satisfied with being chosen (_iṣṭifá_), which is love -(_maḥabbat_). He who looks away from the Giver to the gift accepts it -with his soul, and when he has so accepted it trouble and grief vanish -from his heart. He who looks away from the gift to the Giver loses the -gift and treads the path of satisfaction by his own effort. Now effort -is painful and grievous, and gnosis is only realized when its true -nature is divinely revealed; and inasmuch as gnosis, when sought by -effort, is a shackle and a veil, such gnosis is non-cognition -(_nakirat_). Again, he who is satisfied with this world, without God, is -involved in destruction and perdition, because the whole world is not -worth so much that a friend of God should set his heart on it or that -any care for it should enter his mind. Happiness is happiness only when -it leads to the Giver of happiness; otherwise, it is an affliction. -Again, he who is satisfied with the affliction that God sends is -satisfied because in the affliction he sees the Author thereof and can -endure its pain by contemplating Him who sent it; nay, he does not -account it painful, such is his joy in contemplating his Beloved. -Finally, those who are satisfied with being chosen by God are His -lovers, whose existence is an illusion alike in His anger and His -satisfaction; whose hearts dwell in the presence of Purity and in the -garden of Intimacy; who have no thought of created things and have -escaped from the bonds of “stations” and “states” and have devoted -themselves to the love of God. Their satisfaction involves no loss, for -satisfaction with God is a manifest kingdom. - - - SECTION. - -It is related in the Traditions that Moses said: “O God, show me an -action with which, if I did it, Thou wouldst be satisfied.” God -answered: “Thou canst not do that, O Moses!” Then Moses fell prostrate, -worshipping God and supplicating Him, and God made a revelation to him, -saying: “O son of `Imrán, My satisfaction with thee consists in thy -being satisfied with My decree,” i.e. when a man is satisfied with God’s -decrees it is a sign that God is satisfied with him. - -Bishr Ḥáfí asked Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ whether renunciation (_zuhd_) or -satisfaction was better. Fuḍayl replied: “Satisfaction, because he who -is satisfied does not desire any higher stage,” i.e. there is above -renunciation a stage which the renouncer desires, but there is no stage -above satisfaction that the satisfied man should wish for it. Hence the -shrine is superior to the gate. This story shows the correctness of -Muḥásibí’s doctrine, that satisfaction belongs to the class of “states” -and Divine gifts, not to the stages that are acquired (by effort). It is -possible, however, that the satisfied man should have a desire. The -Apostle used to say in his prayers: “O God, I ask of Thee satisfaction -after the going forth of Thy ordinance (_al-riḍá ba`d al-qaḍá_),” i.e. -“keep me in such a condition that when the ordinance comes to me from -Thee, Destiny may find me satisfied with its coming”. Here it is -affirmed that satisfaction properly is posterior to the advent of -Destiny, because, if it preceded, it would only be a resolution to be -satisfied, which is not the same thing as actual satisfaction. Abu -´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá says: “Satisfaction is this, that the heart should -consider the eternal choice of God on behalf of His creature,” i.e. -whatever befalls him, he should recognize it as the eternal will of God -and His past decree, and should not be distressed, but should accept it -cheerfully. Ḥárith Muḥásibí, the author of the doctrine, says: -“Satisfaction is the quiescence (_sukún_) of the heart under the events -which flow from the Divine decrees.” This is sound doctrine, because the -quiescence and tranquillity of the heart are not qualities acquired by -Man, but are Divine gifts. And as an argument for the view that -satisfaction is a “state”, not a “station”, they cite the story of `Utba -al-Ghulám, who one night did not sleep, but kept saying: “If Thou -chastise me I love Thee, and if Thou have mercy on me I love Thee,” i.e. -“the pain of Thy chastisement and the pleasure of Thy bounty affect the -body alone, whereas the agitation of love resides in the heart, which is -not injured thereby”. This corroborates the view of Muḥásibí. -Satisfaction is the result of love, inasmuch as the lover is satisfied -with what is done by the Beloved. Abú `Uthmán Ḥírí says: “During the -last forty years God has never put me in any state that I disliked, or -transferred me to another state that I resented.” This indicates -continual satisfaction and perfect love. The story of the dervish who -fell into the Tigris is well known. Seeing that he could not swim, a man -on the bank cried out to him: “Shall I tell some one to bring you -ashore?” The dervish said, “No.” “Then do you wish to be drowned?” “No.” -“What, then, do you wish?” The dervish replied: “That which God wishes. -What have I to do with wishing?” - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs have uttered many sayings on satisfaction, which differ -in phraseology but agree in the two principles that have been mentioned. - - _The distinction between a “State”_ (ḥál) _and a “Station”_ (maqám). - -You must know that both these terms are in common use among Ṣúfís, and -it is necessary that the student should be acquainted with them. I must -discuss this matter here, although it does not belong to the present -chapter. - -“Station” (_maqám_) denotes anyone’s “standing” in the Way of God, and -his fulfilment of the obligations appertaining to that “station” and his -keeping it until he comprehends its perfection so far as lies in a man’s -power. It is not permissible that he should quit his “station” without -fulfilling the obligations thereof. Thus, the first “station” is -repentance (_tawbat_), then comes conversion (_inábat_), then -renunciation (_zuhd_), then trust in God (_tawakkul_), and so on: it is -not permissible that anyone should pretend to conversion without -repentance, or to renunciation without conversion, or to trust in God -without renunciation. - -“State” (_ḥál_), on the other hand, is something that descends from God -into a man’s heart, without his being able to repel it when it comes, or -to attract it when it goes, by his own effort. Accordingly, while the -term “station” denotes the way of the seeker, and his progress in the -field of exertion, and his rank before God in proportion to his merit, -the term “state” denotes the favour and grace which God bestows upon the -heart of His servant, and which are not connected with any mortification -on the latter’s part. “Station” belongs to the category of acts, “state” -to the category of gifts. Hence the man that has a “station” stands by -his own self-mortification, whereas the man that has a “state” is dead -to “self” and stands by a “state” which God creates in him. - -Here the Shaykhs are at variance. Some hold that a “state” may be -permanent, while others reject this view. Ḥárith Muḥásibí maintained -that a “state” may be permanent. He argued that love and longing and -“contraction” (_qabḍ_) and “expansion” (_basṭ_) are “states”: if they -cannot be permanent, then the lover would not be a lover, and until a -man’s “state” becomes his attribute (_ṣifat_) the name of that “state” -is not properly applied to him. It is for this reason that he holds -satisfaction to be one of the “states”, and the same view is indicated -by the saying of Abú `Uthmán: “During the last forty years God has never -put me in a ‘state’ that I disliked.” Other Shaykhs deny that a “state” -can be permanent. Junayd says: “‘States’ are like flashes of lightning: -their permanence is merely a suggestion of the lower soul (_nafs_).” -Some have said, to the same effect: “‘States’ are like their name,” i.e. -they vanish almost as soon as they descend (_taḥillu_) on the heart. -Whatever is permanent becomes an attribute, and attributes subsist in an -object which must be more perfect than the attributes themselves; and -this reduces the doctrine that “states” are permanent to an absurdity. I -have set forth the distinction between “state” and “station” in order -that you may know what is signified by these terms wherever they occur -in the phraseology of the Ṣúfís or in the present work. - -In conclusion, you must know that satisfaction is the end of the -“stations” and the beginning of the “states”: it is a place of which one -side rests on acquisition and effort, and the other side on love and -rapture: there is no “station” above it: at this point mortifications -(_mujáhadát_) cease. Hence its beginning is in the class of things -acquired by effort, its end in the class of things divinely bestowed. -Therefore it may be called either a “station” or a “state”. - -This is the doctrine of Muḥásibí as regards the theory of Ṣúfiism. In -practice, however, he made no difference, except that he used to warn -his pupils against expressions and acts which, though sound in -principle, might be thought evil. For example, he had a “king-bird” -(_sháhmurghí_), which used to utter a loud note. One day Abú Ḥamza of -Baghdád, who was Ḥárith’s pupil and an ecstatic man, came to see him. -The bird piped, and Abú Ḥamza gave a shriek. Ḥárith rose up and seized a -knife, crying, “Thou art an infidel,” and would have killed him if the -disciples had not separated them. Then he said to Abú Ḥamza: “Become a -Moslem, O miscreant!” The disciples exclaimed: “O Shaykh, we all know -him to be one of the elect saints and Unitarians: why does the Shaykh -regard him with suspicion?” Ḥárith replied: “I do not suspect him: his -opinions are excellent, and I know that he is a profound Unitarian, but -why should he do something which resembles the actions of those who -believe in incarnation (_ḥulúliyán_) and has the appearance of being -derived from their doctrine? If a senseless bird pipes after its -fashion, capriciously, why should he behave as though its note were the -voice of God? God is indivisible, and the Eternal does not become -incarnate, or united with phenomena or commingled with them.” When Abú -Ḥamza perceived the Shaykh’s insight, he said: “O Shaykh, although I am -right in theory, nevertheless, since my action resembled the actions of -heretics, I repent and withdraw.” - -May God keep my conduct above suspicion! But this is impossible when one -associates with worldly formalists whose enmity is aroused by anyone who -does not submit to their hypocrisy and sin. - - - 2. THE QAṢṢÁRÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú Ṣáliḥ Ḥamdún b. Aḥmad b. `Umára al-Qaṣṣár, -a celebrated divine and eminent Ṣúfí. His doctrine was the manifestation -and divulgation of “blame” (_malámat_). He used to say: “God’s knowledge -of thee is better than men’s knowledge,” i.e. thy dealings with God in -private should be better than thy dealings with men in public, for thy -preoccupation with men is the greatest veil between thee and God. I have -given some account of al-Qaṣṣár in the chapter on “Blame”. He relates -the following story: “One day, while I was walking in the river-bed in -the Ḥíra quarter of Níshápúr, I met Núḥ, a brigand famous for his -generosity, who was the captain of all the brigands of Níshápúr. I said -to him, ‘O Núḥ, what is generosity?’ He replied, ‘My generosity or -yours?’ I said, ‘Describe both.’ He replied: ‘I put off the coat -(_qabá_) and wear a patched frock and practise the conduct appropriate -to that garment, in order that I may become a Ṣúfí and refrain from sin -because of the shame that I feel before God; but you put off the patched -frock in order that you may not be deceived by men, and that men may not -be deceived by thee: accordingly, my generosity is formal observance of -the religious law, while your generosity is spiritual observance of the -Truth.’” This is a very sound principle. - - - 3. THE ṬAYFÚRÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú Yazíd Ṭayfúr b. Ísá b. Surúshán -al-Bisṭámí, a great and eminent Ṣúfí. His doctrine is rapture -(_ghalabat_) and intoxication (_sukr_). Rapturous longing for God and -intoxication of love cannot be acquired by human beings, and it is idle -to claim, and absurd to imitate, anything that lies beyond the range of -acquisition. Intoxication is not an attribute of the sober, and Man has -no power of drawing it to himself. The intoxicated man is enraptured and -pays no heed to created things, that he should manifest any quality -involving conscious effort (_taklif_). The Ṣúfí Shaykhs are agreed that -no one is a proper model for others unless he is steadfast (_mustaqím_) -and has escaped from the circle of “states”; but there are some who -allow that the way of rapture and intoxication may be trodden with -effort, because the Apostle said: “Weep, or else make as though ye -wept!” Now, to imitate others for the sake of ostentation is sheer -polytheism, but it is different when the object of the imitator is that -God may perchance raise him to the rank of those whom he has imitated, -in accordance with the saying of the Apostle: “Whoever makes himself -like unto a people is one of them.” And one of the Shaykhs said: -“Contemplations (_musháhadát_) are the result of mortifications -(_mujáhadát_).” My own view is that, although mortifications are always -excellent, intoxication and rapture cannot be acquired at all; hence -they cannot be induced by mortifications, which in themselves never -become a cause of intoxication. I will now set forth the different -opinions of the Shaykhs concerning the true nature of intoxication -(_sukr_) and sobriety (_ṣaḥw_), in order that difficulties may be -removed. - - _Discourse on Intoxication and Sobriety._ - -You must know that “intoxication” and “rapture” are terms used by -spiritualists to denote the rapture of love for God, while the term -“sobriety” expresses the attainment of that which is desired. Some place -the former above the latter, and some hold the latter to be superior. -Abú Yazíd and his followers prefer intoxication to sobriety. They say -that sobriety involves the fixity and equilibrium of human attributes, -which are the greatest veil between God and Man, whereas intoxication -involves the destruction of human attributes, like foresight and choice, -and the annihilation of a man’s self-control in God, so that only those -faculties survive in him that do not belong to the human _genus_; and -they are the most complete and perfect. Thus David was in the state of -sobriety; an act proceeded from him which God attributed to him and -said, “_David killed Goliath_” (Kor. ii, 252): but our Apostle was in -the state of intoxication; an act proceeded from him which God -attributed to Himself and said, “_Thou didst not throw, when thou -threwest, but God threw_” (Kor. viii, 17). How great is the difference -between these two men! The attribution of a man’s act to God is better -than the attribution of God’s act to a man, for in the latter case the -man stands by himself, while in the former case he stands through God. - -Junayd and his followers prefer sobriety to intoxication. They say that -intoxication is evil, because it involves the disturbance of one’s -normal state and loss of sanity and self-control; and inasmuch as the -principle of all things is sought either by way of annihilation or -subsistence, or of effacement or affirmation, the principle of -verification cannot be attained unless the seeker is sane. Blindness -will never release anyone from the bondage and corruption of phenomena. -The fact that people remain in phenomena and forget God is due to their -not seeing things as they really are; for if they saw, they would -escape. Seeing is of two kinds: he who looks at anything sees it either -with the eye of subsistence (_baqá_) or with the eye of annihilation -(_faná_). If with the eye of subsistence, he perceives that the whole -universe is imperfect in comparison with his own subsistence, for he -does not regard phenomena as self-subsistent; and if he looks with the -eye of annihilation, he perceives that all created things are -non-existent beside the subsistence of God. In either case he turns away -from created things. On this account the Apostle said in his prayer: “O -God, show us things as they are,” because whoever thus sees them finds -rest. Now, such vision cannot be properly attained except in the state -of sobriety, and the intoxicated have no knowledge thereof. For example, -Moses was intoxicated; he could not endure the manifestation of one -epiphany, but fell in a swoon (Kor. vii, 139): but our Apostle was -sober; he beheld the same glory continuously, with ever-increasing -consciousness, all the way from Mecca, until he stood at the space of -two bow-lengths from the Divine presence (Kor. liii, 9). - -My Shaykh, who followed the doctrine of Junayd, used to say that -intoxication is the playground of children, but sobriety is the -death-field of men. I say, in agreement with my Shaykh, that the -perfection of the state of the intoxicated man is sobriety. The lowest -stage in sobriety consists in regarding the powerlessness of humanity: -therefore, a sobriety that appears to be evil is better than an -intoxication that is really evil. It is related that Abú `Uthmán -Maghribí, in the earlier part of his life, passed twenty years in -retirement, living in deserts where he never heard the sound of a human -voice, until his frame was wasted and his eyes became as small as the -eye of a sack-needle. After twenty years he was commanded to associate -with mankind. He resolved to begin with the people of God who dwelt -beside His Temple, since by doing so he would gain a greater blessing. -The Shaykhs of Mecca were aware of his coming and went forth to meet -him. Finding him so changed that he hardly seemed to be a human -creature, they said to him: “O Abú `Uthmán, tell us why you went and -what you saw and what you gained and wherefore you have come back.” He -replied: “I went because of intoxication, and I saw the evil of -intoxication, and I gained despair, and I have come back on account of -weakness.” All the Shaykhs said: “O Abú `Uthmán, it is not lawful for -anyone after you to explain the meaning of sobriety and intoxication, -for you have done justice to the whole matter and have shown forth the -evil of intoxication.” - -Intoxication, then, is to fancy one’s self annihilated while the -attributes really subsist; and this is a veil. Sobriety, on the other -hand, is the vision of subsistence while the attributes are annihilated; -and this is actual revelation. It is absurd for anyone to suppose that -intoxication is nearer to annihilation than sobriety is, for -intoxication is a quality that exceeds sobriety, and so long as a man’s -attributes tend to increase he is without knowledge; but when he begins -to diminish them, seekers (of God) have some hope of him. - -It is related that Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh wrote to Abú Yazíd: “What do you say -of one who drinks a single drop of the ocean of love and becomes -intoxicated?” Báyazíd wrote in reply: “What do you say of one who, if -all the oceans in the world were filled with the wine of love, would -drink them all and still cry for more to slake his thirst?” People -imagine that Yahyá was speaking of intoxication, and Báyazíd of -sobriety, but the opposite is the case. The man of sobriety is he who is -unable to drink even one drop, and the man of intoxication is he who -drinks all and still desires more. Wine being the instrument of -intoxication, but the enemy of sobriety, intoxication demands what is -homogeneous with itself, whereas sobriety takes no pleasure in drinking. - -There are two kinds of intoxication: (1) with the wine of affection -(_mawaddat_) and (2) with the cup of love (_maḥabbat_). The former is -“caused” (_ma`lúl_), since it arises from regarding the benefit -(_ni`mat_); but the latter has no cause, since it arises from regarding -the benefactor (_mun`im_). He who regards the benefit sees through -himself and therefore sees himself, but he who regards the benefactor -sees through Him and therefore does not see himself, so that, although -he is intoxicated, his intoxication is sobriety. - -Sobriety also is of two kinds: sobriety in heedlessness (_ghaflat_) and -sobriety in love (_maḥabbat_). The former is the greatest of veils, but -the latter is the clearest of revelations. The sobriety that is -connected with heedlessness is really intoxication, while that which is -linked with love, although it be intoxication, is really sobriety. When -the principle (_aṣl_) is firmly established, sobriety and intoxication -resemble one another, but when the principle is wanting, both are -baseless. In short, where true mystics tread, sobriety and intoxication -are the effect of difference (_ikhtiláf_), and when the Sultan of Truth -displays his beauty, both sobriety and intoxication appear to be -intruders (_ṭufaylí_), because the boundaries of both are joined, and -the end of the one is the beginning of the other, and beginning and end -are terms that imply separation, which has only a relative existence. In -union all separations are negated, as the poet says— - - “_When the morning-star of wine rises, - The drunken and the sober are as one._” - -At Sarakhs there were two spiritual directors, namely, Luqmán and Abu -´l-Faḍl Ḥasan. One day Luqmán came to Abu ´l-Faḍl and found him with a -piece (of manuscript) in his hand. He said: “O Abu ´l-Faḍl, what are you -seeking in this paper?” Abu ´l-Faḍl replied: “The same thing as you are -seeking without a paper.” Luqmán said: “Then why this difference?” Abu -´l-Faḍl answered: “You see a difference when you ask me what I am -seeking. Become sober from intoxication and get rid of sobriety, in -order that the difference may be removed from you and that you may know -what you and I are in search of.” - -The Ṭayfúrís and Junaydís are at variance to the extent which has been -indicated. As regards ethics, the doctrine of Báyazíd consists in -shunning companionship and choosing retirement from the world, and he -enjoined all his disciples to do the same. This is a praiseworthy and -laudable Path. - - - 4. THE JUNAYDÍS. - -They are the followers of Abu ´l-Qásim al-Junayd b. Muḥammad, who in his -time was called the Peacock of the Divines (_Ṭá´ús al-`Ulamá_). He is -the chief of this sect and the Imám of their Imáms. His doctrine is -based on sobriety and is opposed to that of the Ṭayfúrís, as has been -explained. It is the best known and most celebrated of all doctrines, -and all the Shaykhs have adopted it, notwithstanding that there is much -difference in their sayings on the ethics of Ṣúfiism. Want of space -forbids me to discuss it further in this book: those who wish to become -better acquainted with it must seek information elsewhere. - -I have read in the Anecdotes that when Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) in -his rapture broke off all relations with `Amr b. `Uthmán (al-Makkí) and -came to Junayd, Junayd asked him for what purpose he had come to him. -Ḥusayn said: “For the purpose of associating with the Shaykh.” Junayd -replied: “I do not associate with madmen. Association demands sanity; if -that is wanting, the result is such behaviour as yours in regard to Sahl -b. `Abdalláh Tustarí and `Amr.” Ḥusayn said: “O Shaykh, sobriety and -intoxication are two attributes of Man, and Man is veiled from his Lord -until his attributes are annihilated.” “O son of Manṣúr,” said Junayd, -“you are in error concerning sobriety and intoxication. The former -denotes soundness of one’s spiritual state in relation to God, while the -latter denotes excess of longing and extremity of love, and neither of -them can be acquired by human effort. O son of Manṣúr, in your words I -see much foolishness and nonsense.” - - - 5. THE NÚRÍS. - -They are the followers of Abu ´l-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. Muḥammad Núrí, one of -the most eminent and illustrious Ṣúfí divines. The principle of his -doctrine is to regard Ṣúfiism (_taṣawwuf_) as superior to poverty -(_faqr_). In matters of conduct he agrees with Junayd. It is a -peculiarity of his “path” that in companionship (_ṣuḥbat_) he prefers -his companion’s claim to his own, and holds companionship without -preference (_íthár_) to be unlawful. He also holds that companionship is -obligatory on dervishes, and that retirement (_`uzlat_) is not -praiseworthy, and that everyone is bound to prefer his companion to -himself. It is related that he said: “Beware of retirement! for it is in -connexion with Satan; and cleave to companionship, for therein is the -satisfaction of the Merciful God.” - -Now I will explain the true nature of preference, and when I come to the -chapter on companionship and retirement I will set forth the mysteries -of the subject in order to make it more generally instructive. - - _Discourse on Preference_ (íthár). - -God said: “_And they prefer them to themselves, although they are -indigent_” (Kor. lix, 9). This verse was revealed concerning the poor -men among the Companions in particular. The true nature of preference -consists in maintaining the rights of the person with whom one -associates, and in subordinating one’s own interest to the interest of -one’s friend, and in taking trouble upon one’s self for the sake of -promoting his happiness, because preference is the rendering of help to -others, and the putting into practice of that which God commanded to His -Apostle: “_Use indulgence and command what is just and turn away from -the ignorant_” (Kor. vii, 198). This will be explained more fully in the -chapter on the rules of companionship. - -Now, preference is of two kinds: firstly, in companionship, as has been -mentioned; and secondly, in love. In preferring the claim of one’s -companion there is a sort of trouble and effort, but in preferring the -claim of one’s beloved there is nothing but pleasure and delight. It is -well known that when Ghulám al-Khalíl persecuted the Ṣúfís, Núrí and -Raqqám and Abú Ḥamza were arrested and conveyed to the Caliph’s palace. -Ghulám al-Khalíl urged the Caliph to put them to death, saying that they -were heretics (_zanádiqa_), and the Caliph immediately gave orders for -their execution. When the executioner approached Raqqám, Núrí rose and -offered himself in Raqqám’s place with the utmost cheerfulness and -submission. All the spectators were astounded. The executioner said: “O -young man, the sword is not a thing that people desire to meet so -eagerly as you have welcomed it; and your turn has not yet arrived.” -Núrí answered: “Yes; my doctrine is founded on preference. Life is the -most precious thing in the world: I wish to sacrifice for my brethren’s -sake the few moments that remain. In my opinion, one moment of this -world is better than a thousand years of the next world, because this is -the place of service (_khidmat_) and that is the place of proximity -(_qurbat_), and proximity is gained by service.” The tenderness of Núrí -and the fineness of his saying astonished the Caliph (who was informed -by a courier of what had passed) to such a degree, that he suspended the -execution of the three Ṣúfís and charged the chief Cadi, Abu ´l-`Abbás -b. `Alí, to inquire into the matter. The Cadi, having taken them to his -house and questioned them concerning the ordinances of the Law and the -Truth, found them perfect, and felt remorse for his indifference to -their fate. Then Núrí said: “O Cadi, though you have asked all these -questions, you have not yet asked anything to the point, for God has -servants who eat through Him, and drink through Him, and sit through -Him, and live through Him, and abide in contemplation of Him: if they -were cut off from contemplating Him they would cry out in anguish.” The -Cadi was amazed at the subtlety of his speech and the soundness of his -state. He wrote to the Caliph: “If the Ṣúfís are heretics, who in the -world is a Unitarian?” The Caliph called them to his presence and said: -“Ask a boon.” They replied: “The only boon we ask of thee is that thou -shouldst forget us, and neither make us thy favourites nor banish us -from thy court, for thy favour and displeasure are alike to us.” The -Caliph wept and dismissed them with honour. - -It is related that Náfi`[111] said: “Ibn `Umar[112] desired to eat a -fish. I sought through the town, but did not find one until several days -had passed. Having procured it, I gave orders that it should be placed -on a cake of bread and presented it to him. I noticed an expression of -joy on his face as he received it, but suddenly a beggar came to the -door of his house and he ordered the fish to be given to him. The -servant said: ‘O master, you have been desiring a fish for several days; -let us give the beggar something else.’ Ibn `Umar replied: ‘This fish is -unlawful to me, for I have put it out of my mind on account of a -Tradition which I heard from the Apostle: _Whenever anyone feels a -desire and repels it and prefers another to himself, he shall be -forgiven_.’“ - -Footnote 111: - - A well-known traditionist, who died about 120 A.H. - -Footnote 112: - - `Abdalláh, son of the Caliph `Umar. - -I have read in the Anecdotes that ten dervishes lost their way in the -desert and were overtaken by thirst. They had only one cup of water, and -everyone preferred the claim of the others, so that none of them would -drink and they all died except one, who then drank it and found strength -to escape. Some person said to him: “Had you not drunk, it would have -been better.” He replied: “The Law obliged me to drink; if I had not, I -should have killed myself and been punished on that account.” The other -said: “Then did your friends kill themselves?” “No,” said the dervish; -“they refused to drink in order that their companions might drink, but -when I alone survived I was legally obliged to drink.”[113] - -Footnote 113: - - Here follow two stories illustrating the same topic: the first relates - how `Alí slept in the Prophet’s bed on the night of the latter’s - emigration from Mecca, when the infidels were seeking to slay him; the - second, how on the battle-field of Uḥud the wounded Moslems, though - parched with thirst, preferred to die rather than drink the water - which their comrades asked for. - -Among the Israelites there was a devotee who had served God for four -hundred years. One day he said: “O Lord, if Thou hadst not created these -mountains, wandering for religion’s sake (_siyáḥat_) would have been -easier for Thy servants.” The Divine command came to the Apostle of that -time to say to the devotee: “What business have you to interfere in My -kingdom? Now, since you have interfered, I blot your name from the -register of the blest and inscribe it in the register of the damned.” On -hearing this, the devotee trembled with joy and bowed to the ground in -thanksgiving. The Apostle said: “O fool, it is not necessary to bow down -in thanksgiving for damnation.” “My thanksgiving,” the devotee replied: -“is not for damnation, but because my name is at least inscribed in one -of His registers. But, O Apostle, I have a boon to ask. Say unto God, -‘Since Thou wilt send me to Hell, make me so large that I may take the -place of all sinful Unitarians, and let them go to Paradise.’” God -commanded the Apostle to tell the devotee that the probation which he -had undergone was not for the purpose of humiliating him, but to reveal -him to the people, and that on the Day of Resurrection both he and those -for whom he had interceded would be in Paradise. - -I asked Aḥmad Ḥammádí of Sarakhs what was the beginning of his -conversion. He replied: “Once I set out from Sarakhs and took my camels -into the desert and stayed there for a considerable time. I was always -wishing to be hungry and was giving my portion of food to others, and -the words of God—‘_They_ _prefer them to themselves, although they -are_ _indigent_’ (Kor. lix, 9)—were ever fresh in my mind; and I -had a firm belief in the Ṣúfís. One day a hungry lion came from the -desert and killed one of my camels and retired to some rising ground and -roared. All the wild beasts in the neighbourhood, hearing him roar, -gathered round him. He tore the camel to pieces and went back to the -higher ground without having eaten anything. The other beasts—foxes, -jackals, wolves, etc.—began to eat, and the lion waited until they had -gone away. Then he approached in order to eat a morsel, but seeing a -lame fox in the distance he withdrew once more until the new-comer had -eaten his fill. After that, he came and ate a morsel. As he departed he -spoke to me, who had been watching from afar, and said: ‘O Aḥmad, to -prefer others to one’s self in the matter of food is an act only worthy -of dogs: a _man_ sacrifices his life and his soul.’ When I saw this -evidence I renounced all worldly occupations, and that was the beginning -of my conversion.” - -Ja`far Khuldí says: “One day, when Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí was praying to God -in solitude I went to overhear him, for he was very eloquent. He was -saying, ‘O Lord, in Thy eternal knowledge and power and will Thou dost -punish the people of Hell, whom Thou hast created; and if it be Thy -inexorable will to make Hell full of mankind, Thou art able to fill that -Hell and all its limbos with me alone and to send them to Paradise.’ I -was amazed by his speech, but I dreamed that some one came to me and -said: ‘God bids thee tell Abu ´l-Ḥasan that he has been forgiven on -account of his compassion for God’s creatures and his reverence for -God.’” - -He was called Núrí because when he spoke in a dark room the whole room -was illuminated by the light (_núr_) of his spirituality. And by the -light of the Truth he used to read the inmost thoughts of his disciples, -so that Junayd said: “Abu ´l-Ḥasan is the spy on men’s hearts (_jásús -al-qulúb_).“ - -This is his peculiar doctrine. It is a sound principle, and one of great -importance in the eyes of those who have insight. Nothing is harder to a -man than spiritual sacrifice (_badhl-i rúḥ_) and to refrain from the -object of his love, and God hath made this sacrifice the key of all -good, as He said: ”_Ye shall never attain to righteousness until ye give -in alms of that which ye love_” (Kor. iii, 86). When a man’s spirit is -sacrificed, of what value are his wealth and his health and his frock -and his food? This is the foundation of Ṣúfiism. Some one came to Ruwaym -and asked him for direction. Ruwaym said: “O my son, the whole affair -consists in spiritual sacrifice. If you are able for this, it is well; -if not, do not occupy yourself with the futilities (_turrahát_) of the -Ṣúfís,” i.e. all except this is futile; and God said: “_Do not call dead -those who are slain in the way of God. Nay, they are living_” (Kor. ii, -149). Eternal life is gained by spiritual sacrifice and by renunciation -of self-interest in fulfilling God’s commandment and by obedience to His -friends. But from the standpoint of gnosis (_ma`rifat_) preference and -free choice are separation (_tafriqat_), and real preference consists in -union with God, for the true basis of self-interest is self-abandonment. -So long as the seeker’s progress is connected with acquisition (_kasb_) -it is pernicious, but when the attracting influence (_jadhb_) of the -Truth manifests its dominion all his actions are confounded, and he -loses all power of expression; nor can any name be applied to him or any -description be given of him or anything be imputed to him. On this -subject Shiblí says in verse— - - “_I am lost to myself and unconscious, - And my attributes are annihilated. - To-day I am lost to all things: - Naught remains but a forced expression._” - - - 6. THE SAHLÍS. - -They are the followers of Sahl b. `Abdalláh of Tustar, a great and -venerable Ṣúfí, who has been already mentioned. His doctrine inculcates -endeavour and self-mortification and ascetic training, and he used to -bring his disciples to perfection in self-mortification (_mujáhadat_). -It is related in a well-known anecdote that he said to one of his -disciples: “Strive to say continuously for one day, ‘O Allah! O Allah! O -Allah!’ and do the same next day and the day after that,” until he -became habituated to saying those words. Then he bade him repeat them at -night also, until they became so familiar that he uttered them even -during his sleep. Then he said: “Do not repeat them any more, but let -all your faculties be engrossed in remembering God.” The disciple did -this, until he became absorbed in the thought of God. One day, when he -was in his house, a piece of wood fell on his head and broke it. The -drops of blood which trickled to the ground bore the legend “Allah! -Allah! Allah!” - -The “path” of the Sahlís is to educate disciples by acts of -self-mortification, and austerities; that of the Ḥamdúnís[114] is to -serve and reverence dervishes; and that of the Junaydís is to keep watch -over one’s spiritual state (_muráqaba-i báṭin_). - -Footnote 114: - - The followers of Ḥamdún al-Qaṣṣár, who are generally called Qaṣṣárís. - -The object of all austerities and acts of self-mortification is -resistance to the lower soul (_nafs_), and until a man knows his lower -soul his austerities are of no use to him. Now, therefore, I will -explain the knowledge and true nature of the lower soul, and in the next -place I will lay down the doctrine concerning self-mortification and its -principles. - - _Discourse touching the true nature of the Lower Soul_ (nafs) _and the - meaning of Passion_ (hawá). - -You must know that _nafs_, etymologically, is the essence and reality of -anything, but in popular language it is used to denote many -contradictory meanings, e.g. “spirit”, “virility” (_muruwwat_), “body”, -and “blood”. The mystics of this sect, however, are agreed that it is -the source and principle of evil, but while some assert that it is a -substance (_`ayn_) located in the body, as the spirit (_rúḥ_) is, others -hold it to be an attribute of the body, as life is. But they all agree -that through it base qualities are manifested and that it is the -immediate cause of blameworthy actions. Such actions are of two kinds, -namely, sins (_ma`áṣí_) and base qualities (_akhláq-i daní_), like -pride, envy, avarice, anger, hatred, etc., which are not commendable in -law and reason. These qualities can be removed by discipline -(_riyáḍat_): e.g., sins are removed by repentance. Sins belong to the -class of external attributes, whereas the qualities above mentioned -belong to the class of internal attributes. Similarly, discipline is an -external act, and repentance is an internal attribute. A base quality -that appears _within_ is purged by excellent outward attributes, and one -that appears _without_ is purged by laudable inward attributes. Both the -lower soul and the spirit are subtle things (_laṭá´if_) existing in the -body, just as devils and angels and Paradise and Hell exist in the -universe; but the one is the seat of good, while the other is the seat -of evil. Hence, resistance to the lower soul is the chief of all acts of -devotion and the crown of all acts of self-mortification, and only -thereby can Man find the way to God, because submission to the lower -soul involves his destruction and resistance to it involves his -salvation.[115] - -Footnote 115: - - Here the author cites Kor. lxxix, 40, 41; ii, 81 (part of the verse); - xii, 53; and the Traditions: “When God wishes well unto His servant He - causes him to see the faults of his soul,” and “God said to David, ‘O - David, hate thy soul, for My love depends on thy hatred of it.’” - -Now, every attribute needs an object whereby it subsists, and knowledge -of that attribute, namely, the soul, is not attained save by knowledge -of the whole body, which knowledge in turn demands an explanation of the -qualities of human nature (_insániyyat_) and the mystery thereof, and is -incumbent upon all seekers of the Truth, because whoever is ignorant of -himself is yet more ignorant of other things; and inasmuch as a man is -bound to know God, he must first know himself, in order that by rightly -perceiving his own temporality he may recognize the eternity of God, and -may learn the everlastingness of God through his own perishableness. The -Apostle said: “He who knows himself already knows his Lord,” i.e., if he -knows himself as perishable he knows God as everlasting, or if he knows -himself as humble he knows God as Almighty, or if he knows himself as a -servant he knows God as the Lord. Therefore one who does not know -himself is debarred from knowledge of all things. - -As regards the knowledge of human nature and the various opinions held -on that topic, some Moslems assert that Man is nothing but spirit -(_rúḥ_), of which this body is the cuirass and temple and residence, in -order to preserve it from being injured by the natural humours -(_ṭabáyi`_), and of which the attributes are sensation and intelligence. -This view is false, because a body from which the soul (_ján_) has -departed is still called “a human being” (_insán_); if the soul is -joined with it it is “a live human being”, and if the soul is gone it is -“a dead human being”. Moreover, a soul is located in the bodies of -animals, yet they are not called “human beings”. If the spirit (_rúḥ_) -were the cause of human nature, it would follow that the principle of -human nature must exist in every creature possessed of a soul -(_ján-dárí_); which is a proof of the falsity of their assertion. -Others, again, have stated that the term “human nature” is applicable to -the spirit and the body together, and that it no longer applies when one -is separated from the other; e.g., when two colours, black and white, -are combined on a horse, it is called “piebald” (_ablaq_), whereas the -same colours, apart from each other, are called “black” and “white”. -This too is false, in accordance with God’s word: “_Did there not come -over Man a space of time during which he was not a thing worthy of -mention?_” (Kor. lxxvi, 1): in this verse Man’s clay, without soul—for -the soul had not yet been joined to his body—is called “Man”. Others -aver that “Man” is an atom, centred in the heart, which is the principle -of all human attributes. This also is absurd, for if anyone is killed -and his heart is taken out of his body he does not lose the name of -“human being”; moreover, it is agreed that the heart was not in the -human body before the soul. Some pretenders to Ṣúfiism have fallen into -error on this subject. They declare that “Man” is not that which eats -and drinks and suffers decay, but a Divine mystery, of which this body -is the vesture, situated in the interfusion of the natural humours -(_imtizáj-i ṭab`_) and in the union (_ittiḥád_) of body and spirit. To -this I reply, that by universal consent the name of “human being” -belongs to sane men and mad, and to infidels and immoral and ignorant -persons, in whom there is no such “mystery” and who suffer decay and eat -and drink; and that there is not anything called “Man” in the body, -either while it exists or after it has ceased to exist. God Almighty has -given the name of “Man” to the sum of the substances which He compounded -in us, excluding those things which are not to be found in some human -beings, e.g. in the verses “_And We have created Man of the choicest -clay_,” etc. (Kor. xxiii, 12-14). Therefore, according to the word of -God, who is the most veracious of all who speak the Truth, this -particular form, with all its ingredients and with all the changes which -it undergoes, is “Man”. In like manner, certain Sunnís have said that -Man is a living creature whose form has these characteristics, and that -death does not deprive him of this name, and that he is endowed with a -definite physiognomy (_ṣúrat-i ma`húd_) and a distinct organ (_álat-i -mawsúm_) both externally and internally. By “a definite physiognomy” -they mean that he has either good or ill health, and by “a distinct -organ” that he is either mad or sane. It is generally allowed that the -more sound (_ṣaḥíḥ_) a thing is, the more perfect it is in constitution. -You must know, then, that in the opinion of mystics the most perfect -composition of Man includes three elements, viz. spirit, soul, and body; -and that each of these has an attribute which subsists therein, the -attribute of spirit being intelligence, of soul, passion, and of body, -sensation. Man is a type of the whole universe. The universe is the name -of the two worlds, and in Man there is a vestige of both, for he is -composed of phlegm, blood, bile, and melancholy, which four humours -correspond to the four elements of this world, viz. water, earth, air, -and fire, while his soul (_ján_), his lower soul (_nafs_), and his body -correspond to Paradise, Hell, and the place of Resurrection. Paradise is -the effect of God’s satisfaction, and Hell is the result of His anger. -Similarly, the spirit of the true believer reflects the peace of -knowledge, and his lower soul the error which veils him from God. As, at -the Resurrection, the believer must be released from Hell before he can -reach Paradise and attain to real vision and pure love, so in this world -he must escape from his lower soul before he can attain to real -discipleship (_irádat_), of which the spirit is the principle, and to -real proximity (to God) and gnosis. Hence, whoever knows Him in this -world and turns away from all besides and follows the highway of the -sacred law, at the Resurrection he will not see Hell and the Bridge -(_Ṣiráṭ_). In short, the believer’s spirit calls him to Paradise, of -which it is a type in this world, and his lower soul calls him to Hell, -of which it is a type in this world. Therefore it behoves those who seek -God never to relax their resistance to the lower soul, in order that -thereby they may reinforce the spirit and the intelligence, which are -the home of the Divine mystery. - - - SECTION. - -As regards what has been said by the Shaykhs concerning the lower soul, -Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian says: “Vision of the lower soul and its -promptings is the worst of veils,” because obedience to it is -disobedience to God, which is the origin of all veils. Abú Yazíd Bisṭámí -says: “The lower soul is an attribute which never rests save in -falsehood,” i.e. it never seeks the Truth. Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí -says: “You wish to know God while your lower soul subsists in you; but -your lower soul does not know itself, how should it know another?” -Junayd says: “To fulfil the desires of your lower soul is the foundation -of infidelity,” because the lower soul is not connected with, and is -always striving to turn away from, the pure truth of Islam; and he who -turns away denies, and he who denies is an alien (_bégána_). Abú -Sulaymán Dárání says: “The lower soul is treacherous and hindering (one -who seeks to please God); and resistance to it is the best of actions.” - -Now I come to my main purpose, which is to set forth the doctrine of -Sahl concerning the mortification and discipline of the lower soul, and -to explain its true nature. - - _Discourse on the Mortification of the Lower Soul._ - -God has said: “_Those who strive to the utmost_ (jáhadú) _for Our sake, -We will guide them into Our ways_” (Kor. xxix, 69). And the Prophet -said: “The (_mujáhid_) is he who struggles with all his might against -himself (_jáhada nafsahu_) for God’s sake.” And he also said: “We have -returned from the lesser war (_al-jihád al-aṣghar_) to the greater war -(_al-jihád al-akbar_)”. On being asked, “What is the greater war?” he -replied, “It is the struggle against one’s self” (_mujáhadat al-nafs_). -Thus the Apostle adjudged the mortification of the lower soul to be -superior to the Holy War against unbelievers, because the former is more -painful. You must know, then, that the way of mortification is plain and -manifest, for it is approved by men of all religions and sects, and is -observed and practised by the Ṣúfís in particular; and the term -“mortification” (_mujáhadat_) is current among Ṣúfís of every class, and -the Shaykhs have uttered many sayings on this topic. Sahl b. `Abdalláh -Tustarí carries the principle to an extreme point. It is related that he -used to break his fast only once in fifteen days, and he ate but little -food in the course of his long life. While all mystics have affirmed the -need of mortification, and have declared it to be an indirect means -(_asbáb_) of attaining contemplation (_musháhadat_), Sahl asserted that -mortification is the direct cause (_`illat_) of the latter, and he -attributed to search (_ṭalab_) a powerful effect on attainment (_yáft_), -so that he even regarded the present life, spent in search, as superior -to the future life of fruition. “If,” he said, “you serve God in this -world, you will attain proximity to Him in the next world: without that -service there would not be this proximity: it follows that -self-mortification, practised with the aid of God, is the direct cause -of union with God.” Others, on the contrary, hold that there is no -direct cause of union with God, and whoever attains to God does so by -Divine grace (_faḍl_), which is independent of human actions. Therefore, -they argue, the object of mortification is to correct the vices of the -lower soul, not to attain real proximity, and inasmuch as mortification -is referred to Man, while contemplation is referred to God, it is -impossible that one should be caused by the other. Sahl, however, cites -in favour of his view the words of God: “_Those who strive to the utmost -for Our sake, We will guide them into Our ways_” (Kor. xxix, 69), i.e. -whoever mortifies himself will attain to contemplation. Furthermore, he -contends that inasmuch as the books revealed to the Prophets, and the -Sacred Law, and all the religious ordinances imposed on mankind involve -mortification, they must all be false and vain if mortification were not -the cause of contemplation. Again, both in this world and the next, -everything is connected with principles and causes. If it is maintained -that principles have no causes, there is an end of all law and order: -neither can religious obligations be justified nor will food be the -cause of repletion and clothes the cause of warmth. Accordingly, to -regard actions as being caused is Unification (_tawḥíd_), and to rebut -this is Nullification (_ta`ṭíl_). He who asserts it is proving the -existence of contemplation, and he who denies it is denying the -existence of contemplation. Does not training (_riyáḍat_) alter the -animal qualities of a wild horse and substitute human qualities in their -stead, so that he will pick up a whip from the ground and give it to his -master, or will roll a ball with his foot? In the same way, a boy -without sense and of foreign race is taught by training to speak Arabic, -and take a new language in exchange for his mother tongue; and a savage -beast is trained to go away when leave is given to it, and to come back -when it is called, preferring captivity to freedom.[116] Therefore, Sahl -and his followers argue, mortification is just as necessary for the -attainment of union with God as diction and composition are necessary -for the elucidation of ideas; and as one is led to knowledge of the -Creator by assurance that the universe was created in time, so one is -led to union with God by knowledge and mortification of the lower soul. - -Footnote 116: - - Here follows an account of the mortification which the Prophet imposed - on himself. - -I will now state the arguments of the opposing party. They maintain that -the verse of the Koran (xxix, 69) cited by Sahl is a _hysteron -proteron_, and that the meaning of it is, “Those whom We guide into Our -ways strive to the utmost for Our sake.” And the Apostle said: “Not one -of you shall be saved by his works.” “O Apostle,” they cried, “not even -thou?” “Not even I,” he said, “unless God encompass me with His mercy.” -Now, mortification is a man’s act, and his act cannot possibly become -the cause of his salvation, which depends on the Divine Will, as God -hath said: “_Whomsoever God wishes to lead aright, He will open his -breast to receive_ _Islam, but whomsoever He wishes to lead astray, He -will make his breast strait and narrow_” (Kor. vi, 125). By affirming -His will, He denies the (effect of the) religious ordinances which have -been laid upon mankind. If mortification were the cause of union Iblís -would not have been damned, or if neglect of mortification were the -cause of damnation Adam would never have been blessed. The result hangs -on predestined grace (_`ináyat_), not on abundance of mortification. It -is not the case that he who most exerts himself is the most secure, but -that he who has most grace is nearest to God. A monk worshipping in his -cell may be far from God, and a sinner in the tavern may be near to Him. -The noblest thing in the world is the faith of a child who is not -subject to the religious law (_mukallaf_) and in this respect belongs to -the same category as madmen: if, then, mortification is not the cause of -the noblest of all gifts, no cause is necessary for anything that is -inferior. - -I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, say that the difference between the two -parties in this controversy lies in expression (_`ibárat_). One says, -“He who seeks shall find,” and the other says, “He who finds shall -seek.” Seeking is the cause of finding, but it is no less true that -finding is the cause of seeking. The one party practises mortification -for the purpose of attaining contemplation, and the other party -practises contemplation for the purpose of attaining mortification. The -fact is that mortification stands in the same relation to contemplation -as Divine blessing (_tawfíq_), which is a gift from God, to obedience -(_ṭá`at_): as it is absurd to seek obedience without Divine blessing, so -it is absurd to seek Divine blessing without obedience, and as there can -be no mortification without contemplation, so there can be no -contemplation without mortification. Man is guided to mortification by a -flash of the Divine Beauty, and inasmuch as that flash is the cause of -the existence of mortification, Divine guidance (_hidáyat_) precedes -mortification. - -Now, as regards the argument of Sahl and his followers that failure to -affirm mortification involves the denial of all the religious ordinances -which have come down in the books revealed to the Prophets, this -statement requires correction. Religious obligations (_taklíf_) depend -on Divine guidance (_hidáyat_), and acts of mortification only serve to -affirm the proofs of God, not to effect real union with Him. God has -said: “_And though We had sent down the angels unto them and the dead -had spoken unto them and We had gathered before them all things -together, they would not have believed unless God had so willed_” (Kor. -vi, 111), for the cause of belief is Our will, not evidences or -mortification. Accordingly, the revelations of the Prophets and the -ordinances of religion are a means (_asbáb_) of attaining to union, but -are not the cause (_`illat_) of union. So far as religious obligations -are concerned, Abú Bakr was in the same position as Abú Jahl, but Abú -Bakr, having justice and grace, attained, whereas Abú Jahl, having -justice without grace, failed. Therefore the cause of attainment is -attainment itself, not the act of seeking attainment, for if the seeker -were one with the object sought the seeker would be one, and in that -case he would not be a seeker, because he who has attained is at rest, -which the seeker cannot be. - -Again, in reference to their argument that the qualities of a horse are -altered by mortification, you must know that mortification is only a -means of bringing out qualities that are already latent in the horse but -do not appear until he has been trained. Mortification will never turn a -donkey into a horse or a horse into a donkey, because this involves a -change of identity; and since mortification has not the power of -transforming identity it cannot possibly be affirmed in the presence of -God. - -Over that spiritual director, namely, Sahl, there used to pass a -mortification of which he was independent and which, while he was in the -reality thereof, he was unable to express in words. He was not like some -who have made it their religion to talk about mortification without -practising it. How absurd that what ought to consist wholly in action -should become nothing but words! In short, the Ṣúfís are unanimous in -recognizing the existence of mortification and discipline, but hold that -it is wrong to pay regard to them. Those who deny mortification do not -mean to deny its reality, but only to deny that any regard should be -paid to it or that anyone should be pleased with his own actions in the -place of holiness, inasmuch as mortification is the act of Man, while -contemplation is a state in which one is kept by God, and a man’s -actions do not begin to have value until God keeps him thus. The -mortification of those whom God loves is the work of God in them without -choice on their part: it overwhelms and melts them away; but the -mortification of ignorant men is the work of themselves in themselves by -their own choice: it perturbs and distresses them, and distress is due -to evil. Therefore, do not speak of thine own actions while thou canst -avoid it, and never in any circumstances follow thy lower soul, for it -is thy phenomenal being that veils thee from God. If thou wert veiled by -one act alone, thou mightest be unveiled by another, but since thy whole -being is a veil thou wilt not become worthy of subsistence (_baqá_) -until thou art wholly annihilated. It is related in a well—known -anecdote that Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) came to Kúfa and lodged in -the house of Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-`Alawí. Ibráhím Khawwáṣ also came -to Kúfa, and, having heard of al-Ḥalláj, went to see him. Al-Ḥalláj -said: “O Ibráhím, during these forty years of your connexion with -Ṣúfiism, what have you gained from it?” Ibráhím answered: “I have made -the doctrine of trust in God (_tawakkul_) peculiarly my own.” Al-Ḥalláj -said: “You have wasted your life in cultivating your spiritual nature: -what has become of annihilation in Unification (_al-faná fi -´l-tawḥíd_)?” i.e. “trust in God is a term denoting your conduct towards -God and your spiritual excellence in regard to relying on Him: if a man -spends his whole life in remedying his spiritual nature, he will need -another life for remedying his material nature, and his life will be -lost before he has found a trace or vestige of God”. And a story is told -of Shaykh Abú `Alí Siyáh of Merv, that he said: “I saw my lower soul in -a form resembling my own, and some one had seized it by its hair and -gave it into my hands. I bound it to a tree and was about to destroy it, -when it cried out, ‘O Abú `Alí, do not trouble yourself. I am God’s army -(_lashkar-i khudáyam_): you cannot reduce me to naught.’” And it is -related concerning Muḥammad b. `Ulyán of Nasá, an eminent companion of -Junayd, that he said: “In my novitiate, when I had become aware of the -corruptions of the lower soul and acquainted with its places of ambush, -I always felt a violent hatred of it in my heart. One day something like -a young fox came forth from my throat, and God caused me to know that it -was my lower soul. I cast it under my feet, and at every kick that I -gave it, it grew bigger. I said: ‘Other things are destroyed by pain and -blows: why dost thou increase?’ It replied: ‘Because I was created -perverse: that which is pain to other things is pleasure to me, and -their pleasure is my pain.’” Shaykh Abu ´l-`Abbás Shaqání, who was the -Imám of his time, said: “One day I came into my house and found a yellow -dog lying there, asleep. Thinking it had come in from the street, I was -about to turn it out. It crept under my skirt and vanished.” Shaykh Abu -´l-Qásim Gurgání, who to-day is the Quṭb—may God prolong his -life!—relates, speaking of his novitiate, that he saw his lower soul in -the form of a snake. A dervish said: “I saw my lower soul in the shape -of a mouse. ‘Who art thou?’ I asked. It answered: ‘I am the destruction -of the heedless, for I urge them to evil, and the salvation of those who -love God, for if I were not with them in my corruption they would be -puffed up with pride in their purity.’” - -All these stories prove that the lower soul is a real substance -(_`ayní_), not a mere attribute, and that it has attributes which we -clearly perceive. The Apostle said: “Thy worst enemy is thy lower soul, -which is between thy two sides.” When you have obtained knowledge of it -you recognize that it can be mastered by discipline, but that its -essence and substance do not perish. If it is rightly known and under -control, the seeker need not care though it continues to exist in him. -Hence the purpose of mortifying the lower soul is to destroy its -attributes, not to annihilate its reality. Now I will discuss the true -nature of passion and the renunciation of lusts. - - _Discourse on the true nature of Passion_ (hawá). - -You must know that, according to the opinion of some, passion is a term -applied to the attributes of the lower soul, but, according to others, a -term denoting the natural volition (_irádat-i ṭab`_) whereby the lower -soul is controlled and directed, just as the spirit is controlled by the -intelligence. Every spirit that is devoid of the faculty of intelligence -is imperfect, and similarly every lower soul that is devoid of the -faculty of passion is imperfect. Man is continually being called by -intelligence and passion into contrary ways. If he obeys the call of -intelligence he attains to faith, but if he obeys the call of passion he -arrives at error and infidelity. Therefore passion is a veil and a false -guide, and man is commanded to resist it. Passion is of two kinds: (1) -desire of pleasure and lust, and (2) desire of worldly honour and -authority. He who follows pleasure and lust haunts taverns, and mankind -are safe from his mischief, but he who desires honour and authority -lives in cells (_ṣawámi`_) and monasteries, and not only has lost the -right way himself but also leads others into error. One whose every act -depends on passion, and who finds satisfaction in following it, is far -from God although he be with you in a mosque, but one who has renounced -and abandoned it is near to God although he be in a church. Ibráhím -Khawwáṣ relates this anecdote: “Once I heard that in Rúm there was a -monk who had been seventy years in a monastery. I said to myself: -‘Wonderful! Forty years is the term of monastic vows: what is the state -of this man that he has remained there for seventy years?’ I went to see -him. When I approached, he opened a window and said to me: ‘O Ibráhím, I -know why you have come. I have not stayed here for seventy years because -of monastic vows, but I have a dog foul with passion, and I have taken -my abode in this monastery for the purpose of guarding the dog -(_sagbání_), and preventing it from doing harm to others.’ On hearing -him say this I exclaimed: ‘O Lord, Thou art able to bestow righteousness -on a man even though he be involved in sheer error.’ He said to me: ‘O -Ibráhím, how long will you seek men? Go and seek yourself, and when you -have found yourself keep watch over yourself, for this passion clothes -itself every day in three hundred and sixty diverse garments of godhead -and leads men astray.’“ - -In short, the devil cannot enter a man’s heart until he desires to -commit a sin: but when a certain quantity of passion appears, the devil -takes it and decks it out and displays it to the man’s heart; and this -is called diabolic suggestion (_waswás_). It begins from passion, and in -reference to this fact God said to Iblís when he threatened to seduce -all mankind: ”_Verily, thou hast no power over My servants_” (Kor. xv, -42), for the devil in reality is a man’s lower soul and passion. Hence -the Apostle said: “There is no one whom his devil (i.e. his passion) has -not subdued except `Umar, for he has subdued his devil.” Passion is -mingled as an ingredient in the clay of Adam; whoever renounces it -becomes a prince and whoever follows it becomes a captive. Junayd was -asked: “What is union with God?” He replied: “To renounce passion,” for -of all the acts of devotion by which God’s favour is sought none has -greater value than resistance to passion, because it is easier for a man -to destroy a mountain with his nails than to resist passion. I have read -in the Anecdotes that Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian said: “I saw a man flying -through the air, and asked him how he had attained to this degree. He -answered: ‘I set my feet on passion (_hawá_) in order that I might -ascend into the air (_hawá_).’” It is related that Muḥammad b. Faḍl -al-Balkhí said: “I marvel at one who goes with his passion into God’s -House and visits Him: why does not he trample on his passion that he may -attain to Him?” - -The most manifest attribute of the lower soul is lust (_shahwat_). Lust -is a thing that is dispersed in different parts of the human body, and -is served by the senses. Man is bound to guard all his members from it, -and he shall be questioned concerning the acts of each. The lust of the -eye is sight, that of the ear is hearing, that of the nose is smell, -that of the tongue is speech, that of the palate is taste, that of the -body (_jasad_) is touch, and that of the mind is thought (_andíshídan_). -It behoves the seeker of God to spend his whole life, day and night, in -ridding himself of these incitements to passion which show themselves -through the senses, and to pray God to make him such that this desire -will be removed from his inward nature, since whoever is afflicted with -lust is veiled from all spiritual things. If anyone should repel it by -his own exertions, his task would be long and painful. The right way is -resignation (_taslím_). It is related that Abú `Alí Siyáh of Merv said: -“I had gone to the bath and in accordance with the custom of the Prophet -I was using a razor (_pubis tondendæ causâ_). I said to myself: ‘O Abú -`Alí, amputate this member which is the source of all lusts and keeps -thee afflicted with so much evil.’ A voice in my heart whispered: ‘O Abú -`Alí, wilt thou interfere in My kingdom? Are not all thy limbs equally -at My disposal? If thou do this, I swear by My glory that I will put a -hundredfold lust and passion in every hair in that place.’” - -Although a man has no power over what is vicious in his constitution, he -can get an attribute changed by Divine aid and by resigning himself to -God’s will and by divesting himself of his own power and strength. In -reality, when he resigns himself, God protects him; and through God’s -protection he comes nearer to annihilating the evil than he does through -self-mortification, since flies are more easily driven away with an -umbrella (_mikanna_) than with a fly-whisk (_midhabba_). Unless Divine -protection is predestined to a man, he cannot abstain from anything by -his own exertion, and unless God exerts Himself towards a man, that -man’s exertion is of no use. All acts of exertion fall under two heads: -their object is either to avert the predestination of God or to acquire -something in spite of predestination; and both these objects are -impossible. It is related that when Shiblí was ill, the physician -advised him to be abstinent. “From what shall I abstain?” said he, “from -that which God bestows upon me, or from that which He does not bestow? -It is impossible to abstain from the former, and the latter is not in my -hands.” I will discuss this question carefully on another occasion. - - - 7. THE ḤAKÍMÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Ḥakím -al-Tirmidhí, who was one of the religious leaders of his time and the -author of many works on every branch of exoteric and esoteric science. -His doctrine was based on saintship (_wiláyat_), and he used to explain -the true nature of saintship and the degrees of the saints and the -observance of the proper arrangement of their ranks. - -As the first step towards understanding his doctrine, you must know that -God has saints (_awliyá_), whom He has chosen out of mankind, and whose -thoughts He has withdrawn from worldly ties and delivered from sensual -temptations; and He has stationed each of them in a particular degree, -and has opened unto them the door of these mysteries. Much might be said -on this topic, but I must briefly set forth several points of capital -importance. - - _Discourse on the Affirmation of Saintship_ (wiláyat). - -You must know that the principle and foundation of Ṣúfiism and knowledge -of God rests on saintship, the reality of which is unanimously affirmed -by all the Shaykhs, though every one has expressed himself in different -language. The peculiarity of Muḥammad b. `Alí (al-Ḥakím) lies in the -fact that he applied this term to the theory of Ṣúfiism. - -_Waláyat_ means, etymologically, “power to dispose” (_taṣarruf_), and -_wiláyat_ means “possession of command” (_imárat_). _Waláyat_ also means -“lordship” (_rubúbiyyat_); hence God hath said: “_In this case the -lordship_ (al-waláyat) _belongs to God who is the_ _Truth_” (Kor. xviii, -42), because the unbelievers seek His protection and turn unto Him and -renounce their idols. And _wiláyat_ also means “love” (_maḥabbat_). -_Walí_ may be the form _fa`íl_ with the meaning of _maf`úl_, as God hath -said: “_And He takes charge of_ (yatawallá) _the righteous_” (Kor. vii, -195), for God does not leave His servant to his own actions and -attributes, but keeps him under His protection. And _walí_ may be the -form _fa`íl_, equivalent to _fá`il_, with an intensive force, because a -man takes care (_tawallí kunad_) to obey God and constantly to fulfil -the obligations that he owes to Him. Thus _walí_ in the active meaning -is “one who desires” (_muríd_), while in the passive meaning it denotes -“one who is the object of God’s desire” (_murád_). All these meanings, -whether they signify the relation of God to Man or that of Man to God, -are allowable, for God may be the protector of His friends, inasmuch as -He promised His protection to the Companions of the Apostle, and -declared that the unbelievers had no protector (_mawlá_).[117] And, -moreover, He may distinguish them in an exclusive way by His friendship, -as He hath said, “_He loves them and they love Him_” (Kor. v, 59), so -that they turn away from the favour of mankind: He is their friend -(_walí_) and they are His friends (_awliyá_). And He may confer on one a -“friendship” (_wiláyat_) that enables him to persevere in obedience to -Him, and keeps him free from sin, and on another a “friendship” that -empowers him to loose and bind, and makes his prayers answered and his -aspirations effectual, as the Apostle said: “There is many a one with -dirty hair, dust-stained, clad in two old garments, whom men never heed; -but if he were to swear by God, God would verify his oath.” It is well -known that in the Caliphate of `Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb, the Nile, in -accordance with its usual habit, ceased to flow; for in the time of -Paganism they used annually to adorn a maiden and throw her into the -river to make it flow again. `Umar therefore wrote on a piece of paper: -“O river, if thou hast stopped of thy own will, thou doest wrong, and if -by command of God, `Umar bids thee flow.“ When this paper was thrown in, -the Nile resumed its course. - -Footnote 117: - - Kor. xlvii, 12. - -My purpose in discussing saintship and affirming its reality is to show -you that the name of saint (_walí_) is properly applied to those in whom -the above-mentioned qualities are actually present (_ḥál_) and not -merely reputed (_qál_). Certain Shaykhs formerly composed books on this -subject, but they became rare and soon disappeared. Now I will commend -to you the explanation given by that venerable spiritual director who is -the author of the doctrine—for my own belief in it is greater—in order -that much instruction may be gained, not only by yourself, but also by -every seeker of Ṣúfiism who may have the good fortune to read this book. - - - SECTION. - -You must know that the word _walí_ is current among the vulgar, and is -to be found in the Koran and the Apostolic Traditions: e.g., God hath -said, ”_Verily, on the friends_ (awliyá) _of God no fear shall come, and -they shall not grieve_“ (Kor. x, 63); and again, ”_God is the friend_ -(walí) _of those who believe_” (Kor. ii, 258). And the Apostle said: -“Among the servants of God there are some whom the prophets and martyrs -deem happy.” He was asked: “Who are they? Describe them to us that -perchance we may love them.” He replied: “Those who love one another, -through God’s mercy, without wealth and without seeking a livelihood: -their faces are luminous, and they sit on thrones of light; they are not -afraid when men are afraid, nor do they grieve when men grieve.” Then he -recited: “_Verily, on the friends of God no fear shall come, and they -shall not grieve_” (Kor. x, 63). Furthermore, the Apostle said that God -said: “He who hurts a saint (_walí_) has allowed himself to make war on -Me.” - -These passages show that God has saints (_awliyá_) whom He has specially -distinguished by His friendship and whom He has chosen to be the -governors of His kingdom and has marked out to manifest His actions and -has peculiarly favoured with diverse kinds of miracles (_karámát_) and -has purged of natural corruptions and has delivered from subjection to -their lower soul and passion, so that all their thoughts are of Him and -their intimacy is with Him alone. Such have been in past ages, and are -now, and shall be hereafter until the Day of Resurrection, because God -has exalted this (Moslem) community above all others and has promised to -preserve the religion of Muḥammad. Inasmuch as the traditional and -intellectual proofs of this religion are to be found among the divines -(_`ulamá_), it follows that the visible proof is to be found among the -Saints and elect of God. Here we have two parties opposed to us, namely, -the Mu`tazilites and the rank and file of the Anthropomorphists -(_Ḥashwiyya_). The Mu`tazilites deny that one Moslem is specially -privileged more than another; but if a saint is not specially -privileged, neither is a prophet specially privileged; and this is -infidelity. The vulgar Anthropomorphists allow that special privileges -may be conferred, but assert that such privileged persons no longer -exist, although they did exist in the past. It is all the same, however, -whether they deny the past or the future, since one side of denial is no -better than another. - -God, then, has caused the prophetic evidence (_burhán-i nabawí_) to -remain down to the present day, and has made the Saints the means -whereby it is manifested, in order that the signs of the Truth and the -proof of Muḥammad’s veracity may continue to be clearly seen. He has -made the Saints the governors of the universe; they have become entirely -devoted to His business, and have ceased to follow their sensual -affections. Through the blessing of their advent the rain falls from -heaven, and through the purity of their lives the plants spring up from -the earth, and through their spiritual influence the Moslems gain -victories over the unbelievers. Among them there are four thousand who -are concealed and do not know one another and are not aware of the -excellence of their state, but in all circumstances are hidden from -themselves and from mankind. Traditions have come down to this effect, -and the sayings of the Saints proclaim the truth thereof, and I -myself—God be praised!—have had ocular experience (_khabar-i `iyán_) of -this matter. But of those who have power to loose and to bind and are -the officers of the Divine court there are three hundred, called -_Akhyár_, and forty, called _Abdál_, and seven, called _Abrár_, and -four, called _Awtád_, and three, called _Nuqabá_, and one, called _Quṭb_ -or _Ghawth_. All these know one another and cannot act save by mutual -consent. - -Here the vulgar may object to my assertion that they know one another to -be saints, on the ground that, if such is the case, they must be secure -as to their fate in the next world. I reply that it is absurd to suppose -that knowledge of saintship involves security. A believer may have -knowledge of his faith and yet not be secure: why should not the same -hold good of a saint who has knowledge of his saintship? Nevertheless, -it is possible that God should miraculously cause the saint to know his -security in regard to the future life, while maintaining him in a state -of spiritual soundness and preserving him from disobedience. The Shaykhs -differ on this question for the reason which I have explained. Those -belonging to the four thousand who are concealed do not admit that the -saint can know himself to be such, whereas those of the other class take -the contrary view. Each opinion is supported by many lawyers and -scholastics. Abú Isḥáq Isfará´iní[118] and some of the ancients hold -that a saint is ignorant of his saintship, while Abú Bakr b. Fúrak[119] -and others of the past generation hold that he is conscious of it. I ask -the former party, what loss or evil does a saint suffer by knowing -himself? If they allege that he is conceited when he knows himself to be -a saint, I answer that Divine protection is a necessary condition of -saintship, and one who is protected from evil cannot fall into -self-conceit. It is a very common notion (_sukhan-i sakht `ámiyána_) -that a saint, to whom extraordinary miracles (_karámát_) are continually -vouchsafed, does not know himself to be a saint or these miracles to be -miracles. Both parties have adherents among the common people, but -opinion is of no account. - -Footnote 118: - - See Ibn Khallikán, No. 4. - -Footnote 119: - - See Ibn Khallikán, No. 621; Brockelmann, i, 166. - -The Mu`tazilites, however, deny special privileges and miracles, which -constitute the essence of saintship. They affirm that all Moslems are -friends (_awliyá_) of God when they are obedient to Him, and that anyone -who fulfils the ordinances of the Faith and denies the attributes and -vision of God and allows believers to be eternally damned in Hell and -acknowledges only such obligations as are imposed by Reason, without -regard to Revelation, is a “friend” (_walí_). All Moslems agree that -such a person is a “friend”, but a friend of the Devil. The Mu`tazilites -also maintain that, if saintship involved miracles, all believers must -have miracles vouchsafed to them, because they all share in faith -(_ímán_), and if they share in what is fundamental they must likewise -share in what is derivative. They say, further, that miracles may be -vouchsafed both to believers and to infidels, e.g. when anyone is hungry -or fatigued on a journey some person may appear in order to give him -food or mount him on an animal for riding. If it were possible, they -add, for anyone to traverse a great distance in one night, the Apostle -must have been that man; yet, when he set out for Mecca, God said, “_And -they_ (the animals) _carry your burdens to a land which ye would not -have reached save with sore trouble to yourselves_” (Kor. xvi, 7). I -reply: “Your arguments are worthless, for God said, ‘_Glory to Him who -transported His servant by night from the sacred mosque to the farther -mosque_’” (Kor. xvii, 1). Miracles are special, not general; but it -would have been a general instance if all the Companions had been -miraculously conveyed to Mecca, and this would have destroyed all the -principles of faith in the unseen. Faith is a general term, applicable -to the righteous and the wicked alike, whereas saintship is special. The -journey of the Companions to Mecca falls under the former category, but -inasmuch as the case of the Apostle was a special one, God conveyed him -in one night from Mecca to Jerusalem, and thence to a space of two -bow-lengths from the Divine presence; and he returned ere the night was -far spent. Again, to deny special privileges is manifestly unreasonable. -As in a palace there are chamberlains, janitors, grooms, and viziers, -who, although they are equally the king’s servants, are not equal in -rank, so all believers are equal in respect of their faith, but some are -obedient, some wise, some pious, and some ignorant. - - - SECTION. - -The Shaykhs, every one, have given hints as to the true meaning of -saintship. Now I will bring together as many of these selected -definitions as possible. - -Abú `Alí Júzajání says: “The saint is annihilated in his own state and -subsistent in the contemplation of the Truth: he cannot tell anything -concerning himself, nor can he rest with anyone except God,” because a -man has knowledge only of his own state, and when all his states are -annihilated he cannot tell anything about himself; and he cannot rest -with anyone else, to whom he might tell his state, because to -communicate one’s hidden state to another is to reveal the secret of the -Beloved, which cannot be revealed except to the Beloved himself. -Moreover, in contemplation it is impossible to regard aught except God: -how, then, can he be at rest with mankind? Junayd said: “The saint hath -no fear, because fear is the expectation either of some future calamity -or of the eventual loss of some object of desire, whereas the saint is -the son of his time (_ibn waqtihi_): he has no future that he should -fear anything; and as he hath no fear so he hath no hope, since hope is -the expectation either of gaining an object of desire or of being -relieved from a misfortune, and this belongs to the future; nor does he -grieve, because grief arises from the rigour of time, and how should he -feel grief who is in the radiance of satisfaction (_riḍá_) and the -garden of concord (_muwáfaqat_)?” The vulgar imagine this saying to -imply that, inasmuch as the saint feels neither fear nor hope nor grief, -he has security (_amn_) in their place; but he has not security, for -security arises from not seeing that which is hidden, and from turning -one’s back on “time”; and this (absence of security) is characteristic -of those who pay no regard to their humanity (_bashariyyat_) and are not -content with attributes. Fear and hope and security and grief all refer -to the interests of the lower soul, and when that is annihilated -satisfaction (_riḍá_) becomes an attribute of Man, and when satisfaction -has been attained his states become steadfast (_mustaqím_) in vision of -the Author of states (_muḥawwil_), and his back is turned on all states. -Then saintship is revealed to his heart and its meaning is made clear to -his inmost thoughts. Abú `Uthmán Maghribí says: “The saint is sometimes -celebrated (_mashhúr_), but he is not seduced (_maftún_),” and another -says: “The saint is sometimes hidden (_mastúr_), but he is not -celebrated.” Seduction consists in falsehood: inasmuch as the saint must -be veracious, and miracles cannot possibly be performed by a liar, it -follows that the saint is incapable of being seduced. These two sayings -refer to the controversy whether the saint knows himself to be such: if -he knows, he is celebrated, and if he does not know, he is seduced; but -the explanation of this is tedious. It is related that Ibráhím b. Adham -asked a certain man whether he desired to be one of God’s saints, and on -his replying “Yes”, said: “Do not covet anything in this world or the -next, and devote thyself entirely to God, and turn to God with all thy -heart.” To covet this world is to turn away from God for the sake of -that which is transitory, and to covet the next world is to turn away -from God for the sake of that which is everlasting: that which is -transitory perishes and its renunciation becomes naught, but that which -is everlasting cannot perish, hence its renunciation also is -imperishable. Abú Yazíd was asked: “Who is a saint?” He answered: “That -one who is patient under the command and prohibition of God,” because -the more a man loves God the more does his heart revere what He commands -and the farther is his body from what He forbids. It is related that Abú -Yazíd said: “Once I was told that a saint of God was in such and such a -town. I set out to visit him. When I arrived at his mosque he came forth -from his chamber and spat on the floor of the mosque. I turned back -without saluting him, and said to myself: ‘A saint must keep the -religious law in order that God may keep him in his spiritual state. Had -this man been a saint his respect for the mosque would have prevented -him from spitting on its floor, or God would have preserved him from -marring the grace vouchsafed to him.’ The same night I dreamed that the -Apostle said to me, ‘O Abú Yazíd, the blessing of that which thou hast -done is come to thee.’ Next day I attained to this degree which ye -behold.” And I have heard that a man who came to visit Shaykh Abú Sa`íd -entered the mosque with his left foot foremost. The Shaykh gave orders -that he should be dismissed, saying: “He who does not know how to enter -the house of the Friend is not suitable for us.” Some heretics who have -adopted this perilous doctrine assert that service of God (_khidmat_) is -necessary only while one is becoming a saint, but that after one has -become a saint service is abolished. This is clearly wrong. There is no -“station” on the way to the Truth where any obligation of service is -abolished. I will explain this matter fully in its proper place. - - _Discourse on the Affirmation of Miracles_ (karámát). - -You must know that miracles may be vouchsafed to a saint so long as he -does not infringe the obligations of the religious law. Both parties of -the orthodox Moslems agree on this point, nor is it intellectually -impossible, because such miracles are a species of that which is -predestined by God, and their manifestation does not contradict any -principle of the religious law, nor, on the other hand, is it repugnant -to the mind to conceive them as a genus. A miracle is a token of a -saint’s veracity, and it cannot be manifested to an impostor except as a -sign that his pretensions are false. It is an extraordinary act (_fi`lí -náqiḍ-i `ádat_), performed while he is still subject to the obligations -of religion; and whoever is able, through knowledge given him by God, to -distinguish by the method of deduction what is true from what is false, -he too is a saint. Some Sunnís maintain that miracles are established, -but not to the degree of an evidentiary miracle (_mu`jizat_[120]): they -do not admit, for example, that prayers may be answered and fulfilled, -and so forth, contrary to custom. I ask in reply: “What do you consider -wrong in the performance by a true saint, while he is subject to -religious obligations, of an act which violates custom?” If they say -that it is not a species of that which is predestined by God, this -statement is erroneous; and if they say that it is a species of that -which is predestined, but that its performance by a true saint involves -the annulment of prophecy and the denial of special privileges to the -prophets, this assertion also is inadmissible, since the saint is -specially distinguished by miracles (_karámát_) and the prophet by -evidentiary miracles (_mu`jizát_); and inasmuch as the saint is a saint -and the prophet is a prophet, there is no likeness between them to -justify such precaution. The pre-eminence of the prophets depends on -their exalted rank and on their being preserved from the defilement of -sin, not on miracles or evidentiary miracles or acts which violate -custom. All the prophets are equal so far as they all have the power of -working such miracles (_i`jáz_), but some are superior to others in -degree. Since, then, notwithstanding this equality in regard to their -actions, some prophets are superior to others, why should not miracles -(_karámát_) which violate custom be vouchsafed also to the saints, -although the prophets are superior to them? And since, in the case of -the prophets, an act which violates custom does not cause one of them to -be more exalted or more specially privileged than another, so, in the -case of the saints, a similar act does not cause a saint to be more -specially privileged than a prophet, i.e. the saints do not become like -in kind (_hamsán_) to the prophets. This proof will clear away, for -reasonable men, any difficulties that this matter may have presented to -them. “But suppose,” it may be said, “that a saint whose miracles -violate custom should claim to be a prophet.” I reply that this is -impossible, because saintship involves veracity, and he who tells a -falsehood is no saint. Moreover, a saint who pretends to prophesy casts -an imputation on (the genuineness of) evidentiary miracles, which is -infidelity. Miracles (_karámát_) are vouchsafed only to a pious -believer, and falsehood is impiety. That being so, the miracles of the -saint confirm the evidence of the prophet. There is no difficulty in -reconciling the two classes of miracles. The apostle establishes his -prophecy by establishing the reality of evidentiary miracles, while the -saint, by the miracles which he performs, establishes both the prophecy -of the apostle and his own saintship. Therefore the veracious saint says -the same thing as the veracious prophet. The miracles of the former are -identical with the evidentiary miracles of the latter. A believer, -seeing the miracles of a saint, has more faith in the veracity of the -prophet, not more doubt, because there is no contradiction between the -claims made by them. Similarly, in law, when a number of heirs are -agreed in their claim, if one of them establishes his claim the claim of -the others is established; but not so if their claims are contradictory. -Hence, when a prophet adduces evidentiary miracles as evidence that his -prophecy is genuine, and when his claim is confirmed by a saint, it is -impossible that any difficulty should arise. - -Footnote 120: - - The name _mu`jizat_ is given to a miracle performed by a prophet, - while one performed by a saint is called _karámat_. - - _Discourse on the difference between Evidentiary Miracles_ (mu`jizát) - _and Miracles_ (karámát). - -Inasmuch as it has been shown that neither class of miracles can be -wrought by an impostor, we must now distinguish more clearly between -them. _Mu`jizát_ involve publicity and _karámát_ secrecy, because the -result of the former is to affect others, while the latter are peculiar -to the person by whom they are performed. Again, the doer of _mu`jizát_ -is quite sure that he has wrought an extraordinary miracle, whereas the -doer of _karámát_ cannot be sure whether he has really wrought a miracle -or whether he is insensibly deceived (_istidráj_). He who performs -_mu`jizát_ has authority over the law, and in arranging it he denies or -affirms, according as God commands him, that he is insensibly -deceived.[121] On the other hand, he who performs _karámát_ has no -choice but to resign himself (to God’s will) and to accept the -ordinances that are laid upon him, because the _karámát_ of a saint are -never in any way incompatible with the law laid down by a prophet. It -may be said: “If evidentiary miracles are the proof of a prophet’s -veracity, and if nevertheless you assert that miracles of the same kind -may be performed by one who is not a prophet, then they become ordinary -events (_mu`tád_): therefore your proof of the reality of _mu`jizát_ -annuls your argument establishing the reality of _karámát_.” I reply: -“This is not the case. The _karámat_ of a saint is identical with, and -displays the same evidence as, the _mu`jizat_ of a prophet: the quality -of _i`jáz_ (inimitability) exhibited in the one instance does not impair -the same quality in the other instance.” When the infidels put Khubayb -on the gallows at Mecca, the Apostle, who was then seated in the mosque -at Medína, saw him and told the Companions what was being done to him. -God also lifted the veil from the eyes of Khubayb, so that he saw the -Apostle and cried, “Peace be with thee!” and God caused the Apostle to -hear his salutation, and caused Khubayb to hear the Apostle’s answer. -Now, the fact that the Apostle at Medína saw Khubayb at Mecca was an -evidentiary miracle, and the fact that Khubayb at Mecca saw the Apostle -at Medína was likewise an extraordinary act. Accordingly there is no -difference between absence in time and absence in space; for Khubayb’s -miracle (_karámat_) was wrought when he was absent from the Apostle in -space, and the miracles of later days were wrought by those who were -absent from the Apostle in time. This is a clear distinction and a -manifest proof that _karámát_ cannot possibly be in contradiction with -_i`jáz_ (miracles performed by a prophet). _Karámát_ are not established -unless they bear testimony to the truth of one who has performed a -_mu`jizat_, and they are not vouchsafed except to a pious believer who -bears such testimony. _Karámát_ of Moslems are an extraordinary miracle -(_mu`jizat_) of the Apostle, for as his law is permanent so must his -proof (_ḥujjat_) also be permanent. The saints are witnesses to the -truth of the Apostle’s mission, and it is impossible that a miracle -(_karámat_) should be wrought by an unbeliever (_bégána_). - -Footnote 121: - - B. omits the words “that he is insensibly deceived”. - -On this topic a story is related of Ibráhím Khawwáṣ, which is very -apposite here. Ibráhím said: “I went down into the desert in my usual -state of detachment from worldly things (_tajríd_). After I had gone -some distance a man appeared and begged me to let him be my companion. I -looked at him and was conscious of a feeling of repugnance. He said to -me: ‘O Ibráhím, do not be vexed. I am a Christian, and one of the -Ṣábians among them. I have come from the confines of Rúm in the hope of -being thy companion.’ When I knew that he was an unbeliever, I regained -my equanimity, and felt it more easy to take him as my companion and to -fulfil my obligations towards him. I said: ‘O monk, I fear that thou -wilt suffer from want of meat and drink, for I have nothing with me.’ ‘O -Ibráhím,’ said he, ‘is thy fame in the world so great, and art thou -still concerned about meat and drink?’ I marvelled at his boldness and -accepted him as my companion in order to test his claim. After -journeying seven days and nights we were overtaken by thirst. He stopped -and cried: ‘O Ibráhím, they trumpet thy praise throughout the world. Now -let me see what privileges of intimacy (_gustákhíhá_) thou hast in this -court (i.e. to what extent thou art a favourite with God), for I can -endure no more.’ I laid my head on the earth and cried: ‘O Lord, do not -shame me before this unbeliever, who thinks well of me!’ When I raised -my head I saw a dish on which were placed two loaves of bread and two -cups of water. We ate and drank and went on our way. After seven days -had passed I resolved to test him ere he should again put me to the -proof. ‘O monk,’ I said, ‘now it is thy turn. Let me see the fruits of -thy mortification.’ He laid his head on the earth and muttered -something. Immediately a dish appeared containing four loaves and four -cups of water. I was amazed and grieved, and I despaired of my state. -‘This has appeared,’ I said, ‘for the sake of an unbeliever: how can I -eat or drink thereof?’ He bade me taste, but I refused, saying, ‘Thou -art not worthy of this, and it is not in harmony with thy spiritual -condition. If I regard it as a miracle (_karámat_), miracles are not -vouchsafed to unbelievers; and if I regard it as a contribution -(_ma`únat_) from thee, I must suspect thee of being an impostor.’ He -said: ‘Taste, O Ibráhím! I give thee joy of two things: firstly, of my -conversion to Islam (here he uttered the profession of faith), and -secondly, of the great honour in which thou art held by God.’ ‘How so?’ -I asked. He answered: ‘I have no miraculous powers, but my shame on -account of thee made me lay my head on the earth and beg God to give me -two loaves and two cups of water if the religion of Muḥammad is true, -and two more loaves and cups if Ibráhím Khawwáṣ is one of God’s -saints.’” Then Ibráhím ate and drank, and the man who had been a monk -rose to eminence in Islam. - -Now, this violation of custom, although attached to the _karámat_ of a -saint, is identical with the evidentiary miracles which are wrought by -prophets, but it is rare that in a prophet’s absence an evidence should -be vouchsafed to another person, or that in the presence of a saint some -portion of his miraculous powers should be transferred to another -person. In fact, the end of saintship is only the beginning of prophecy. -That monk was one of the hidden (saints), like Pharaoh’s magicians. -Ibráhím confirmed the Prophet’s power to violate custom, and his -companion also was endeavouring both to confirm prophecy and to glorify -saintship; a purpose which God in His eternal providence fulfilled. This -is a clear difference between _karámat_ and _i`jáz_. The manifestation -of miracles to the saints is a second miracle, for they ought to be kept -secret, not intentionally divulged. My Shaykh used to say that if a -saint reveals his saintship and claims to be a saint, the soundness of -his spiritual state is not impaired thereby, but if he takes pains to -obtain publicity he is led astray by self-conceit. - - _Discourse on the performance of miracles belonging to the evidentiary - class by those who pretend to godship._ - -The Shaykhs of this sect and all orthodox Moslems are agreed that an -extraordinary act resembling a prophetic miracle (_mu`jizat_) may be -performed by an unbeliever, in order that by means of his performance he -may be shown beyond doubt to be an impostor. Thus, for example, Pharaoh -lived four hundred years without once falling ill; and when he climbed -up to any high ground the water followed him, and stopped when he -stopped, and moved when he moved. Nevertheless, intelligent men did not -hesitate to deny his pretensions to godship, inasmuch as every -intelligent person acknowledges that God is not incarnate (_mujassam_) -and composite (_murakkab_). You will judge by analogy the wondrous acts -related of Shaddád, who was the lord of Iram, and Nimrod. Similarly, we -are told on trustworthy authority that in the last days Dajjál will come -and will claim godship, and that two mountains will go with him, one on -his right hand and the other on his left; and that the mountain on his -right hand will be the place of felicity, and the mountain on his left -hand will be the place of torment; and that he will call the people to -himself and will punish those who refuse to join him. But though he -should perform a hundredfold amount of such extraordinary acts, no -intelligent person would doubt the falsity of his claim, for it is well -known that God does not sit on an ass and is not blind. Such things fall -under the principle of Divine deception (_istidráj_). So, again, one who -falsely pretends to be an apostle may perform an extraordinary act, -which proves him an impostor, just as a similar act performed by a true -apostle proves him genuine. But no such act can be performed if there be -any possibility of doubt or any difficulty in distinguishing the true -claimant from the impostor, for in that case the principle of allegiance -(_bay`at_) would be nullified. It is possible, moreover, that something -of the same kind as a miracle (_karámat_) may be performed by a -pretender to saintship who, although his conduct is bad, is blameless in -his religion, inasmuch as by that miraculous act he confirms the truth -of the Apostle and manifests the grace of God vouchsafed to him and does -not attribute the act in question to his own power. One who speaks the -truth, without evidence, in the fundamental matter of faith (_ímán_), -will always speak the truth, with evidence and firm belief, in the -matter of saintship, because his belief is of the same quality as the -belief of the saint; and though his actions do not square with his -belief, his claim of saintship is not demonstrably contradicted by his -evil conduct, any more than his claim of faith could be. In fact, -miracles (_karámát_) and saintship are Divine gifts, not things acquired -by Man, so that human actions (_kasb_) cannot become the cause of Divine -guidance. - -I have already said that the saints are not preserved from sin -(_ma`ṣúm_), for sinlessness belongs to the prophets, but they are -protected (_maḥfúẕ_) from any evil that involves the denial of their -saintship; and the denial of saintship, after it has come into being, -depends on something inconsistent with faith, namely, apostasy -(_riddat_): it does not depend on sin. This is the doctrine of Muḥammad -b. `Alí Ḥakím of Tirmidh, and also of Junayd, Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí, Ḥárith -Muḥásibí, and many other mystics (_ahl-i ḥaqá´iq_). But those who attach -importance to conduct (_ahl-i mu`ámalát_), like Sahl b. `Abdalláh of -Tustar, Abú Sulaymán Dárání, Ḥamdún Qaṣṣár, and others, maintain that -saintship involves unceasing obedience (_ṭá`at_), and that when a great -sin (_kabíra_) occurs to the mind of a saint he is deposed from his -saintship. Now, as I have stated before, there is a consensus of opinion -(_ijmá`_) among Moslems that a great sin does not put anyone outside the -pale of faith; and one saintship (_wiláyat_) is no better than another. -Therefore, since the saintship of knowledge of God (_ma`rifat_), which -is the foundation of all miracles vouchsafed by Divine grace -(_karámathá_), is not lost through sin, it is impossible that what is -inferior to that in excellence and grace (_karámat_) should disappear -because of sin. The controversy among the Shaykhs on this matter has run -to great length, and I do not intend to record it here. - -It is most important, however, that you should know with certainty in -what state this miraculous grace is manifested to the saint: in sobriety -or intoxication, in rapture (_ghalabat_) or composure (_tamkín_). I have -fully explained the meaning of intoxication and sobriety in my account -of the doctrine of Abú Yazíd. He and Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian and -Muḥammad b. Khafíf and Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) and Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh -Rází and others hold that miracles are not vouchsafed to a saint except -when he is in the state of intoxication, whereas the miracles of the -prophets are wrought in the state of sobriety. Hence, according to their -doctrine, this is a clear distinction between _mu`jizát_ and _karámát_, -for the saint, being enraptured, pays no heed to the people and does not -call upon them to follow him, while the prophet, being sober, exerts -himself to attain his object and challenges the people to rival what he -has done. Moreover, the prophet may choose whether he will manifest or -conceal his extraordinary powers, but the saints have no such choice; -sometimes a miracle is not granted to them when they desire it, and -sometimes it is bestowed when they do not desire it, for the saint has -no propaganda, so that his attributes should be subsistent, but he is -hidden and his proper state is to have his attributes annihilated. The -prophet is a man of law (_ṣáḥib shar`_), and the saint is a man of -inward feeling (_ṣáḥib sirr_). Accordingly, a miracle (_karámat_) will -not be manifested to a saint unless he is in a state of absence from -himself and bewilderment, and unless his faculties are entirely under -the control of God. While saints are with themselves and maintain the -state of humanity (_bashariyyat_), they are veiled; but when the veil is -lifted they are bewildered and amazed through realizing the bounties of -God. A miracle cannot be manifested except in the state of unveiledness -(_kashf_), which is the rank of proximity (_qurb_); and whoever is in -that state, to him worthless stones appear even as gold. This is the -state of intoxication with which no human being, the prophets alone -excepted, is permanently endowed. Thus, one day, Ḥáritha was transported -from this world and had the next world revealed to him; he said: “I have -cut myself loose from this world, so that its stones and its gold and -its silver and its clay are all one to me.” Next day he was seen tending -asses, and on being asked what he was doing, he said: “I am trying to -get the food that I need.” Therefore, the saints, while they are sober, -are as ordinary men, but while they are intoxicated their rank is the -same as that of the prophets, and the whole universe becomes like gold -unto them. Shiblí says— - - “_Gold wherever we go, and pearls - Wherever we turn, and silver in the waste._” - -I have heard the Master and Imám Abu ´l-Qásim Qushayrí say: “Once I -asked Ṭábarání about the beginning of his spiritual experience. He told -me that on one occasion he wanted a stone from the river-bed at Sarakhs. -Every stone that he touched turned into a gem, and he threw them all -away.” This was because stones and gems were the same to him, or rather, -gems were of less value, since he had no desire for them. And I have -heard Khwája Imám Khazá´iní at Sarakhs relate as follows: “In my boyhood -I went to a certain place to get mulberry leaves for silkworms. When it -was midday I climbed a tree and began to shake the branches. While I was -thus employed Shaykh Abu ´l-Faḍl b. al-Ḥasan passed by, but he did not -see me, and I had no doubt that he was beside himself and that his heart -was with God. Suddenly he raised his head and cried with the boldness of -intimacy: ‘O Lord, it is more than a year since Thou hast given me a -small piece of silver (_dángí_) that I might have my hair cut. Is this -the way to treat Thy friends?’ No sooner had he spoken than I saw all -the leaves and boughs and roots of the trees turned to gold. Abu ´l-Faḍl -exclaimed: ‘How strange! The least hint that I utter is a backsliding -(_hama ta`ríḍ-i má í`ráḍ ast_). One cannot say a word to Thee for the -sake of relieving one’s mind.’” It is related that Shiblí cast four -hundred dínárs into the Tigris. When asked what he was doing, he -replied: “Stones are better in the water.” “But why,” they said, “don’t -you give the money to the poor?” He answered: “Glory to God! what plea -can I urge before Him if I remove the veil from my own heart only to -place it on the hearts of my brother Moslems? It is not religious to -wish them worse than myself.” All these cases belong to the state of -intoxication, which I have already explained. - -On the other hand, Junayd and Abu ´l-`Abbás Sayyárí and Abú Bakr Wásiṭí -and Muḥammad b. `Alí of Tirmidh, the author of the doctrine, hold that -miracles are manifested in the state of sobriety and composure (_ṣaḥw ú -tamkín_), not in the state of intoxication. They argue that the saints -of God are the governors of His kingdom and the overseers of the -universe, which God has committed absolutely to their charge: therefore -their judgments must be the soundest of all, and their hearts must be -the most tenderly disposed of all towards the creatures of God. They are -mature (_rasídagán_); and whereas agitation and intoxication are marks -of inexperience, with maturity agitation is transmuted into composure. -Then, and only then, is one a saint in reality, and only then are -miracles genuine. It is well known among Ṣúfís that every night the -_Awtád_ must go round the whole universe, and if there should be any -place on which their eyes have not fallen, next day some imperfection -will appear in that place; and they must then inform the _Quṭb_, in -order that he may fix his attention on the weak spot, and that by his -blessing the imperfection may be removed. As regards the assertion that -gold and earth are one to the saint, this indifference is a sign of -intoxication and failure to see truly. More excellent is the man of true -sight and sound perception, to whom gold is gold and earth is earth, but -who recognizes the evil of the former and says: “O yellow ore! O white -ore! beguile some one else, for I am aware of your corruptedness.” He -who sees the corruptedness of gold and silver perceives them to be a -veil (between himself and God), and God will reward him for having -renounced them. Contrariwise, he to whom gold is even as earth is not -made perfect by renouncing earth. Ḥáritha, being intoxicated, declared -that stones and gold were alike to him, but Abú Bakr, being sober, -perceived the evil of laying hands on worldly wealth, and knew that God -would reward him for rejecting it. Therefore he renounced it, and when -the Apostle asked him what he had left for his family he answered, “God -and His Apostle.” And the following story is related by Abú Bakr Warráq -of Tirmidh: “One day Muḥammad b. `Alí (al-Ḥakím) said that he would take -me somewhere. I replied: ‘It is for the Shaykh to command.’ Soon after -we set out I saw an exceedingly dreadful wilderness, and in the midst -thereof a golden throne placed under a green tree beside a fountain of -running water. Seated on the throne was a person clad in beautiful -raiment, who rose when Muḥammad b. `Alí approached, and bade him sit on -the throne. After a while, people came from every side until forty were -gathered together. Then Muḥammad b. `Alí waved his hand, and immediately -food appeared from heaven, and we ate. Afterwards Muḥammad b. `Alí asked -a question of a man who was present, and he in reply made a long -discourse of which I did not understand a single word. At last the -Shaykh begged leave and took his departure, saying to me: ‘Go, for thou -art blest.’ On our return to Tirmidh, I asked him what was that place -and who was that man. He told me that the place was the Desert of the -Israelites (_tíh-i Baní Isrá´íl_) and that the man was the _Quṭb_ on -whom the order of the universe depends. ‘O Shaykh,’ I said, ‘how did we -reach the Desert of the Israelites from Tirmidh in such a brief time?’ -He answered: ‘O Abú Bakr, it is thy business to arrive (_rasídan_), not -to ask questions (_pursídan_).’“ This is a mark, not of intoxication, -but of sanity. - -Now I will mention some miracles and stories of the Ṣúfís, and link -thereto certain evidence which is to be found in the Book (the Koran). - - _Discourse concerning their Miracles._ - -The reality of miracles having been established by logical argument, you -must now become acquainted with the evidence of the Koran and the -genuine Traditions of the Apostle. Both Koran and Tradition proclaim the -reality of miracles and extraordinary acts wrought by saints. To deny -this is to deny the authority of the sacred texts. One example is the -text, ”_And We caused the clouds to overshadow you and the manna and the -quails to descend upon you_” (Kor. ii, 54). If any sceptic should assert -that this was an evidentiary miracle (_mu`jizat_) of Moses, I raise no -objection, because all the miracles of the saints are an evidentiary -miracle of Muḥammad; and if he says that this miracle was wrought in the -absence of Moses, although it occurred in his time, and that therefore -it was not necessarily wrought by him, I reply that the same principle -holds good in the case of Moses, when he quitted his people and went to -Mount Sinai, as in the case of Muḥammad; for there is no difference -between being absent in time and being absent in space. We are also told -of the miracle of Áṣaf b. Barkhiyá, who brought the throne of Bilqís to -Solomon in the twinkling of an eye (Kor. xxvii, 40). This cannot have -been a _mu`jizat_, for Áṣaf was not an apostle; had it been a -_mu`jizat_, it must have been wrought by Solomon: therefore it was a -_karámat_. We are told also of Mary that whenever Zacharias went into -her chamber he found winter fruits in summer and summer fruits in -winter, so that he said: “_‘Whence hadst thou this?’ She answered, ‘It -is from God’_” (Kor. iii, 32). Everyone admits that Mary was not an -apostle. Furthermore, we have the story of the men of the cave (_aṣḥáb -al-kahf_), how their dog spoke to them, and how they slept and turned -about in the cave (Kor. xviii, 17). All these were extraordinary acts, -and since they certainly were not a _mu`jizat_, they must have been a -_karámat_. Such miracles (_karámat_) may be, for example, the answering -of prayers through the accomplishment of wishes conceived by one who is -subject to the religious law (_ba-ḥuṣúl-i umúr-i mawhúm andar zamán-i -taklíf_), or the traversing of great distances in a short time, or the -appearance of food from an unaccustomed place, or power to read the -thoughts of others, etc. - -Among the genuine Traditions is the story of the cave (_ḥadíth -al-ghár_), which is told as follows. One day the Companions of the -Apostle begged him to relate to them some marvellous tale of the ancient -peoples. He said: “Once three persons were going to a certain place. At -eventide they took shelter in a cave, and while they were asleep a rock -fell from the mountain and blocked the mouth of the cave. They said to -one another, ‘We shall never escape from here unless we make our -disinterested actions plead for us before God.’ So one of them began: ‘I -had a father and mother and I had no worldly goods except a goat, whose -milk I used to give to them; and every day I used to gather a bundle of -firewood and sell it and spend the money in providing food for them and -myself. One night I came home rather late, and before I milked the goat -and steeped their food in the milk they had fallen asleep. I kept the -bowl in my hand and stood there, without having eaten anything, until -morning, when they awoke and ate; then I sat down.’ ‘O Lord’ (he -continued), ‘if I speak the truth concerning this matter, send us -deliverance and come to our aid!’” The Apostle said: “Thereupon the rock -moved a little and a crevice appeared. The next man said: ‘There was a -beautiful blind girl, with whom I was deeply in love, but she would not -listen to my suit. I managed to send to her a hundred and twenty dínárs -with a promise that she should keep the money if she would be mine for -one night. When she came the fear of God seized my heart. I turned from -her and let her keep the money.’ He added, ‘O God, if I speak the truth, -deliver us!’” The Apostle said: “Then the rock moved a little further -and the crevice widened, but they could not yet go forth. The third man -said: ‘I had some labourers working for me. When the work was done they -all received their wages except one, who disappeared. With his wages I -bought a sheep. Next year there were two, and in the year after that -there were four, and they soon became a large flock. After several years -the labourer returned and asked me for his wages. I said to him, “Go and -take all these sheep; they are your property.” He thought I must be -mocking him, but I assured him that it was true, and he went off with -the whole flock.’ The narrator added, ‘O Lord, if I speak the truth, -deliver us!’” “He had scarcely finished,” said the Apostle, “when the -rock moved away from the mouth of the cave and let the three men come -forth.”[122] It is related that Abú Sa`íd Kharráz said: “For a long time -I used to eat only once in three days. I was journeying in the desert, -and on the third day I felt weak through hunger. A voice from heaven -cried to me, ‘Dost thou prefer food that will quiet thy lower nature, or -an expedient that will enable thee to overcome thy weakness without -food?’ I replied, ‘O God, give me strength!’ Then I rose and travelled -twelve stages without meat or drink.” It is well known that at the -present day the house of Sahl b. `Abdalláh at Tustar is called the House -of the Wild Beasts (_bayt al-sibá`_), and the people of Tustar are -agreed that many wild beasts used to come to him, and that he fed and -tended them. Abu ´l-Qásim of Merv tells the following story: “As I was -walking on the seashore with Abú Sa`íd Kharráz, I saw a youth clad in a -patched frock and carrying a bucket (_rakwa_), to which an ink-bottle -was fastened. Kharráz said: ‘When I look at this youth he seems to be -one of the adepts (_rasídagán_), but when I look at his ink-bottle I -think he is a student. Let me question him.’ So he accosted the youth -and said, ‘What is the way to God?’ The youth answered: ‘There are two -ways to God: the way of the vulgar and the way of the elect. Thou hast -no knowledge of the latter, but the way of the vulgar, which thou -pursuest, is to regard thine own actions as the cause of attaining to -God, and to suppose that an ink-bottle is one of the things that -interfere with attainment.’” Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian says: “Once I -embarked in a ship voyaging from Egypt to Jidda. Among the passengers -was a youth wearing a patched frock. I was eager to be his companion, -but he inspired me with such awe that I did not venture to address him, -for his spiritual state was very exalted and he was constantly engaged -in devotion. One day a certain man lost a purse of jewels, and suspicion -fell on this youth. They were about to maltreat him, but I said, ‘Let me -question him courteously.’ I told him that he was suspected of theft and -that I had saved him from maltreatment. ‘And now,’ I said, ‘what is to -be done?’ He looked towards Heaven and spoke a few words. The fishes -came to the surface of the sea, each with a jewel in its mouth. He took -a jewel and gave it to his accuser; then he set his foot on the water -and walked away. Thereupon the real thief dropped the purse, and the -people in the ship repented.” Ibráhím Raqqí[123] is related to have -said: “In my novitiate I set out to visit Muslim Maghribí. I found him -in his mosque, acting as precentor. He pronounced _al-ḥamd_ incorrectly. -I said to myself, ‘My trouble has been wasted.’ Next day, when I was -going to the bank of the Euphrates to perform the religious ablution, I -saw a lion asleep on the road. I turned back, and was faced by another -lion which had been following me. Hearing my cry of despair, Muslim came -forth from his cell. When the lions saw him they humbled themselves -before him. He took the ear of each one and rubbed it, saying, ‘O dogs -of God, have not I told you that you must not interfere with my guests?’ -Then he said to me: ‘O Abú Isḥáq, thou hast busied thyself with -correcting thy exterior for the sake of God’s creatures, hence thou art -afraid of them; but it has been my business to correct my interior for -God’s sake, hence His creatures are afraid of me.’” One day my Shaykh -set out from Bayt al-Jinn to Damascus. Heavy rain had begun to fall, and -I was walking with difficulty in the mire. I noticed that the Shaykh’s -shoes and clothes were perfectly dry. On my pointing this out to him, he -said: “Yes; God has preserved me from mud ever since I put unquestioning -trust in Him and guarded my interior from the desolation of cupidity.” -Once an experience occurred to me which I could not unravel. I set out -to visit Shaykh Abu `l-Qásim Gurgání at Ṭús. I found him alone in his -chamber in the mosque, and he was expounding precisely the same -difficulty to a pillar, so that I was answered without having asked the -question. “O Shaykh,” I cried, “to whom art thou saying this?” He -replied: “O son, God just now caused this pillar to speak and ask me -this question.” In Farghána, at a village called Ashlátak,[124] there -was an old man, one of the _Awtád_ of the earth. His name was Báb -`Umar[125]—all the dervishes in that country give the title of Báb to -their great Shaykhs—and he had an old wife called Fáṭima. I went from -Uzkand to see him. When I entered his presence he said: “Why have you -come?” I replied: “In order that I might see the Shaykh in person and -that he might look on me with kindness.” He said: “I have been seeing -you continually since such and such a day, and I wish to see you as long -as you are not removed from my sight.” I computed the day and year: it -was the very day on which my conversion began. The Shaykh said: “To -traverse distance (_sipardan-i masáfat_) is child’s play: henceforth pay -visits by means of thought (_himmat_); it is not worth while to visit -any person (_shakhṣ_), and there is no virtue in bodily presence -(_ḥuḍúr-i ashbáḥ_).” Then he bade Fáṭima bring something to eat. She -brought a dish of new grapes, although it was not the season for them, -and some fresh ripe dates, which cannot possibly be procured in -Farghána. On another occasion, while I was sitting alone, as is my -custom, beside the tomb of Shaykh Abú Sa`íd at Mihna, I saw a white -pigeon fly under the cloth (_fúṭa_) covering the sepulchre. I supposed -that the bird had escaped from its owner, but when I looked under the -cloth nothing was to be seen. This happened again next day, and also on -the third day. I was at a loss to understand it, until one night I -dreamed of the saint and asked him about my experience. He answered: -“That pigeon is my good conduct (_ṣafá-yi mu`ámalat_), which comes every -day to my tomb to feast with me (_ba-munádamat-i man_).”[126] I might -adduce many more of these tales without exhausting them, but my purpose -in this book is to establish the principles of Ṣúfiism. As regards -derivatives and matters of conduct books have been compiled by the -traditionists (_naqqálán_), and these topics are disseminated from the -pulpit by preachers (_mudhakkirán_). Now I will give, in one or two -sections, an adequate account of certain points bearing on the present -discussion, in order that I may not have to return to it again. - -Footnote 122: - - Here follow (1) a Tradition, related by Abú Hurayra, of three infants - who were miraculously endowed with speech: (_a_) Jesus, (_b_) a child - who exculpated the monk Jurayj (George) when he was falsely accused by - a harlot, (_c_) a child who divined the characters of a horseman and a - woman. (2) A story of Zá´ida, the handmaid of the Caliph `Umar: how a - knight descended from heaven and gave her a message from Riḍwán, the - keeper of Paradise, to the Prophet; and how, when she could not lift a - bundle of firewood from a rock on which she had laid it, the Prophet - bade the rock go with her and carry the firewood to `Umar’s house. (3) - A story of `Alá b. al-Ḥaḍramí, who, having been sent on a warlike - expedition by the Prophet, walked dry-shod across a river with his - company. (4) A story of `Abdalláh b. `Umar, at whose bidding a lion - decamped and left the way open for a party of travellers. (5) A story - of a man who was seen sitting in the air, and when Abraham asked him - by what means he had obtained such power, replied that he had - renounced the world and that God had bestowed on him an aerial - dwelling-place where he was not disturbed by any thought of mankind. - (6) A story of the Caliph `Umar, who was on the point of being killed - by a Persian, when two lions suddenly appeared and caused the assassin - to desist. (7) A story of Khálid b. Walíd, who said “Bismillah” and - drank a deadly poison, which did him no harm. (8) A story, related by - Ḥasan of Baṣra, of a negro who turned the walls of a tavern into gold. - (9) A story, related by Ibráhím b. Adham, of a shepherd who smote a - rock with his staff and caused water to gush forth. (10) A story of a - cup which pronounced the words “Glory to God” in the hearing of Abú - Dardá and Salmán Fárisí. - -Footnote 123: - - Died in 326 A.H. See Abu ´l-Maḥásin, _Nujúm_, ii, 284, 13. - -Footnote 124: - - L. سلاتک. IJ. اسلاتک. - -Footnote 125: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 351. - -Footnote 126: - - Here the author tells the story, which has already been related (p. - 142 _supra_), of Abú Bakr Warráq, who was commanded by Muḥammad b. - `Alí of Tirmidh to throw some of the latter’s mystical writings into - the Oxus. - - _Discourse on the Superiority of the Prophets to the Saints._ - -You must know that, by universal consent of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, the saints -are at all times and in all circumstances subordinate to the prophets, -whose missions they confirm. The prophets are superior to the saints, -because the end of saintship is only the beginning of prophecy. Every -prophet is a saint, but some saints are not prophets. The prophets are -constantly exempt from the attributes of humanity, while the saints are -so only temporarily; the fleeting state (_ḥál_) of the saint is the -permanent station (_maqám_) of the prophet; and that which to the saints -is a station (_maqám_) is to the prophets a veil (_ḥijáb_). This view is -held unanimously by the Sunní divines and the Ṣúfí mystics, but it is -opposed by a sect of the Ḥashwiyya—the Anthropomorphists (_mujassima_) -of Khurásán—who discourse in a self-contradictory manner concerning the -principles of Unification (_tawḥíd_), and who, although they do not know -the fundamental doctrine of Ṣúfiism, call themselves saints. Saints they -are indeed, but saints of the Devil. They maintain that the saints are -superior to the prophets, and it is a sufficient proof of their error -that they declare an ignoramus to be more excellent than Muḥammad, the -Chosen of God. The same vicious opinion is held by another sect of -Anthropomorphists (_mushabbiha_), who pretend to be Ṣúfís, and admit the -doctrines of the incarnation of God and His descent (into the human -body) by transmigration (_intiqál_), and the division (_tajziya_) of His -essence. I will treat fully of these matters when I give my promised -account of the two reprobated sects (of Ṣúfís). The sects to which I am -now referring claim to be Moslems, but they agree with the Brahmans in -denying special privileges to the prophets; and whoever believes in this -doctrine becomes an infidel. Moreover, the prophets are propagandists -and Imáms, and the saints are their followers, and it is absurd to -suppose that the follower of an Imám is superior to the Imám himself. In -short, the lives, experiences, and spiritual powers of all the saints -together appear as nothing compared with one act of a true prophet, -because the saints are seekers and pilgrims, whereas the prophets have -arrived and have found and have returned with the command to preach and -to convert the people. If any one of the above-mentioned heretics should -urge that an ambassador sent by a king is usually inferior to the person -to whom he is sent, as e.g. Gabriel is inferior to the Apostles, and -that this is against my argument, I reply that an ambassador sent to a -single person should be inferior to him, but when an ambassador is sent -to a large number of persons or to a people, he is superior to them, as -the Apostles are superior to the nations. Therefore one moment of the -prophets is better than the whole life of the saints, because when the -saints reach their goal they tell of contemplation (_musháhadat_) and -obtain release from the veil of humanity (_bashariyyat_), although they -are essentially men. On the other hand, contemplation is the first step -of the apostle; and since the apostle’s starting-place is the saint’s -goal, they cannot be judged by the same standard. Do not you perceive -that, according to the unanimous opinion of all the saints who seek God, -the station of union (_jam`_) belongs to the perfection of saintship? -Now, in this station, a man attains such a degree of rapturous love that -his intelligence is enraptured in gazing upon the act of God (_fi`l_), -and in his longing for the Divine Agent (_fá`il_) he regards the whole -universe as that and sees nothing but that. Thus Abú `Alí Rúdbárí says: -“Were the vision of that which we serve to vanish from us, we should -lose the name of servantship (_`ubúdiyyat_)” for we derive the glory of -worship (_`ibádat_) solely from vision of Him. This is the beginning of -the state of the prophets, inasmuch as separation (_tafriqa_) is -inconceivable in relation to them. They are entirely in the essence of -union, whether they affirm or deny, whether they approach or turn away, -whether they are at the beginning or at the end. Abraham, in the -beginning of his state, looked on the sun and said: “_This is my Lord_,” -and he looked on the moon and stars and said: “_This is my Lord_” (Kor. -vi, 76-8), because his heart was overwhelmed by the Truth and he was -united in the essence of union. Therefore he saw naught else, or if he -saw aught else he did not see it with the eye of “otherness” (_ghayr_), -but with the eye of union (_jam`_), and in the reality of that vision he -disavowed his own and said: “_I love not those that set_” (Kor. vi, 76). -As he began with union, so he ended with union. Saintship has a -beginning and an end, but prophecy has not. The prophets were prophets -from the first, and shall be to the last, and before they existed they -were prophets in the knowledge and will of God. Abú Yazíd was asked -about the state of the prophets. He replied: “Far be it from me to say! -We have no power to judge of them, and in our notions of them we are -wholly ourselves. God has placed their denial and affirmation in such an -exalted degree that human vision cannot reach unto it.” Accordingly, as -the rank of the saints is hidden from the perception of mankind, so the -rank of the prophets is hidden from the judgment of the saints. Abú -Yazíd was the proof (_ḥujjat_) of his age, and he says: “I saw that my -spirit (_sirr_) was borne to the heavens. It looked at nothing and gave -no heed, though Paradise and Hell were displayed to it, for it was freed -from phenomena and veils. Then I became a bird, whose body was of -Oneness and whose wings were of Everlastingness, and I continued to fly -in the air of the Absolute (_huwiyyat_), until I passed into the sphere -of Purification (_tanzíh_), and gazed upon the field of Eternity -(_azaliyyat_) and beheld there the tree of Oneness. When I looked I -myself was all those. I cried: ‘O Lord, with my egoism (_maní-yi man_) I -cannot attain to Thee, and I cannot escape from my selfhood. What am I -to do?’ God spake: ‘O Abú Yazíd, thou must win release from thy -“thou-ness” by following My beloved i.e. (Muḥammad). Smear thine eyes -with the dust of his feet and follow him continually.‘” This is a long -narrative. The Ṣúfís call it the Ascension (_mi`ráj_) of Báyazíd;[127] -and the term “ascension” denotes proximity to God (_qurb_). The -ascension of prophets takes place outwardly and in the body, whereas -that of saints takes place inwardly and in the spirit. The body of an -apostle resembles the heart and spirit of a saint in purity and nearness -to God. This is a manifest superiority. When a saint is enraptured and -intoxicated he is withdrawn from himself by means of a spiritual ladder -and brought near to God; and as soon as he returns to the state of -sobriety all those evidences have taken shape in his mind and he has -gained knowledge of them. Accordingly, there is a great difference -between one who is carried thither in person and one who is carried -thither only in thought (_fikrat_), for thought involves duality. - -Footnote 127: - - A full account of Báyazíd’s ascension is given in the _Tadhkirat - al-Awliyá_, i, 172 ff. - -_Discourse on the Superiority of the Prophets and Saints to the Angels._ - -The whole community of orthodox Moslems and all the Ṣúfí Shaykhs agree -that the prophets and such of the saints as are guarded from sin -(_maḥfúẕ_) are superior to the angels. The opposite view is held by the -Mu`tazilites, who declare that the angels are superior to the prophets, -being of more exalted rank, of more subtle constitution, and more -obedient to God. I reply that this is not as you imagine, for an -obedient body, an exalted rank, and a subtle constitution cannot be -causes of superiority, which belongs only to those on whom God has -bestowed it. Iblís had all the qualities that you mention, yet he is -universally acknowledged to have become accursed. The superiority of the -prophets is indicated by the fact that God commanded the angels to -worship Adam; for the state of one who is worshipped is higher than the -state of the worshipper. If they argue that, just as a true believer is -superior to the Ka`ba, an inanimate mass of stone, although he bows down -before it, so the angels may be superior to Adam, although they bowed -down before him, I reply: “No one says that a believer bows down to a -house or an altar or a wall, but all say that he bows down to God, and -it is admitted by all that the angels bowed down to Adam (Kor. ii, 32). -How, then, can the Ka`ba be compared to Adam? A traveller may worship -God on the back of the animal which he is riding, and he is excused if -his face be not turned towards the Ka`ba; and, in like manner, one who -has lost his bearings in a desert, so that he cannot tell the direction -of the Ka`ba, will have done his duty in whatever direction he may turn -to pray. The angels offered no excuse when they bowed down to Adam, and -the one who made an excuse for himself became accursed.” These are clear -proofs to any person of insight. - -Again, the angels are equal to the prophets in knowledge of God, but not -in rank. The angels are without lust, covetousness, and evil; their -nature is devoid of hypocrisy and guile, and they are instinctively -obedient to God; whereas lust is an impediment in human nature; and men -have a propensity to commit sins and to be impressed by the vanities of -this world; and Satan has so much power over their bodies that he -circulates with the blood in their veins; and closely attached to them -is the lower soul (_nafs_), which incites them to all manner of -wickedness. Therefore, one whose nature has all these characteristics -and who, in spite of the violence of his lust, refrains from immorality, -and notwithstanding his covetousness renounces this world, and, though -his heart is still tempted by the Devil, turns back from sin and averts -his face from sensual depravity in order to occupy himself with devotion -and persevere in piety and mortify his lower soul and contend against -the Devil, such a one is in reality superior to the angel who is not the -battle-field of lust, and is naturally without desire of food and -pleasures, and has no care for wife and child and kinsfolk, and need not -have recourse to means and instruments, and is not absorbed in corrupt -ambitions. A Gabriel, who worships God so many thousands of years in the -hope of gaining a robe of honour, and the honour bestowed on him was -that of acting as Muḥammad’s groom on the night of the Ascension—how -should he be superior to one who disciplines and mortifies his lower -soul by day and night in this world, until God looks on him with favour -and grants to him the grace of seeing Himself and delivers him from all -distracting thoughts? When the pride of the angels passed all bounds, -and every one of them vaunted the purity of his conduct and spoke with -an unbridled tongue in blame of mankind, God resolved that He would show -to them their real state. He therefore bade them choose three of the -chief among them, in whom they had confidence, to go to the earth and be -its governors and reform its people. So three angels were chosen, but -before they came to the earth one of them perceived its corruption and -begged God to let him return. When the other two arrived on the earth -God changed their nature so that they felt a desire for food and drink -and were inclined to lust, and God punished them on that account, and -the angels were forced to recognize the superiority of mankind to -themselves.[128] In short, the elect among the true believers are -superior to the elect among the angels, and the ordinary believers are -superior to the ordinary angels. Accordingly those men who are preserved -(_ma`ṣúm_) and protected (_maḥfúẕ_) from sin are more excellent than -Gabriel and Michael, and those who are not thus preserved are better -than the Recording Angels (_ḥafaẕa_) and the noble Scribes (_kirám-i -kátibín_). - -Footnote 128: - - See Kor. ii, 96 ff. - -Something has been said on this subject by every one of the Shaykhs. God -awards superiority to whom He pleases, over whom He pleases. You must -know that saintship is a Divine mystery which is revealed only through -conduct (_rawish_). A saint is known only to a saint. If this matter -could be made plain to all reasonable men it would be impossible to -distinguish the friend from the foe or the spiritual adept from the -careless worldling. Therefore God so willed that the pearl of His love -should be set in the shell of popular contempt and be cast into the sea -of affliction, in order that those who seek it may hazard their lives on -account of its preciousness and dive to the bottom of this ocean of -death, where they will either win their desire or bring their mortal -state to an end. - - - 8.THE KHARRÁZÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú Sa`íd Kharráz, who wrote brilliant works -on Ṣúfiism and attained a high degree in detachment from the world. He -was the first to explain the state of annihilation and subsistence -(_faná ú baqá_), and he comprehended his whole doctrine in these two -terms. Now I will declare their meaning and show the errors into which -some have fallen in this respect, in order that you may know what his -doctrine is and what the Ṣúfís intend when they employ these current -expressions. - - _Discourse on Subsistence_ (baqá) _and Annihilation_ (faná). - -You must know that annihilation and subsistence have one meaning in -science and another meaning in mysticism, and that formalists -(_ẕáhiriyán_) are more puzzled by these words than by any other -technical terms of the Ṣúfís. Subsistence in its scientific and -etymological acceptation is of three kinds: (1) a subsistence that -begins and ends in annihilation, e.g. this world, which had a beginning -and will have an end, and is now subsistent; (2) a subsistence that came -into being and will never be annihilated, viz. Paradise and Hell and the -next world and its inhabitants; (3) a subsistence that always was and -always will be, viz. the subsistence of God and His eternal attributes. -Accordingly, knowledge of annihilation lies in your knowing that this -world is perishable, and knowledge of subsistence lies in your knowledge -that the next world is everlasting. - -But the subsistence and annihilation of a state (_ḥál_) denotes, for -example, that when ignorance is annihilated knowledge is necessarily -subsistent, and that when sin is annihilated piety is subsistent, and -that when a man acquires knowledge of his piety his forgetfulness -(_ghaflat_) is annihilated by remembrance of God (_dhikr_), i.e., when -anyone gains knowledge of God and becomes subsistent in knowledge of Him -he is annihilated from (entirely loses) ignorance of Him, and when he is -annihilated from forgetfulness he becomes subsistent in remembrance of -Him, and this involves the discarding of blameworthy attributes and the -substitution of praiseworthy attributes. A different signification, -however, is attached to the terms in question by the elect among the -Ṣúfís. They do not refer these expressions to “knowledge” (_`ilm_) or to -“state” (_ḥál_), but apply them solely to the degree of perfection -attained by the saints who have become free from the pains of -mortification and have escaped from the prison of “stations” and the -vicissitude of “states”, and whose search has ended in discovery, so -that they have seen all things visible, and have heard all things -audible, and have discovered all the secrets of the heart; and who, -recognizing the imperfection of their own discovery, have turned away -from all things and have purposely become annihilated in the object of -desire, and in the very essence of desire have lost all desires of their -own, for when a man becomes annihilated from his attributes he attains -to perfect subsistence, he is neither near nor far, neither stranger nor -intimate, neither sober nor intoxicated, neither separated nor united; -he has no name, or sign, or brand, or mark. - -In short, real annihilation from anything involves consciousness of its -imperfection and absence of desire for it, not merely that a man should -say, when he likes a thing, “I am subsistent therein,” or when he -dislikes it, that he should say, “I am annihilated therefrom”; for these -qualities are characteristic of one who is still seeking. In -annihilation there is no love or hate, and in subsistence there is no -consciousness of union or separation. Some wrongly imagine that -annihilation signifies loss of essence and destruction of personality, -and that subsistence indicates the subsistence of God in Man; both these -notions are absurd. In India I had a dispute on this subject with a man -who claimed to be versed in Koranic exegesis and theology. When I -examined his pretensions I found that he knew nothing of annihilation -and subsistence, and that he could not distinguish the eternal from the -phenomenal. Many ignorant Ṣúfís consider that total annihilation -(_faná-yi kulliyyat_) is possible, but this is a manifest error, for -annihilation of the different parts of a material substance (_ṭínatí_) -can never take place. I ask these ignorant and mistaken men: “What do -you mean by this kind of annihilation?” If they answer, “Annihilation of -substance” (_faná-yi `ayn_), that is impossible; and if they answer, -“Annihilation of attributes,” that is only possible in so far as one -attribute may be annihilated through the subsistence of another -attribute, both attributes belonging to Man; but it is absurd to suppose -that anyone can subsist through the attributes of another individual. -The Nestorians of Rúm and the Christians hold that Mary annihilated by -self-mortification all the attributes of humanity (_awṣáf-i násútí_) and -that the Divine subsistence became attached to her, so that she was made -subsistent through the subsistence of God, and that Jesus was the result -thereof, and that he was not originally composed of the stuff of -humanity, because his subsistence is produced by realization of the -subsistence of God; and that, in consequence of this, he and his mother -and God are all subsistent through one subsistence, which is eternal and -an attribute of God. All this agrees with the doctrine of the -anthropomorphistic sects of the Ḥashwiyya, who maintain that the Divine -essence is a _locus_ of phenomena (_maḥall-i ḥawádith_) and that the -Eternal may have phenomenal attributes. I ask all who proclaim such -tenets: “What difference is there between the view that the Eternal is -the _locus_ of the phenomenal and the view that the phenomenal is the -_locus_ of the Eternal, or between the assertion that the Eternal has -phenomenal attributes and the assertion that the phenomenal has eternal -attributes?” Such doctrines involve materialism (_dahr_) and destroy the -proof of the phenomenal nature of the universe, and compel us to say -that both the Creator and His creation are eternal or that both are -phenomenal, or that what is created may be commingled with what is -uncreated, and that what is uncreated may descend into what is created. -If, as they cannot help admitting, the creation is phenomenal, then -their Creator also must be phenomenal, because the _locus_ of a thing is -like its substance; if the _locus_ (_maḥall_) is phenomenal, it follows -that the contents of the _locus_ (_ḥáll_) are phenomenal too. In fine, -when one thing is linked and united and commingled with another, both -things are in principle as one. - -Accordingly, our subsistence and annihilation are attributes of -ourselves, and resemble each other in respect of their being our -attributes. Annihilation is the annihilation of one attribute through -the subsistence of another attribute. One may speak, however, of an -annihilation that is independent of subsistence, and also of a -subsistence that is independent of annihilation: in that case -annihilation means “annihilation of all remembrance of other”, and -subsistence means “subsistence of the remembrance of God” (_baqá-yi -dhikr-i ḥaqq_). Whoever is annihilated from his own will subsists in the -will of God, because thy will is perishable and the will of God is -everlasting: when thou standest by thine own will thou standest by -annihilation, but when thou art absolutely controlled by the will of God -thou standest by subsistence. Similarly, the power of fire transmutes to -its own quality anything that falls into it, and surely the power of -God’s will is greater than that of fire; but fire affects only the -quality of iron without changing its substance, for iron can never -become fire. - - - SECTION. - -All the Shaykhs have given subtle indications on this subject. Abú Sa’íd -Kharráz, the author of the doctrine, says: “Annihilation is annihilation -of consciousness of manhood (_`ubúdiyyat_), and subsistence is -subsistence in the contemplation of Godhead (_iláhiyyat_),” i.e., it is -an imperfection to be conscious in one’s actions that one is a man, and -one attains to real manhood (_bandagí_) when one is not conscious of -them, but is annihilated so as not to see them, and becomes subsistent -through beholding the action of God. Hence all one’s actions are -referred to God, not to one’s self, and whereas a man’s actions that are -connected with himself are imperfect, those which are attached to him by -God are perfect. Therefore, when anyone becomes annihilated from things -that depend on himself, he becomes subsistent through the beauty of -Godhead. Abú Ya`qúb Nahrajúrí says: “A man’s true servantship -(_`ubúdiyyat_) lies in annihilation and subsistence,” because no one is -capable of serving God with sincerity until he renounces all -self-interest: therefore to renounce humanity (_ádamiyyat_) is -annihilation, and to be sincere in servantship is subsistence. And -Ibráhím b. Shaybán says: “The science of annihilation and subsistence -turns on sincerity (_ikhláṣ_) and unity (_wáḥid—iyyat_) and true -servantship; all else is error and heresy,” i.e., when anyone -acknowledges the unity of God he feels himself overpowered by the -omnipotence of God, and one who is overpowered (_maghlúb_) is -annihilated in the might of his vanquisher; and when his annihilation is -rightly fulfilled on him, he confesses his weakness and sees no resource -except to serve God, and tries to gain His satisfaction (_riḍá_). And -whoever explains these terms otherwise, i.e. annihilation as meaning -“annihilation of substance” and subsistence as meaning “subsistence of -God (in Man)”, is a heretic and a Christian, as has been stated above. - -Now I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, declare that all these sayings are -near to each other in meaning, although they differ in expression; and -their real gist is this, that annihilation comes to a man through vision -of the majesty of God and through the revelation of Divine omnipotence -to his heart, so that in the overwhelming sense of His majesty this -world and the next world are obliterated from his mind, and “states” and -“stations” appear contemptible in the sight of his aspiring thought, and -what is shown to him of miraculous grace vanishes into nothing: he -becomes dead to reason and passion alike, dead even to annihilation -itself; and in that annihilation of annihilation his tongue proclaims -God, and his mind and body are humble and abased, as in the beginning -when Adam’s posterity were drawn forth from his loins without admixture -of evil and took the pledge of servantship to God (Kor. vii, 171). - -Such are the principles of annihilation and subsistence. I have -discussed a portion of the subject in the chapter on Poverty and -Ṣúfiism, and wherever these terms occur in the present work they bear -the meaning which I have explained. - - - 9.THE KHAFÍFÍS. - -They are the followers of Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. Khafíf of Shíráz, an -eminent mystic in his time and the author of celebrated treatises on -various branches of Ṣúfiism. He was a man of great spiritual influence, -and was not led by his lusts. I have heard that he contracted four -hundred marriages. This was due to the fact that he was of royal -descent, and that after his conversion the people of Shíráz paid great -court to him, and the daughters of kings and nobles desired to marry him -for the sake of the blessing which would accrue to them. He used to -comply with their wishes, and then divorce them before consummation of -the marriage. But in the course of his life forty wives, who were -strangers to him (_bégána_), two or three at a time, used to serve him -as bed-makers (_khádimán-i firásh_), and one of them—she was the -daughter of a vizier—lived with him for forty years. I have heard from -Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Bakrán of Shíráz that one day several of his wives -were gathered together, and each one was telling some story about him. -They all agreed _sese nunquam eum vidisse libidini obsequentem_. -Hitherto each of them had believed that she was peculiarly treated in -this respect, and when they learned that the Shaykh’s behaviour was the -same towards them all, they were astonished and doubted whether such was -truly the case. Accordingly, they sent two of their number to question -the vizier’s daughter, who was his favourite, as to his dealings with -her. She replied: “When the Shaykh wedded me and I was informed that he -would visit me that night, I prepared a fine repast and adorned myself -assiduously. As soon as he came and the food was brought in, he called -me to him and looked for a while first at me and then at the food. Then -he took my hand and drew it into his sleeve. From his breast to his -navel there were fifteen knots (_`aqd_) growing out of his belly. He -said, ‘Ask me what these are’; so I asked him and he replied, ‘They are -knots made by the tribulation and anguish of my abstinence in renouncing -a face like this and viands like these.’ He said no more, but departed; -and that is all my intimacy with him.” - -The form of his doctrine in Ṣúfiism is “absence” (_ghaybat_) and -“presence” (_ḥuḍúr_). I will explain it as far as possible. - - _Discourse on Absence_ (ghaybat) _and Presence_ (ḥuḍúr). - -These terms, although apparently opposed to each other, express the same -meaning from different points of view. “Presence” is “presence of the -heart”, as a proof of intuitive faith (_yaqín_), so that what is hidden -from it has the same force as what is visible to it. “Absence” is -“absence of the heart from all things except God” to such an extent that -it becomes absent from itself and absent even from its absence, so that -it no longer regards itself; and the sign of this state is withdrawal -from all formal authority (_ḥukm-i rusúm_), as when a prophet is -divinely preserved from what is unlawful. Accordingly, absence from -one’s self is presence with God, and _vice versâ_. God is the lord of -the human heart: when a divine rapture (_jadhbat_) overpowers the heart -of the seeker, the absence of his heart becomes equivalent to its -presence (with God); partnership (_shirkat_) and division (_qismat_) -disappear, and relationship to “self” comes to an end, as one of the -Shaykhs has said in verse— - - “_Thou art the Lord of my heart, - Without any partner: how, then, can it be divided?_” - -Inasmuch as God is sole lord of the heart, He has absolute power to keep -it absent or present as He will, and, in regard to the essence of the -case, this is the whole argument for the doctrine of His favourites; but -when a distinction is made, the Shaykhs hold various opinions on the -subject, some preferring “presence” to “absence”, while others declare -that “absence” is superior to “presence”. There is the same controversy -as that concerning sobriety and intoxication, which I have explained -above; but these terms indicate that the human attributes are still -subsistent, whereas “absence” and “presence” indicate that the human -attributes are annihilated: therefore the latter terms are in reality -more sublime. “Absence” is preferred to “presence” by Ibn `Aṭá, Ḥusayn -b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj), Abú Bakr Shiblí, Bundár b. al-Ḥusayn, Abú Ḥamza -of Baghdád, Sumnún Muḥibb, and a number of the Shaykhs of `Iráq. They -say: “Thou thyself art the greatest of all veils between thee and God: -when thou hast become absent from thyself, the evils implicit in thy -being are annihilated in thee, and thy state undergoes a fundamental -change: the ‘stations’ of novices become a veil to thee, and the -‘states’ of those who seek God become a source of mischief to thee; -thine eye is closed to thyself and to all that is other than God, and -thy human attributes are consumed by the flame of proximity to God -(_qurbat_). This is the same state of ‘absence’ in which God drew thee -forth from the loins of Adam, and caused thee to hear His exalted word, -and distinguished thee by the honorary robe of Unification and the -garment of contemplation; so long as thou wert absent from thyself, thou -wert present with God face to face, but when thou becamest present with -thine own attributes, thou becamest absent from thy proximity to God. -Therefore thy ‘presence’ is thy perdition. This is the meaning of God’s -word, ‘_And now are ye come unto us alone, as We created you at first_’” -(Kor. vi, 94). On the other hand, Ḥárith Muḥásibí, Junayd, Sahl b. -`Abdalláh, Abú Ja`far Ḥaddád,[129] Ḥamdún Qaṣṣár, Abú Muḥammad Jurayrí, -Ḥuṣrí, Muḥammad b. Khafíf, who is the author of the doctrine, and others -hold that “presence” is superior to “absence”. They argue that inasmuch -as all excellences are bound up with “presence”, and as “absence” from -one’s self is a way leading to “presence” with God, the way becomes an -imperfection after you have arrived at the goal. “Presence” is the fruit -of “absence”, but what light is to be found in “absence” without -“presence”? A man must needs renounce heedlessness in order that, by -means of this “absence”, he may attain to “presence”; and when he has -attained his object, the means by which he attained it has no longer any -worth. - - “_The ‘absent’ one is not he who is absent from his country, - But he who is absent from all desire. - The ‘present’ one is not he who hath no desire, - But he who hath no heart (no thought of worldly things), - So that his desire is ever fixed on God._” - -Footnote 129: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 201. - -It is a well-known story that one of the disciples of Dhu ´l-Nún set out -to visit Abú Yazíd. When he came to Abú Yazíd’s cell and knocked at the -door Abú Yazíd said: “Who art thou, and whom dost thou wish to see?” He -answered: “Abú Yazíd.” Abú Yazíd said: “Who is Abú Yazíd, and where is -he, and what thing is he? I have been seeking Abú Yazíd for a long -while, but I have not found him.” When the disciple returned to Dhu -´l-Nún and told him what had passed, Dhu ´l-Nún said: “My brother Abú -Yazíd is lost with those who are lost in God.” A certain man came to -Junayd and said: “Be present with me for a moment that I may speak to -thee.” Junayd answered: “O young man, you demand of me something that I -have long been seeking. For many years I have been wishing to become -present with myself a moment, but I cannot; how, then, can I become -present with you just now?” Therefore, “absence” involves the sorrow of -being veiled, while “presence” involves the joy of revelation, and the -former state can never be equal to the latter. Shaykh Abú Sa`íd says on -this subject— - - _Taqashsha`a ghaymu ´l-hajri `an qamari ´l-ḥubbi - Wa-asfara núru ´l-ṣubḥi `an ẕulmati ´l-ghaybi._ - - “The clouds of separation have been cleared away from the moon of love, - And the light of morning has shone forth from the darkness of the - Unseen.” - -The distinction made by the Shaykhs between these two terms is mystical, -and on the surface merely verbal, for they seem to be approximately the -same. To be present with God is to be absent from one’s self—what is the -difference?—and one who is not absent from himself is not present with -God. Thus, forasmuch as the impatience of Job in his affliction did not -proceed from himself, but on the contrary he was then absent from -himself, God did not distinguish his impatience from patience, and when -he cried, “_Evil hath befallen me_” (Kor. xxi, 83), God said, “_Verily, -he was patient_.” This is evidently a judgment founded on the essential -nature of the case (_ḥukm ba-`ayn_). It is related that Junayd said: -“For a time I was such that the inhabitants of heaven and earth wept -over my bewilderment (_ḥayrat_); then, again, I became such that I wept -over their absence (_ghaybat_); and now my state is such that I have no -knowledge either of them or of myself.” This is an excellent indication -of “presence”. - -I have briefly explained the meaning of “presence” and “absence” in -order that you may be acquainted with the doctrine of the Khafífís, and -may also know in what sense these terms are used by the Ṣúfís. - - - 10. SAYYÁRÍS. - -They are the followers of Abu ´l-`Abbás Sayyárí, the Imám of Merv. He -was learned in all the sciences and associated with Abú Bakr Wásiṭí. At -the present day he has numerous followers in Nasá and Merv. His school -of Ṣúfiism is the only one that has kept its original doctrine -unchanged, and the cause of this fact is that Nasá and Merv have never -been without some person who acknowledged his authority and took care -that his followers should maintain the doctrine of their founder. The -Sayyárís of Nasá carried on a discussion with those of Merv by means of -letters, and I have seen part of this correspondence at Merv; it is very -fine. Their expositions are based on “union” (_jam`_) and “separation” -(_tafriqa_). These words are common to all scientists and are employed -by specialists in every branch of learning as a means of rendering their -explanations intelligible, but they bear different meanings in each -case. Thus, in arithmetic _jam`_ denotes the addition and _tafriqa_ the -subtraction of numbers; in grammar _jam`_ is the agreement of words in -derivation, while _tafriqa_ is the difference in meaning; in law _jam`_ -is analogy (_qiyás_) and _tafriqa_ the characteristics of an -authoritative text (_ṣifát-i nuṣṣ_), or _jam`_ is the text and _tafriqa_ -the analogy; in divinity _jam`_ denotes the essential and _tafriqa_ the -formal attributes of God.[130] But the Ṣúfís do not use these terms in -any of the significations which I have mentioned. Now, therefore, I will -explain the meaning attached to them by the Ṣúfís and the various -opinions of the Shaykhs on this subject. - -Footnote 130: - - For the distinction between _ṣifát-i dhát_ and _ṣifát-i fi`l_ see - Dozy, _Supplément_, ii, 810. - - _Discourse on Union_ (jam`) _and Separation_ (tafriqa). - -God united all mankind in His call, as He says, “_And God calls to the -abode of peace_”; then He separated them in respect of Divine guidance, -and said, “_and guides whom He willeth into the right way_” (Kor. x, -26). He called them all, and banished some in accordance with the -manifestation of His will; He united them all and gave a command, and -then separated them, rejecting some and leaving them without succour, -but accepting others and granting to them Divine aid; then once more he -united a certain number and separated them, giving to some immunity from -sin and to others a propensity towards evil. Accordingly the real -mystery of union is the knowledge and will of God, while separation is -the manifestation of that which He commands and forbids: e.g., He -commanded Abraham to behead Ishmael, but willed that he should not do -so; and He commanded Iblís to worship Adam, but willed the contrary; and -He commanded Adam not to eat the corn, but willed that he should eat it; -and so forth. Union is that which He unites by His attributes, and -separation is that which He separates by His acts. All this involves -cessation of human volition and affirmation of the Divine will so as to -exclude all personal initiative. As regards what has been said on the -subject of union and separation, all the Sunnís, except the -Mu`tazilites, are in agreement with the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, but at this point -they begin to diverge, some applying the terms in question to the Divine -Unity (_tawḥíd_), some to the Divine attributes, and some to the Divine -acts. Those who refer to the Divine Unity say that there are two degrees -of union, one in the attributes of God and the other in the attributes -of Man. The former is the mystery of Unification (_tawḥíd_), in which -human actions have no part whatever; the latter denotes acknowledgment -of the Divine Unity with sincere conviction and unfailing resolution. -This is the opinion of Abú `Alí Rúdbárí. Those, again, who refer these -terms to the Divine attributes say that union is an attribute of God, -and separation an act of God in which Man does not co-operate, because -God has no rival in Godhead. Therefore union can be referred only to His -substance and attributes, for union is equality in the fundamental -matter (_al-taswiyat fi ´l-aṣl_), and no two things are equal in respect -of eternity except His substance and His attributes, which, when they -are separated by expository analysis (_`ibárat ú tafṣíl_), are not -united. This means that God has eternal attributes, which are peculiar -to Him and subsist through Him; and that He and His attributes are not -two, for His Unity does not admit difference and number. On this ground, -union is impossible except in the sense indicated above. - -Separation in predicament (_al-tafriqat fi ´l-ḥukm_) refers to the -actions of God, all of which are separate in this respect. The -predicament of one is being (_wujúd_); of another, not-being -(_`adam_), but a not-being that is capable of being; of another, -annihilation (_faná_), and of another subsistence (_baqá_). There are -some, again, who refer these terms to knowledge (_`ilm_) and say that -union is knowledge of the Divine Unity and separation knowledge of the -Divine ordinances: hence theology is union and jurisprudence is -separation. One of the Shaykhs has said, to the same effect: “Union is -that on which theologians (_ahl al-`ilm_) are agreed, and separation -is that on which they differ.” Again, all the Ṣúfí mystics, whenever -they use the term “separation” in the course of their expositions and -indications, attach to it the meaning of “human actions” (_makásib_), -e.g. self-mortification, and by “union” they signify “divine gifts” -(_mawáhib_), e.g. contemplation. Whatever is gained by means of -mortification is “separation”, and whatever is solely the result of -Divine favour and guidance is “union”. It is Man’s glory that, while -his actions exist and mortification is possible, he should escape by -God’s goodness from the imperfection of his own actions, and should -find them to be absorbed in the bounties of God, so that he depends -entirely on God and commits all his attributes to His charge and -refers all his actions to Him and none to himself, as Gabriel told the -Apostle that God said: “My servant continually seeks access to Me by -means of works of supererogation until I love him; and when I love -him, I am his ear and his eye and his hand and his heart and his -tongue: through Me he hears and sees and speaks and grasps,” i.e., in -remembering Me he is enraptured by the remembrance (_dhikr_) of Me, -and his own “acquisition” (_kasb_) is annihilated so as to have no -part in his remembrance, and My remembrance overpowers his -remembrance, and the relationship of humanity (_ádamiyyat_) is -entirely removed from his remembrance: then My remembrance is his -remembrance, and in his rapture he becomes even as Abú Yazíd in the -hour when he said: “Glory to me! how great is my majesty!” These words -were the outward sign of his speech, but the speaker was God. -Similarly, the Apostle said: “God speaks by the tongue of `Umar.” The -fact is that when the Divine omnipotence manifests its dominion over -humanity, it transports a man out of his own being, so that his speech -becomes the speech of God. But it is impossible that God should be -mingled (_imtizáj_) with created beings or made one (_ittiḥád_) with -His works or become incarnate (_ḥáll_) in things: God is exalted far -above that, and far above that which the heretics ascribe to Him. - -It may happen, then, that God’s love holds absolute sway over the heart -of His servant, and that his reason and natural faculties are too weak -to sustain its rapture and intensity, and that he loses all control of -his power to act (_kasb_). This state is called “union”.[131] Herewith -are connected all extraordinary miracles (_i`jáz_) and acts of -miraculous grace (_karámát_). All ordinary actions are “separation”, and -all acts which violate custom are “union”. God bestows these miracles on -His prophets and saints, and refers His actions to them and theirs to -Himself, as He hath said: “_Verily, they who swear fealty unto thee, -swear fealty unto God_” (Kor. xlviii, 10), and again: “_Whosoever obeys -the Apostle has obeyed God_” (Kor. iv, 82). Accordingly, His saints are -united (_mujtami`_) by their inward feelings (_asrár_) and separated -(_muftariq_) by their outward behaviour, so that their love of God is -strengthened by the internal union, and the right fulfilment of their -duty as servants of God is assured by their external separation. A -certain great Shaykh says— - - “_I have realized that which is within me, and my tongue hath conversed - with Thee in secret, - And we are united in one respect, but we are separated in another. - Although awe has hidden Thee from the glances of mine eye, - Ecstasy has made Thee near to my inmost parts._”[132] - -The state of being inwardly united he calls “union”, and the secret -conversation of the tongue he calls “separation”; then he indicates that -both union and separation are in himself, and attributes the basis -(_qá`ida_) of them to himself. This is very subtle. - -Footnote 131: - - Here the author illustrates the meaning of “union” and “separation” by - the action of Muḥammad when he threw gravel in the eyes of the - unbelievers at Badr, and by that of David when he slew Goliath. See p. - 185 _supra_. - -Footnote 132: - - The last words are corrupt and unmetrical in all the texts. I have - found the true reading, من الأَحْشآءِ دانى, in a MS. of the _Kitáb - al-Luma`_ by Abú Naṣr al-Sarráj, which has recently come into the - possession of Mr. A. G. Ellis. - - - SECTION. - -Here I must notice a matter of controversy between us and those who -maintain that the manifestation of union is the denial of separation, -because the two terms contradict each other, and that when anyone passes -under the absolute sway of Divine guidance he ceases to act and to -mortify himself. This is sheer nullification (_ta`ṭíl_), for a man must -never cease to practise devotion and mortify himself as long as he has -the possibility and power of doing so. Moreover, union is not apart from -separation, as light is apart from the sun, and accident from substance, -and attribute from object: therefore, neither is self-mortification -apart from Divine guidance, nor the Truth from the Law, nor discovery -from search. But mortification may precede or follow Divine guidance. In -the former case a man’s tribulation is increased, because he is in -“absence” (_ghaybat_), while in the latter case he has no trouble or -pain, because he is in “presence” (_haḍrat_). Those to whom negation is -the source (_mashrab_) of actions, and to whom it seems to be the -substance (_`ayn_) of action, commit a grave error. A man, however, may -attain such a degree that he regards all his qualities as faulty and -defective, for when he sees that his praiseworthy qualities are vicious -and imperfect, his blameworthy qualities will necessarily appear more -vicious. I adduce these considerations because some ignorant persons, -who have fallen into an error that is closely akin to infidelity, assert -that no result whatever depends upon our exertion, and that inasmuch as -our actions and devotions are faulty and our mortifications are -imperfect a thing left undone is better than a thing done. To this -argument I reply: “You are agreed in supposing that everything done by -us has an energy (_fi`l_), and you declare that our energies are a -centre of defect and a source of evil and corruption: consequently you -must also suppose that things left undone by us have an energy; and -since in both cases there is an energy involving defect, how can you -regard that which we leave undone as better than that which we do?” This -notion evidently is a noxious delusion. Here we have an excellent -criterion to distinguish the believer from the infidel. Both agree that -their energies are inherently defective, but the believer, in accordance -with God’s command, deems a thing done to be better than a thing left -undone, while the infidel, in accordance with his denial of the Creator -(_t`aṭíl_), deems a thing left undone to be better than a thing done. - -Union, then, involves this—that, although the imperfection of -separation is recognized, its authority (_ḥukm_) should not be let go; -and separation involves this—that, although one is veiled from the -sight of union, he nevertheless thinks that separation is union. -Muzayyin the Elder[133] says in this sense: “Union is the state of -privilege (_khuṣúṣiyyat_) and separation is the state of a servant -(_`ubúdiyyat_), these states being indissolubly combined with each -other,” because it is a work of the privileged state to fulfil the -duties of servantship; therefore, although the tediousness and -painfulness of self-mortification and personal effort may be removed -from one who performs all that is required of him in this respect, it -is impossible that the substance (_`ayn_) of self-mortification and -religious obligation should be removed from anyone, even though he be -in the essence of union, unless he has an evident excuse that is -generally acknowledged by the authority of the religious law. Now I -will explain this matter in order that you may better understand it. - -Footnote 133: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 188. - -Union is of two kinds: (1) sound union (_jam`-i salámat_), and (2) -broken union (_jam`-i taksír_). Sound union is that which God produces -in a man when he is in the state of rapture and ecstasy, and when God -causes him to receive and fulfil His commandments and to mortify -himself. This was the state of Sahl b. `Abdalláh and Abú Ḥafṣ Ḥaddád and -Abu ´l-`Abbás Sayyárí, the author of the doctrine. Abú Yazíd of Bisṭám, -Abú Bakr Shiblí, Abu ´l-Ḥasan Ḥuṣrí, and a number of great Shaykhs were -continually in a state of rapture until the hour of prayer arrived; then -they returned to consciousness, and after performing their prayers -became enraptured again. While thou art in the state of separation, thou -art thou, and thou fulfillest the command of God; but when God -transports thee He has the best right to see that thou performest His -command, for two reasons: firstly, in order that the token of -servantship may not be removed from thee, and secondly, in order that He -may keep His promise that He will never let the law of Muḥammad be -abrogated. “Broken union” (_jam`-i taksír_) is this: that a man’s -judgment becomes distraught and bewildered, so that it is like the -judgment of a lunatic: then he is either excused from performing his -religious obligations or rewarded (_mashkúr_) for performing them; and -the state of him who is rewarded is sounder than the state of him who is -excused. - -You must know, in short, that union does not involve any peculiar -“station” (_maqám_) or any peculiar “state” (_ḥál_), for union is the -concentration of one’s thoughts (_jam`-i himmat_) upon the object of -one’s desire. According to some the revelation of this matter takes -place in the “stations” (_maqámát_), according to others in the “states” -(_aḥwál_), and in either case the desire of the “united” person (_ṣáḥib -jam`_) is attained by negating his desire. This holds good in -everything, e.g., Jacob concentrated his thoughts on Joseph, so that he -had no thought but of him; and Majnún concentrated his thoughts on -Laylá, so that he saw only her in the whole world, and all created -things assumed the form of Laylá in his eyes. One day, when Abú Yazíd -was in his cell, some one came and asked: “Is Abú Yazíd here?” He -answered: “Is anyone here except God?” And a certain Shaykh relates that -a dervish came to Mecca and remained in contemplation of the Ka`ba for a -whole year, during which time he neither ate nor drank, nor slept, nor -cleansed himself, because of the concentration of his thoughts upon the -Ka`ba, which thereby became the food of his body and the drink of his -soul. The principle in all these cases is the same, viz. that God -divided the one substance of His love and bestows a particle thereof, as -a peculiar gift, upon every one of His friends in proportion to their -enravishment with Him; then He lets down upon that particle the shrouds -of humanity and nature and temperament and spirit, in order that by its -powerful working it may transmute to its own quality all the particles -that are attached to it, until the lover’s clay is wholly converted into -love, and all his actions and looks become so many indispensable -conditions of love. This state is named “union” alike by those who -regard the inward meaning and those who regard the outward expression. -Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) says in this sense: - - “_Thy will be done, O my Lord and Master! - Thy will be done, O my purpose and meaning! - O essence of my being, O goal of my desire, - O my speech and my hints and my gestures! - O all of my all, O my hearing and my sight, - O my whole and my element and my particles!_” - -Therefore, to one whose qualities are only borrowed from God, it is a -disgrace to affirm his own existence, and an act of dualism (_zunnár_) -to pay any heed to the phenomenal universe; and all created objects are -despicable to his soaring thought. Some have been led by their -dialectical subtlety and their admiration of phraseology to speak of -“the union of union” (_jam` al-jam`_). This is a good expression as -phrases go, but if you consider the meaning, it is better not to -predicate union of union, because the term “union” cannot properly be -applied except to separation. Before union can be united it must first -have been separated, whereas the fact is that union does not change its -state. The expression, therefore, is liable to be misunderstood, because -one who is “united” does not look forth from himself to what is above or -to what is below him. Do not you perceive that when the two worlds were -displayed to the Apostle on the night of the Ascension he paid no heed -to anything? He was in “union”, and one who is “united” does not behold -“separation”. Hence God said: “_His gaze swerved not, nor did it stray_” -(Kor. liii, 17). In my early days I composed a book on this subject and -entitled it _Kitáb al-bayán li-ahl al-`iyán_,[134] and I have also -discussed the matter at length in the _Baḥr al-qulúb_[135] in the -chapter on “Union”. I will not now burden my readers by adding to what I -have said here. - -Footnote 134: - - “The Book of Exposition for Persons of Intuition.” - -Footnote 135: - - “The Sea of Hearts.” - -This sketch of the doctrine of the Sayyárís concludes my account of -those Ṣúfí sects which are approved and follow the path of true -theosophy. I now turn to the opinions of those heretics who have -connected themselves with the Ṣúfís and have adopted Ṣúfiistic -phraseology as a means of promulgating their heresy. My aim is to expose -their errors in order that novices may not be deceived by their -pretensions and may guard themselves from mischief. - - - 11. THE ḤULÚLÍS. - -Of those two reprobate sects which profess to belong to Ṣúfiism and make -the Ṣúfís partners in their error, one follows Abú Ḥulmán of -Damascus.[136] The stories which his adherents relate of him do not -agree with what is written about him in the books of the Shaykhs, for, -while the Ṣúfís regard him as one of themselves, these sectaries impute -to him the doctrines of incarnation (_ḥulúl_) and commixture (_imtizáj_) -and transmigration of spirits (_naskh-i arwáḥ_). I have seen this -statement in the book of Muqaddasí,[137] who attacks him; and the same -notion of him has been formed by theologians, but God knows best what is -the truth. The other sect refer their doctrine to Fáris,[138] who -pretends to have derived it from Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj), but he is -the only one of Ḥusayn’s followers who holds such tenets. I saw Abú -Ja`far Ṣaydalání[139] with four thousand men, dispersed throughout -`Iráq, who were Ḥallájís; and they all cursed Fáris on account of this -doctrine. Moreover, in the compositions of al-Ḥalláj himself there is -nothing but profound theosophy. - -Footnote 136: - - See note, p. 131. - -Footnote 137: - - The _nisba_ Muqaddasí or Maqdisí belongs to a number of Moslem - writers. I do not know which of them is intended here. - -Footnote 138: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 178. - -Footnote 139: - - This person, whom the author has already mentioned at the beginning of - Chapter XIII, is not identical with the Ṣúfí of the same name who was - a contemporary of Junayd (_Nafaḥát_, No. 197). - -I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, say that I do not know who Fáris and Abú -Hulmán were or what they said, but anyone who holds a doctrine -conflicting with Unification and true theosophy has no part in religion -at all. If religion, which is the root, is not firmly based, Ṣúfiism, -which is the branch and offspring of religion, must with more reason be -unsound, for it is inconceivable that miracles and evidences should be -manifested except to religious persons and Unitarians. All the errors of -these sectaries are in regard to the spirit (_rúḥ_). Now, therefore, I -will explain its nature and principles according to the Sunní canon, and -in the course of my explanation I will notice the erroneous and delusive -opinions of the heretics in order that your faith may be strengthened -thereby. - - _Discourse on the Spirit_ (al-rúḥ). - -You must know that knowledge concerning the existence of the spirit is -intuitive (_darúrí_), and the intelligence is unable to apprehend its -(the spirit’s) nature. Every Moslem divine and sage has expressed some -conjectural opinion on this point, which has also been debated by -unbelievers of various sorts. When the unbelievers of Quraysh, prompted -by the Jews, sent Naḍr b. al-Ḥárith to question the Apostle concerning -the nature and essence of the spirit, God in the first place affirmed -its substance and said, “_And they will ask thee concerning the -spirit_”; then He denied its eternity, saying, “_Answer, ‘The spirit -belongs to that which_ (i.e. the creation of which) _my Lord -commanded’_” (Kor. xvii, 87). And the Apostle said: “The spirits are -hosts gathered together: those that know one another agree, and those -that do not know one another disagree.” There are many similar proofs of -the existence of the spirit, but they contain no authoritative statement -as to its nature. Some have said that the spirit is the life whereby the -body lives, a view which is also held by a number of scholastic -philosophers. According to this view the spirit is an accident -(_`araḍ_), which at God’s command keeps the body alive, and from which -proceed conjunction, motion, cohesion. and similar accidents by which -the body is changed from one state to another. Others, again, declare -that the spirit is not life, but that life does not exist without it, -just as the spirit does not exist without the body, and that the two are -never found apart, because they are inseparable, like pain and the -knowledge of pain. According to this view also the spirit is an -accident, like life. All the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, however, and most orthodox -Moslems hold that the spirit is a substance, and not an attribute; for, -so long as it is connected with the body, God continually creates life -in the body, and the life of Man is an attribute and by it he lives, but -the spirit is deposited in his body and may be separated from him while -he is still living, as in sleep. But when it leaves him, intelligence -and knowledge can no longer remain with him, for the Apostle has said -that the spirits of martyrs are in the crops of birds: consequently it -must be a substance; and the Apostle has said that the spirits are hosts -(_junúd_), and hosts are subsistent (_báqí_), and no accident can -subsist, for an accident does not stand by itself. - -The spirit, then, is a subtle body (_jismí laṭíf_), which comes and goes -by the command of God. On the night of the Ascension, when the Apostle -saw in Heaven Adam, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, Jesus, and Abraham, it was -their spirits that he saw; and if the spirit were an accident, it would -not stand by itself so as to become visible, for it would need a _locus_ -in substances, and substances are gross (_kathíf_). Accordingly, it has -been ascertained that the spirit is subtle and corporeal (_jasím_), and -being corporeal, it is visible, but visible only to the eye of -intelligence (_chashm-i dil_). And spirits may reside in the crops of -birds or may be armies that move to and fro, as the Apostolic Traditions -declare. - -Here we are at variance with the heretics, who assert that the spirit is -eternal (_qadím_), and worship it, and regard it as the sole agent and -governor of things, and call it the uncreated spirit of God, and aver -that it passes from one body to another. No popular error has obtained -such wide acceptance as this doctrine, which is held by the Christians, -although they express it in terms that appear to conflict with it, and -by all the Indians, Tibetans, and Chinese, and is supported by the -consensus of opinion among the Shí`ites, Carmathians, and Ismá`ílís -(_Báṭiniyán_), and is embraced by the two false sects abovementioned. -All these sectaries base their belief on certain propositions and bring -forward proofs in defence of their assertion. I ask them this question: -“What do you mean by ‘eternity’ (_qidam_)? Do you mean the pre-existence -of a non-eternal thing, or an eternal thing that never came into being?” -If they mean the pre-existence of a non-eternal thing, then there is no -difference between us in principle, for we too say that the spirit is -non-eternal (_muḥdath_), and that it existed before the body, as the -Apostle said: “God created the spirits two thousand years before the -bodies.” Accordingly, the spirit is one sort of God’s creatures, and He -joins it to another sort of His creatures, and in joining them together -He produces life through His predestination. But the spirit cannot pass -from body to body, because, just as a body cannot have two lives, so a -spirit cannot have two bodies. If these facts were not affirmed in -Apostolic Traditions by an Apostle who speaks the truth, and if the -matter were considered purely from the standpoint of a reasonable -intelligence, then the spirit would be life and nothing else, and it -would be an attribute, not a substance. Now suppose, on the other hand, -they say that the spirit is an eternal thing that never came into being. -In this case, I ask: “Does it stand by itself or by something else?” If -they say, “By itself,” I ask them, “Is God its world (_`álam_) or not?” -If they answer that God is not its world, they affirm the existence of -two eternal beings, which is contrary to reason, for the eternal is -infinite, and the essence of one eternal being would limit the other. -But if they answer that God is its world, then I say that God is eternal -and His creatures are non-eternal: it is impossible that the eternal -should be commingled with the non-eternal or made one with it, or become -immanent in it, or that the non-eternal should be the place of the -eternal or that the eternal should carry it; for whatever is joined to -anything must be like that to which it is joined, and only homogeneous -things are capable of being united and separated. And if they say that -the spirit does not stand by itself, but by something else, then it must -be either an attribute (_ṣifat_) or an accident (_`araḍ_). If it is an -accident, it must either be in a _locus_ or not. If it is in a _locus_, -its _locus_ must be like itself, and neither can be called eternal; and -to say that it has no _locus_ is absurd, for an accident cannot stand by -itself. If, again, they say that the spirit is an eternal attribute—and -this is the doctrine of the Ḥulúhs and those who believe in -metempsychosis (_tanásukhiyán_)—and call it an attribute of God, I reply -that an eternal attribute of God cannot possibly become an attribute of -His creatures; for, if His life could become the life of His creatures, -similarly His power could become their power; and inasmuch as an -attribute stands by its object, how can an eternal attribute stand by a -non-eternal object? Therefore, as I have shown, the eternal has no -connexion with the non-eternal, and the doctrine of the heretics who -affirm this is false. The spirit is created and is under God’s command. -Anyone who holds another belief is in flagrant error and cannot -distinguish what is non-eternal from what is eternal. No saint, if his -saintship be sound, can possibly be ignorant of the attributes of God. I -give praise without end to God, who hath guarded us from heresies and -dangers, and hath bestowed on us intelligence to examine and refute them -by our arguments, and hath given us faith in order that we may know Him. -When men who see only the exterior hear stories of this kind from -theologians, they imagine that this is the doctrine of all aspirants to -Ṣúfiism. They are grossly mistaken and utterly deceived, and the -consequence is that they are blinded to the beauty of our mystic -knowledge and to the loveliness of Divine saintship and to the flashes -of spiritual illumination, because eminent Ṣúfís regard popular applause -and popular censure with equal indifference. - - - SECTION. - -One of the Shaykhs says: “The spirit in the body is like fire in fuel; -the fire is created (_makhlúq_) and the coal is made (_maṣnú`_).” -Nothing can be described as eternal except the essence and attributes of -God. Abú Bakr Wásiṭí has discoursed on the spirit more than any of the -Ṣúfí Shaykhs. It is related that he said: “There are ten stations -(_maqámát_) of spirits: (1) the spirits of the sincere (_mukhliṣán_), -which are imprisoned in a darkness and know not what will befall them; -(2) the spirits of pious men (_pársá-mardán_), which in the heaven of -this world rejoice in the fruits of their actions and take pleasure in -devotions, and walk by the strength thereof; (3) the spirits of -disciples (_murídán_), which are in the fourth heaven and dwell with the -angels in the delights of veracity, and in the shadow of their good -works; (4) the spirits of the beneficent (_ahl-i minan_) which are hung -in lamps of light from the Throne of God, and their food is mercy, and -their drink is favour and proximity; (5) the spirits of the faithful -(_ahl-i wafá_), which thrill with joy in the veil of purity and the -station of electness (_iṣṭifá_); (6) the spirits of martyrs -(_shahídán_), which are in Paradise in the crops of birds, and go where -they will in its gardens early and late; (7) the spirits of those who -yearn (_mushtáqán_), which stand on the carpet of respect (_adab_) clad -in the luminous veils of the Divine attributes; (8) the spirits of -gnostics (_`árifán_), which, in the precincts of holiness, listen at -morn and eve to the word of God and see their places in Paradise and in -this world; (9) the spirits of lovers (_dústán_), which have become -absorbed in contemplation of the Divine beauty and the station of -revelation (_kashf_), and perceive nothing but God and rest content with -no other thing; (10) the spirits of dervishes, which have found favour -with God in the abode of annihilation, and have suffered a -transformation of quality and a change of state.” - -It is related concerning the Shaykhs that they have seen the spirit in -different shapes, and this may well be, because, as I have said, it is -created, and a subtle body (_jismí laṭíf_) is necessarily visible. God -shows it to every one of His servants, when and as it pleases Him. - -I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, declare that our life is wholly through -God, and our stability is through Him, and our being kept alive is the -act of God in us, and we live through His creation, not through His -essence and attributes. The doctrine of the animists (_rúḥiyán_) is -entirely false. Belief in the eternity of the spirit is one of the grave -errors which prevail among the vulgar, and is expressed in different -ways, e.g. they use the terms “soul” and “matter” (_nafs ú hayúlá_), or -“light” and “darkness” (_núr ú ẕulmat_), and those Ṣúfí impostors speak -of “annihilation” and “subsistence” (_faná ú baqá_), or “union” and -“separation” (_jam` ú tafriqa_), or adopt similar phrases as a fair mask -for their infidelity. But the Ṣúfís abjure these heretics, for the Ṣúfís -hold that saintship and true love of God depend on knowledge of Him, and -anyone who does not know the eternal from the non-eternal is ignorant in -what he says, and the intelligent pay no attention to what is said by -the ignorant. Now I will unveil the portals of the practice and theory -of the Ṣúfís, furnishing my explanation with evident proofs, in order -that you may the more easily comprehend my meaning, and that any sceptic -possessed of insight may be led back into the right way, and that I may -thereby gain a blessing and a Divine reward. - - - - - CHAPTER XV. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE FIRST VEIL: CONCERNING THE GNOSIS OF GOD - (_ma`rifat Allah_). - - -The Apostle said: “If ye knew God as He ought to be known, ye would walk -on the seas, and the mountains would move at your call.” Gnosis of God -is of two kinds: cognitional (_`ilmí_) and emotional (_ḥálí_). -Cognitional gnosis is the foundation of all blessings in this world and -in the next, for the most important thing for a man at all times and in -all circumstances is knowledge of God, as God hath said: “_I only -created the genii and mankind that they might serve Me_” (Kor. li, 56), -i.e. that they might know Me. But the greater part of men neglect this -duty, except those whom God hath chosen and whose hearts He hath -vivified with Himself. Gnosis is the life of the heart through God, and -the turning away of one’s inmost thoughts from all that is not God. The -worth of everyone is in proportion to gnosis, and he who is without -gnosis is worth nothing. Theologians, lawyers, and other classes of men -give the name of gnosis (_ma`rifat_) to right cognition (_`ilm_) of God, -but the Ṣúfí Shaykhs call right feeling (_ḥál_) towards God by that -name. Hence they have said that gnosis (_ma`rifat_) is more excellent -than cognition (_`ilm_), for right feeling (_ḥál_) is the result of -right cognition, but right cognition is not the same thing as right -feeling, i.e. one who has not cognition of God is not a gnostic -(_`árif_), but one may have cognition of God without being a gnostic. -Those of either class who were ignorant of this distinction engaged in -useless controversy, and the one party disbelieved in the other party. -Now I will explain the matter in order that both may be instructed. - - - SECTION. - -You must know that there is a great difference of opinion touching the -gnosis and right cognition of God. The Mu`tazilites assert that gnosis -is intellectual and that only a reasonable person (_`áqil_) can possibly -have it. This doctrine is disproved by the fact that madmen, within -Islam, are deemed to have gnosis, and that children, who are not -reasonable, are deemed to have faith. Were the criterion of gnosis an -intellectual one, such persons must be without gnosis, while unbelievers -could not be charged with infidelity, provided only that they were -reasonable beings. If reason were the cause of gnosis, it would follow -that every reasonable person must know God, and that all who lack reason -must be ignorant of Him; which is manifestly absurd. Others pretend that -demonstration (_istidlál_) is the cause of knowledge of God, and that -such knowledge is not gained except by those who deduce it in this -manner. The futility of this doctrine is exemplified by Iblís, for he -saw many evidences, such as Paradise, Hell, and the Throne of God, yet -they did not cause him to have gnosis. God hath said that knowledge of -Him depends on His will (Kor. vi, 111). According to the view of -orthodox Moslems, soundness of reason and regard to evidences are a -means (_sabab_) to gnosis, but not the cause (_`illat_) thereof: the -sole cause is God’s will and favour, for without His favour (_`ináyat_) -reason is blind. Reason does not even know itself: how, then, can it -know another? Heretics of all sorts use the demonstrative method, but -the majority of them do not know God. On the other hand, whenever one -enjoys the favour of God, all his actions are so many tokens of gnosis; -his demonstration is search (_ṭalab_), and his neglect of demonstration -is resignation to God’s will (_taslím_); but, in reference to perfect -gnosis, resignation is no better than search, for search is a principle -that cannot be neglected, while resignation is a principle that excludes -the possibility of agitation (_iḍṭiráb_), and these two principles do -not essentially involve gnosis. In reality Man’s only guide and -enlightener is God. Reason and the proofs adduced by reason are unable -to direct anyone into the right way. If the infidels were to return from -the place of Judgment to this world, they would bring their infidelity -back with them (cf. Kor. vi, 28). When the Commander of the Faithful, -`Alí, was asked concerning gnosis, he said: “I know God by God, and I -know that which is not God by the light of God.” God created the body -and committed its life to the spirit (_ján_), and He created the soul -(_dil_) and committed its life to Himself. Hence, inasmuch as reason and -human faculties and evidences have no power to make the body live, they -cannot make the soul live, as God hath said: “_Shall he who was dead and -whom We have restored to life and to whom We have given a light whereby -he may walk among men...?_” (Kor. vi, 122), i.e. “I am the Creator of -the light in which believers are illumined”. It is God that opens and -seals the hearts of men (Kor. xxxix, 23; ii, 6): therefore He alone is -able to guide them. Everything except Him is a cause or a means, and -causes and means cannot possibly indicate the right way without the -favour of the Causer. He it is that imposes the obligation of piety, -which is essentially gnosis; and those on whom that obligation is laid, -so long as they are in the state of obligation, neither bring it upon -themselves nor put it away from themselves by their own choice: -therefore Man’s share in gnosis, unless God makes him know, is mere -helplessness. Abu ´l-Ḥasan Núrí says: “There is none to point out the -way to God except God Himself: knowledge is sought only for due -performance of His worship.” No created being is capable of leading -anyone to God. Those who rely on demonstration are not more reasonable -than was Abú Ṭálib, and no guide is greater than was Muḥammad; yet since -Abú Ṭálib was preordained to misery, the guidance of Muḥammad did not -avail him. The first step of demonstration is a turning away from God, -because demonstration involves the consideration of some other thing, -whereas gnosis is a turning away from all that is not God. Ordinary -objects of search are found by means of demonstration, but knowledge of -God is extraordinary. Therefore, knowledge of Him is attained only by -unceasing bewilderment of the reason, and His favour is not procured by -any act of human acquisition, but is miraculously revealed to men’s -hearts. What is not God is phenomenal (_muḥdath_), and although a -phenomenal being may reach another like himself he cannot reach his -Creator and acquire Him while he exists, for in every act of acquisition -he who makes the acquisition is predominant and the thing acquired is -under his power. Accordingly, the miracle is not that reason should be -led by the act to affirm the existence of the Agent, but that a saint -should be led by the light of the Truth to deny his own existence. The -knowledge gained is in the one case a matter of logic, in the other it -becomes an inward experience. Let those who deem reason to be the cause -of gnosis consider what reason affirms in their minds concerning the -substance of gnosis, for gnosis involves the negation of whatever is -affirmed by reason, i.e. whatever notion of God can be formed by reason, -God is in reality something different. How, then, is there any room for -reason to arrive at gnosis by means of demonstration? Reason and -imagination are homogeneous, and where _genus_ is affirmed gnosis is -denied. To infer the existence of God from intellectual proofs is -assimilation (_tashbíh_), and to deny it on the same grounds is -nullification (_ta`ṭíl_). Reason cannot pass beyond these two -principles, which in regard to gnosis are agnosticism, since neither of -the parties professing them is Unitarian (_muwaḥḥid_). - -Therefore, when reason is gone as far as possible, and the souls of His -lovers must needs search for Him, they rest helplessly without their -faculties, and while they so rest they grow restless and stretch their -hands in supplication and seek a relief for their souls; and when they -have exhausted every manner of search in their power, the power of God -becomes theirs, i.e. they find the way from Him to Him, and are eased of -the anguish of absence and set foot in the garden of intimacy and win to -rest. And reason, when it sees that the souls have attained their -desire, tries to exert its control, but fails; and when it fails it -becomes distraught; and when it becomes distraught it abdicates. Then -God clothes it in the garment of service (_khidmat_) and says to it: -“While thou wert independent thou wert veiled by thy faculties and their -exercise, and when these were annihilated thou didst fail, and having -failed thou didst attain.” Thus it is the allotted portion of the soul -to be near unto God, and that of the reason is to do His service. God -causes Man to know Him through Himself with a knowledge that is not -linked to any faculty, a knowledge in which the existence of Man is -merely metaphorical. Hence to the gnostic egoism is utter perfidy; his -remembrance of God is without forgetfulness, and his gnosis is not empty -words but actual feeling. - -Others, again, declare that gnosis is the result of inspiration -(_ilhám_). This also is impossible, because gnosis supplies a criterion -for distinguishing truth from falsehood, whereas the inspired have no -such criterion. If one says, “I know by inspiration that God is in -space,” and another says, “I know by inspiration that He is not in -space,” one of these contradictory statements must be true, but a proof -is necessary in order to decide where the truth lies. Consequently, this -view, which is held by the Brahmans and the inspirationists -(_ilhámiyán_), falls to the ground. In the present age I have met a -number of persons who carried it to an extreme and who connected their -own position with the doctrine of religious men, but they are altogether -in error, and their assertion is repugnant to all reasonable Moslems and -unbelievers. If it be said that whatever conflicts with the sacred law -is not inspiration, I reply that this argument is fundamentally unsound, -because, if inspiration is to be judged and verified by the standard of -the sacred law, then gnosis does not depend on inspiration, but on law -and prophecy and Divine guidance. - -Others assert that knowledge of God is intuitive (_ḍarúrí_). This also -is impossible. Everything that is known in this way must be known in -common by all reasonable men, and inasmuch as we see that some -reasonable men deny the existence of God and hold the doctrines of -assimilation (_tashbíh_) and nullification (_ta`ṭíl_), it is proved that -knowledge of God is not intuitive. Moreover, if it were so, the -principle of religious obligation (_taklíf_) would be destroyed, for -that principle cannot possibly be applied to objects of intuitive -knowledge, such as one’s self, the heaven and the earth, day and night, -pleasure and pain, etc., concerning the existence of which no reasonable -man can have any doubt, and which he must know even against his will. -But some aspirants to Ṣúfiism, considering the absolute certainty -(_yaqín_) which they feel, say: “We know God intuitively,” giving the -name of intuition to this certainty. Substantially they are right, but -their expression is erroneous, because intuitive knowledge cannot be -exclusively restricted to those who are perfect; on the contrary, it -belongs to all reasonable men. Furthermore, it appears in the minds of -living creatures without any means or evidence, whereas the knowledge of -God is a means (_sababí_). But Master Abú `Alí Daqqáq and Shaykh Abú -Sahl Ṣu`lúkí[140] and his father, who was a leading religious authority -at Níshápúr, maintain that the beginning of gnosis is demonstrative and -that its end is intuitive, just as technical knowledge is first acquired -and finally becomes instinctive. “Do not you perceive,” they say, “that -in Paradise knowledge of God becomes intuitive? Why should it not become -intuitive in this world too? And the Apostles, when they heard the word -of God, either immediately or from the mouth of an angel or by -revelation, knew Him intuitively.” I reply that the inhabitants of -Paradise know God intuitively in Paradise, because in Paradise no -religious obligation is imposed, and the Apostles have no fear of being -separated from God at the last, but enjoy the same security as those who -know Him intuitively. The excellence of gnosis and faith lies in their -being hidden; when they are made visible, faith becomes compulsory -(_jabr_), and there is no longer any free will in regard to its visible -substance (_`ayn_), and the foundations of the religious law are shaken, -and the principle of apostasy is annulled, so that Bal`am[141] and Iblís -and Barṣíṣá[142] cannot properly be described as infidels, for it is -generally allowed that they had knowledge of God. The gnostic, while he -remains a gnostic, has no fear of being separated from God; separation -is produced by the loss of gnosis, but intuitive knowledge cannot -conceivably be lost. This doctrine is full of danger to the vulgar. In -order that you may avoid its evil consequences you must know that Man’s -knowledge and his gnosis of God depend entirely on the information and -eternal guidance of the Truth. Man’s certainty in gnosis may be now -greater and now less, but the principle of gnosis is neither increased -nor diminished, since in either case it would be impaired. You must not -let blind conformity enter into your knowledge of God, and you must know -Him through His attributes of perfection. This can be attained only -through the providence and favour of God, who has absolute control of -our minds. If He so will, He makes one of His actions a guide that shows -us the way to Himself, and if He will otherwise, He makes that same -action an obstacle that prevents us from reaching Him. Thus Jesus was to -some a guide that led them to gnosis, but to others he was an obstacle -that hindered them from gnosis; the former party said, “This is the -servant of God,” and the latter said, “This is the son of God.” -Similarly, some were led to God by idols and by the sun and moon, while -others were led astray. Such guides are a means of gnosis, but not the -immediate cause of it, and one means is no better than another in -relation to Him who is the author of them all. The gnostic’s affirmation -of a means is a sign of dualism (_zunnár_), and regard to anything -except the object of knowledge is polytheism (_shirk_). When a man is -doomed to perdition in the Preserved Tablet, nay, in the will and -knowledge of God, how can any proof and demonstration lead him aright? -The most high God, as He pleases and by whatever means He pleases, shows -His servant the way to Himself and opens to him the door of gnosis, so -that he attains to a degree where the very essence of gnosis appears -alien (_ghayr_) and its attributes become noxious to him, and he is -veiled by his gnosis from the object known and realizes that his gnosis -is a pretension (_da`wá_). Dhu `l-Nún the Egyptian says: “Beware lest -thou make pretensions to gnosis,” and it has been said in verse— - - “_The gnostics pretend to knowledge, - But I avow ignorance: that is my knowledge._” - -Therefore do not claim gnosis, lest thou perish in thy pretension, but -cleave to the reality thereof, that thou mayest be saved. When anyone is -honoured by the revelation of the Divine majesty, his existence becomes -a plague to him and all his attributes a source of corruption. He who -belongs to God and to whom God belongs is not connected with anything in -the universe. The real gist of gnosis is to recognize that to God is the -kingdom. When a man knows that all possessions are in the absolute -control of God, what further business has he with mankind, that he -should be veiled from God by them or by himself? All such veils are the -result of ignorance. As soon as ignorance is annihilated, they vanish, -and this life is made equal in rank to the life hereafter. - -Footnote 140: - - See _Nafaḥát_, No. 373. - -Footnote 141: - - See Baydáwí on Kor. vii, 174. - -Footnote 142: - - See Goldziher & Landberg, _Die Legende vom Mönch Barṣīṣā_ (1896), and - M. Hartmann, _Der heilige Barṣīṣā_ in _Der Islamische Orient_ (1905), - i, 23-8.] - - - SECTION. - -Now, for instruction’s sake, I will mention some of the numerous sayings -which the Shaykhs have uttered on this subject. - -`Abdalláh b. Mubárak says: “Gnosis consists in not being astonished by -anything,” because astonishment arises from an act exceeding the power -of the doer, and inasmuch as God is omnipotent it is impossible that a -gnostic should be astonished by His acts. If there be any room for -astonishment, one must needs marvel that God exalts a handful of earth -to such a degree that it receives His commands, and a drop of blood to -such an eminence that it discourses of love and knowledge of Him, and -seeks vision of Him, and desires union with Him. Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian -says: “Gnosis is in reality God’s providential communication of the -spiritual light to our inmost hearts,” i.e., until God, in His -providence, illuminates the heart of Man and keeps it from -contamination, so that all created things have not even the worth of a -mustard-seed in his heart, the contemplation of Divine mysteries, both -inward and outward, does not overwhelm him with rapture; but when God -has done this, his every look becomes an act of contemplation -(_musháhadat_). Shiblí says: “Gnosis is continual amazement (_ḥayrat_).” -Amazement is of two kinds: (1) amazement at the essence and (2) -amazement at the quality. The former is polytheism and infidelity, -because no gnostic can possibly be in doubt concerning the essential -nature of God; but the latter is gnosis, because the quality of God lies -beyond reason’s scope. Hence a certain one said: “O Guide of the amazed, -increase my amazement!” In the first place, he affirmed the existence of -God and the perfection of His attributes, and recognized that He is the -object of men’s search and the accomplisher of their prayers and the -author of their amazement; then he asked for increase of amazement and -recognized that in seeking God the reason has no alternative between -amazement and polytheism. This sentiment is very fine. It may be, again, -that knowledge of God’s being involves amazement at one’s own being, -because when a man knows God he sees himself entirely subdued by the -Divine omnipotence; and since his existence depends on God and his -non-existence proceeds from God, and his rest and motion are produced by -the power of God, he becomes amazed, saying: “Who and what am I?” In -this sense the Apostle said: “He who knows himself has come to know his -Lord,” i.e. he who knows himself to be annihilated knows God to be -eternally subsistent. Annihilation destroys reason and all human -attributes, and when the substance of a thing is not accessible to -reason it cannot possibly be known without amazement. Abú Yazíd said: -“Gnosis consists in knowing that the motion and rest of mankind depend -on God,” and that without His permission no one has the least control of -His kingdom, and that no one can perform any action until He creates the -ability to act and puts the will to act in his heart, and that human -actions are metaphorical and that God is the real agent. Muḥammad b. -Wási` says, describing the gnostic: “His words are few and his amazement -perpetual,” because only finite things admit of being expressed in -words, and since the infinite cannot be expressed it leaves no resource -except perpetual amazement. Shiblí says: “Real gnosis is the inability -to attain gnosis,” i.e. inability to know a thing, to the real nature of -which a man has no clue except the impossibility of attaining it. -Therefore, in attaining it, he will rightly take no credit to himself, -because inability (_`ajz_) is search, and so long as he depends on his -own faculties and attributes, he cannot properly be described by that -term; and when these faculties and attributes depart, then his state is -not inability, but annihilation. Some pretenders, while affirming the -attributes of humanity and the subsistence of the obligation to decide -with sound judgment (_taklíf ba-ṣiḥḥat-i khiṭáb_) and the authority -maintained over them by God’s proof, declare that gnosis is impotence, -and that they are impotent and unable to attain anything. I reply: “In -search of what thing have you become so helpless?” Impotence (_`ajz_) -has two signs, which are not to be found in you: firstly, the -annihilation of the faculties of search, and secondly, the manifestation -of the glory of God (_tajallí_). Where the annihilation of the faculties -takes place, there is no outward expression (_`ibárat_); and where the -glory of God is revealed, no clue can be given and no discrimination is -conceivable. Hence one who is impotent does not know that he is so, or -that the state attributed to him is called impotence. How should he know -this? Impotence is other than God, and the affirmation of knowledge of -other than God is not gnosis; and so long as there is room in the heart -for aught except God, or the possibility of expressing aught except God, -true gnosis has not been attained. The gnostic is not a gnostic until he -turns aside from all that is not God. Abú Ḥafṣ Ḥaddád says: “Since I -have known God, neither truth nor falsehood has entered my heart.” When -a man feels desire and passion he turns to the soul (_dil_) in order -that it may guide him to the lower soul (_nafs_), which is the seat of -falsehood; and when he finds the evidence of gnosis, he also turns to -the soul in order that it may guide him to the spirit, which is the -source of truth and reality. But when aught except God enters the soul, -the gnostic, if he turns to it, commits an act of agnosticism. There is -a great difference between one who turns to the soul and one who turns -to God. Abú Bakr Wásiṭí says: “He who knows God is cut off from all -things, nay, he is dumb and abject (_kharisa wa-´nqama`a_),” i.e. he is -unable to express anything and all his attributes are annihilated. So -the Apostle, while he was in the state of absence, said: “I am the most -eloquent of the Arabs and non-Arabs”; but when he was borne to the -presence of God, he said: “I know not how to utter Thy praise.” Answer -came: “O Muḥammad, if thou speakest not, I will speak; if thou deemest -thyself unworthy to praise Me, I will make the universe thy deputy, that -all its atoms may praise Me in thy name.” - - - - - CHAPTER XVI. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE SECOND VEIL: CONCERNING UNIFICATION (_tawḥíd_). - - -God said, “_Your God is one_” (Kor. xvi, 23); and again, “_Say, ‘God is -one’_” (Kor. cxii, 1). And the Apostle said: “Long ago there was a man -who did no good work except that he pronounced God to be one. When he -was dying he said to his folk: ‘After my death burn me and gather my -ashes and on a windy day throw half of them into the sea, and scatter -half of them to the winds of the earth, that no trace of me may be -left.’ As soon as he died and this was done, God bade the air and the -water keep the ashes which they had received until the Resurrection; and -when He raises that man from the dead, He will ask him why he caused -himself to be burnt, and he will reply: ‘O Lord, from shame of Thee, for -I was a great sinner,’ and God will pardon him.” - -Real unification (_tawḥíd_) consists in asserting the unity of a thing -and in having a perfect knowledge of its unity. Inasmuch as God is one, -without any sharer in His essence and attributes, without any -substitute, without any partner in His actions, and inasmuch as -Unitarians (_muwaḥḥidán_) have acknowledged that He is such, their -knowledge of unity is called unification. - -Unification is of three kinds: (1) God’s unification of God, i.e. His -knowledge of His unity; (2) God’s unification of His creatures, i.e. His -decree that a man shall pronounce Him to be one, and the creation of -unification in his heart; (3) men’s unification of God, i.e. their -knowledge of the unity of God. Therefore, when a man knows God he can -declare His unity and pronounce that He is one, incapable of union and -separation, not admitting duality; that His unity is not a number so as -to be made two by the predication of another number; that He is not -finite so as to have six directions; that He has no space, and that He -is not in space, so as to require the predication of space; that He is -not an accident, so as to need a substance, nor a substance, which -cannot exist without another like itself, nor a natural constitution -(_ṭab`í_), in which motion and rest originate, nor a spirit so as to -need a frame, nor a body so as to be composed of limbs; and that He does -not become immanent (_ḥáll_) in things, for then He must be homogeneous -with them; and that He is not joined to anything, for then that thing -must be a part of Him; and that He is free from all imperfections and -exalted above all defects; and that He has no like, so that He and His -creature should make two; and that He has no child whose begetting would -necessarily cause Him to be a stock (_aṣl_); and that His essence and -attributes are unchangeable; and that He is endowed with those -attributes of perfection which believers and Unitarians affirm, and -which He has described Himself as possessing; and that He is exempt from -those attributes which heretics arbitrarily impute to Him; and that He -is Living, Knowing, Forgiving, Merciful, Willing, Powerful, Hearing, -Seeing, Speaking, and Subsistent; and that His knowledge is not a state -(_ḥál_) in Him, nor His power solidly planted (_ṣalábat_) in Him, nor -His hearing and sight detached (_mutajarrid_) in Him, nor His speech -divided in Him; and that He together with His attributes exists from -eternity; and that objects of cognition are not outside of His -knowledge, and that entities are entirely dependent on His will; and -that He does that which He has willed, and wills that which He has -known, and no creature has cognisance thereof; and that His decree is an -absolute fact, and that His friends have no resource except resignation; -and that He is the sole predestinator of good and evil, and the only -being that is worthy of hope or fear; and that He creates all benefit -and injury; and that He alone gives judgment, and His judgment is all -wisdom; and that no one has any possibility of attaining unto Him; and -that the inhabitants of Paradise shall behold Him; and that assimilation -(_tashbíh_) is inadmissible; and that such terms as “confronting” and -“seeing face to face” (_muqábalat ú muwájahat_) cannot be applied to His -being; and that His saints may enjoy the contemplation (_musháhadat_) of -Him in this world. - -Those who do not acknowledge Him to be such are guilty of impiety. I, -`Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, said at the beginning of this chapter that -unification consists in declaring the unity of a thing, and that such a -declaration cannot be made without knowledge. The Sunnís have declared -the unity of God with true comprehension, because, seeing a subtle work -and a unique act, they recognized that it could not possibly exist by -itself, and finding manifest evidences of origination (_ḥudúth_) in -every thing, they perceived that there must be an Agent who brought the -universe into being—the earth and heaven and sun and moon and land and -sea and all that moves and rests and their knowledge and speech and life -and death. For all these an artificer was indispensable. Accordingly, -the Sunnís, rejecting the notion that there are two or three artificers, -declared themselves satisfied with a single artificer who is perfect, -living, knowing, almighty, and unpartnered. And inasmuch as an act -requires at least one agent, and the existence of two agents for one act -involves the dependence of one on the other, it follows that the Agent -is unquestionably and certainly one. Here we are at variance with the -dualists, who affirm light and darkness, and with the Magians, who -affirm Yazdán and Ahriman, and with the natural philosophers -(_ṭabá´i`iyán_), who affirm nature and potentiality (_quwwat_), and with -the astronomers (_falakiyán_), who affirm the seven planets, and with -the Mu`tazilites, who affirm creators and artificers without end. I have -briefly refuted all these vain opinions in a book, entitled _Al-Ri`áyat -li-ḥuqúq Allah_,[143] to which or to the works of the ancient -theologians I must refer anyone who desires further information. Now I -will turn to the indications which the Shaykhs have given on this -subject. - -Footnote 143: - - “The Observance of what is due to God.” - - - SECTION. - -It is related that Junayd said: “Unification is the separation of the -eternal from that which was originated in time,” i.e. you must not -regard the eternal as a _locus_ of phenomena, or phenomena as a _locus_ -of the eternal; and you must know that God is eternal and that you are -phenomenal, and that nothing of your _genus_ is connected with Him, and -that nothing of His attributes is mingled in you, and that there is no -homogeneity between the eternal and the phenomenal. This is contrary to -the above-mentioned doctrine of those who hold the spirit to be eternal. -When the eternal is believed to descend into phenomena, or phenomena to -be attached to the eternal, no proof remains of the eternity of God and -the origination of the universe; and this leads to materialism -(_madhhab-i dahriyán_). In all the actions of phenomena there are proofs -of unification and evidences of the Divine omnipotence and signs which -establish the eternity of God, but men are too heedless to desire only -Him or to be content only with keeping Him in remembrance. Ḥusayn b. -Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) says: “The first step in unification is the -annihilation of separation (_tafríd_),” because separation is the -pronouncement that one has become separated from imperfections (_áfát_), -while unification is the declaration of a thing’s unity: therefore in -isolation (_fardániyyat_) it is possible to affirm that which is other -than God, and this quality may be ascribed to others besides God; but in -unity (_waḥdániyyat_) it is not possible to affirm other than God, and -unity may not be ascribed to anything except Him. Accordingly, the first -step in unification is to deny (that God has) a partner (_sharík_) and -to put admixture (_mizáj_) aside, for admixture on the way (to God) is -like seeking the highway with a lamp (_mizáj andar minháj chún ṭalab-i -minháj báshad ba-siráj_). And Ḥuṣrí says: “Our principles in unification -are five: the removal of phenomenality, and the affirmation of eternity, -and departure from familiar haunts, and separation from brethren, and -forgetfulness of what is known and unknown.” The removal of -phenomenality consists in denying that phenomena have any connexion with -unification or that they can possibly attain to His holy essence; and -the affirmation of eternity consists in being convinced that God always -existed, as I have already explained in discussing the saying of Junayd; -and departure from familiar haunts means, for the novice, departure from -the habitual pleasures of the lower soul and the forms of this world, -and for the adept, departure from lofty stations and glorious states and -exalted miracles (_karámát_); and separation from brethren means turning -away from the society of mankind and turning towards the society of God, -since any thought of other than God is a veil and an imperfection, and -the more a man’s thoughts are associated with other than God the more is -he veiled from God, because it is universally agreed that unification is -the concentration of thoughts (_jam`-i himam_), whereas to be content -with other than God is a sign of dispersion of thought (_tafriqa-i -himmat_); and forgetfulness of a thing which is known or unknown means -the unification of that thing, for unification denies whatever the -knowledge of mankind affirms about it; and whatever their ignorance -affirms about it is merely contrary to their knowledge, for ignorance is -not unification, and knowledge of the reality of unification cannot be -attained without denying the personal initiative (_taṣarruf_) in which -knowledge and ignorance consist. A certain Shaykh relates: “While Ḥuṣrí -was speaking to an audience, I fell asleep and dreamed that two angels -came down from Heaven and listened for some time to his discourse. Then -one said to the other, ‘What this man says is the theory (_`ilm_) of -unification, not unification itself (_`ayn_).’ When I awoke he was -explaining unification. He looked at me and said, ‘O So-and-so, it is -impossible to speak of unification except theoretically.’” It is related -that Junayd said: “Unification is this, that one should be a figure -(_shakhṣ_) in the hands of God, a figure over which His decrees pass -according as He in His omnipotence determines, and that one should be -sunk in the seas of His unity, self-annihilated and dead alike to the -call of mankind to him and his answer to them, absorbed by the reality -of the Divine unity in true proximity, and lost to sense and action, -because God fulfils in him what He hath willed of him, namely, that his -last state should become his first state, and that he should be as he -was before he existed.” All this means that the Unitarian in the will of -God has no more a will of his own, and in the unity of God no regard to -himself, so that he becomes like an atom as he was in the eternal past -when the covenant of unification was made, and God answered the question -which He Himself had asked, and that atom was only the object of His -speech.[144] Mankind have no joy in such a one that they should call him -to anything, and he has no friendship with anyone that he should respond -to their call. This saying indicates the annihilation of human -attributes and perfect resignation to God in the state when a man is -overpowered by the revelation of His majesty, so that he becomes a -passive instrument and a subtle substance that feels nothing, and his -body is a repository for the mysteries of God, to whom his speech and -actions are attributed; but, unconscious of all as he is, he remains -subject to the ordinances of the religious law, to the end that the -proof of God may be established. Such was the Apostle when on the night -of the Ascension he was borne to the station of proximity; he desired -that his body should be destroyed and his personality be dissolved, but -God’s purpose was to establish His proof. He bade the Apostle remain in -the state that he was in; whereupon he gained strength and displayed the -existence of God from out of his own non-existence and said, “I am not -as one of you. Verily, I pass the night with my Lord, and he gives me -food and drink”; and he also said, “I am with God in a state in which -none of the cherubim nor any prophet is capable of being contained with -me.” It is related that Sahl b. `Abdalláh said: “Unification is this, -that you should recognize that the essence of God is endowed with -knowledge, that it is not comprehensible nor visible to the eye in this -world, but that it exists in the reality of faith, infinite, -incomprehensible, non-incarnate; and that He will be seen in the next -world, outwardly and inwardly in His kingdom and His power; and that -mankind are veiled from knowledge of the ultimate nature of His essence; -and that their hearts know Him, but their intellects cannot reach unto -Him; and that believers shall behold Him with their (spiritual) eyes, -without comprehending His infinity.” This saying includes all the -principles of unification. And Junayd said: “The noblest saying -concerning unification is that of Abú Bakr: ‘Glory to God, who has not -vouchsafed to His creatures any means of attaining unto knowledge of Him -except through impotence to attain unto knowledge of Him.’” Many have -mistaken the meaning of these words of Abú Bakr and suppose that -impotence to attain to gnosis is the same thing as agnosticism. This is -absurd, because impotence refers only to an existing state, not to a -state that is non-existent. For example, a dead man is not incapable of -life, but he cannot be alive while he is dead; and a blind man is not -incapable of seeing, but he cannot see while he is blind. Therefore, a -gnostic is not incapable of gnosis so long as gnosis is existent, for in -that case his gnosis resembles intuition. The saying of Abú Bakr may be -brought into connexion with the doctrine of Abú Sahl Ṣu`lúkí and Master -Abú `Alí Daqqáq, who assert that gnosis is acquired in the first -instance, but finally becomes intuitive. The possessor of intuitive -knowledge is compelled and incapable of putting it away or drawing it to -himself. Hence, according to what Abú Bakr says, unification is the act -of God in the heart of His creature. Shiblí says: “Unification veils the -Unitarian from the beauty of Oneness,” because unification is said to be -the act of Man, and an act of Man does not cause the revelation of God, -and in the reality of revelation that which does not cause revelation is -a veil. Man with all his attributes is other than God, for if his -attributes are accounted Divine, then he himself must be accounted -Divine, and then Unitarian, unification, and the One become, all three, -causes of the existence of one another; and this is precisely the -Christian Trinity. If any attribute prevents the seeker of God from -annihilating himself in unification, he is still veiled by that -attribute, and while he is veiled he is not a Unitarian, for all except -God is vanity. This is the interpretation of “There is no god but -God”.[145] - -Footnote 144: - - Kor. vii, 171. - -Footnote 145: - - Here the author cites an anecdote of Ibráhím al-Khawwáṣ and al-Ḥalláj - which has been related above. See p. 205. - -The Shaykhs have discussed at large the terms by which unification is -denoted. Some say that it is an annihilation that cannot properly be -attained unless the attributes subsist, while others say that it has no -attribute whatever except annihilation. The analogy of union and -separation (_jam` ú tafriqa_) must be applied to this question in order -that it may be understood. I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, declare that -unification is a mystery revealed by God to His servants, and that it -cannot be expressed in language at all, much less in high-sounding -phrases. The explanatory terms and those who use them are other than -God, and to affirm what is other than God in unification is to affirm -polytheism. - - - - - CHAPTER XVII. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE THIRD VEIL: CONCERNING FAITH (_ímán_). - - -The Apostle said: “Faith is belief in God and His angels and His -(revealed) books.” Etymologically, faith (_ímán_) means verification -(_taṣdíq_). Concerning its principles in their application to the -religious law there is great discussion and controversy. The -Mu`tazilites hold that faith includes all acts of devotion, theoretical -as well as practical: hence they say that sin puts a man outside the -pale of faith. The Khárijites, who call a man an infidel because he -commits a sin, are of the same opinion. Some declare that faith is -simply a verbal profession, while others say it is only knowledge of -God, and a party of Sunní scholastics assert that it is mere -verification. I have written a separate work explaining this subject, -but my present purpose is to establish what the Ṣúfí Shaykhs believe. -They are divided on this question in the same way as the lawyers of the -two opposite sects. Some of them, e.g. Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ and Bishr Ḥáfí -and Khayr al-Nassáj and Sumnún al-Muḥibb and Abú Ḥamza of Baghdád and -Muḥammad Jurayrí and a great number of others, hold that faith is verbal -profession and verification and practice; but others, e.g. Ibráhím b. -Adham and Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian and Abú Yazíd of Bisṭám and Abú -Sulaymán Dárání and Ḥárith Muḥásibí and Junayd and Sahl b. `Abdalláh of -Tustar and Shaqíq of Balkh and Ḥátim Aṣamm and Muḥammad b. al-Faḍl of -Balkh and a number besides, hold that faith is verbal profession and -verification. Some lawyers, i.e. Málik and Sháfi`í and Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, -maintain the former view, while the latter opinion is supported by Abú -Ḥanífa and Ḥusayn b. Faḍl of Balkh and the followers of Abú Ḥanífa, such -as Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan, Dáwud Ṭá´í, and Abú Yúsuf. The difference -between them is entirely one of expression and is devoid of substance, -as I will now briefly explain, in order that no one may be charged with -contradicting the principle of faith because he takes the one view or -the other in this dispute. - - - SECTION. - -You must know that the orthodox Moslems and the Ṣúfís are agreed that -faith has a principle (_aṣl_) and a derivative (_far`_), the principle -being verification in the heart, and the derivative being observance of -the (Divine) command. Now the Arabs commonly and customarily transfer -the name of a principle to a derivative by way of metaphor, e.g. they -call the light of the sun “the sun”. In this sense the former of the two -parties mentioned above apply the name of faith to that obedience -(_ṭá`at_) by which alone a man is made secure from future punishment. -Mere verification (i.e. belief), without performance of the Divine -commands, does not involve security. Therefore, since security is in -proportion to obedience, and obedience together with verification and -verbal profession is the cause of security, they bestowed on obedience -the name of faith. The other party, however, asserted that gnosis, not -obedience, is the cause of security. Obedience, they said, is of no -avail without gnosis, whereas one who has gnosis but lacks obedience -will be saved at the last, although it depends on the will of God -whether he shall be pardoned by Divine grace or through the intercession -of the Apostle, or whether he shall be punished according to the measure -of his sin and then be delivered from Hell and transported to Paradise. -Therefore, since those who have gnosis, although they are sinners, by -reason of their gnosis do not remain for ever in Hell, while those who -have only works without gnosis do not enter Paradise, it follows that -here obedience is not the cause of security. The Apostle said: “None of -you shall be saved by his works.” Hence in reality, without any -controversy among Moslems, faith is gnosis and acknowledgment and -acceptance of works. Whoever knows God knows Him by one of His -attributes, and the most elect of His attributes are of three kinds: -those connected with His beauty (_jamál_) and with His majesty (_jalál_) -and with His perfection (_kamál_). His perfection is not attainable -except by those whose perfection is established and whose imperfection -is banished. There remain beauty and majesty. Those whose evidence in -gnosis is the beauty of God are always longing for vision, and those -whose evidence is His majesty are always abhorring their own attributes -and their hearts are stricken with awe. Now longing is an effect of -love, and so is abhorrence of human attributes, because the lifting of -the veil of human attributes is the very essence of love. Therefore -faith and gnosis are love, and obedience is a sign of love. Whoever -denies this neglects the command of God and knows nothing of gnosis. -This evil is manifest among the aspirants to Ṣúfiism at the present day. -Some heretics, seeing their excellence and persuaded of their high -degree, imitate them and say: “Trouble only lasts while you do not know -God: as soon as you know Him, all the labour of obedience is removed -from the body.” But they are wrong. I reply that when you know Him, the -heart is filled with longing and His command is held in greater -veneration than before. I admit that a pious man may reach a point where -he is relieved from the irksomeness of obedience through the increase of -Divine aid (_tawfíq_), so that he performs without trouble what is -troublesome to others; but this result cannot be achieved without a -longing that produces violent agitation. Some, again, say that faith -comes entirely from God, while others say that it springs entirely from -Man. This has long been a matter of controversy among the people in -Transoxania. To assert that faith comes entirely from God is sheer -compulsion (_jabr_), because Man must then have no choice; and to assert -that it springs entirely from Man is pure free-will, for Man does not -know God except through the knowledge that God gives him. The doctrine -of unification is less than compulsion and more than free-will. -Similarly, faith is really the act of Man joined to the guidance of God, -as God hath said: “_Whomsoever God wishes to lead aright, He will open -his breast to receive Islam; and whomsoever He wishes to lead astray, He -will make his breast strait and narrow_” (Kor. vi, 125). On this -principle, inclination to believe (_girawish_) is the guidance of God, -while belief (_girawídan_) is the act of Man. The signs of belief are -these: in the heart, holding firmly to unification; in the eye, -refraining from forbidden sights and looking heedfully on evidences; in -the ear, listening to His word; in the belly, being empty of what is -unlawful; in the tongue, veracity. Hence those persons (who assert that -faith comes entirely from God) maintain that gnosis and faith may -increase and diminish, which is generally admitted to be false, for if -it were true, then the object of gnosis must also be liable to increase -and diminution. Accordingly, the increase and diminution must be in the -derivative, which is the act; and it is generally agreed that obedience -may diminish and increase. This does not please the anthropomorphists -(_ḥashwiyán_) who imitate the two parties mentioned above, for some of -them hold that obedience is an element of faith, while others declare -that faith is a verbal profession and nothing else. Both these doctrines -are unjust. - -In short, faith is really the absorption of all human attributes in the -search of God. This must be unanimously acknowledged by all believers. -The might of gnosis overwhelms the attributes of agnosticism, and where -faith exists agnosticism is banished, for, as it is said: “A lamp is of -no use when the dawn rises.” God hath said: “_Kings, when they enter a -city, ruin it_” (Kor. xxvii, 34). When gnosis is established in the -heart of the gnostic, the empire of doubt and scepticism and agnosticism -is utterly destroyed, and the sovereignty of gnosis subdues his senses -and passions so that in all his looks and acts and words he remains -within the circle of its authority. I have read that when Ibráhím -Khawwáṣ was asked concerning the reality of faith, he replied: “I have -no answer to this question just now, because whatever I say is a mere -expression, and it behoves me to answer by my actions; but I am setting -out for Mecca: do thou accompany me that thou mayest be answered.” The -narrator continues: “I consented. As we journeyed through the desert, -every day two loaves and two cups of water appeared. He gave one to me -and took the other for himself. One day an old man rode up to us and -dismounted and conversed with Ibráhím for a while; then he left us. I -asked Ibráhím to tell me who he was. He replied: ‘This is the answer to -thy question.’ ‘How so?’ I asked. He said: ‘This was Khiḍr, who begged -me to let him accompany me, but I refused, for I feared that in his -company I might put confidence in him instead of in God, and then my -trust in God (_tawakkul_) would have been vitiated. Real faith is trust -in God.’” And Muḥammad b. Khafíf says: “Faith is the belief of the heart -in that knowledge which comes from the Unseen,” because faith is in that -which is hidden, and it can be attained only through Divine -strengthening of one’s certainty, which is the result of knowledge -bestowed by God. - -Now I will come to matters of practice and will explain their -difficulties. - - - - - CHAPTER XVIII. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE FOURTH VEIL: CONCERNING PURIFICATION FROM - FOULNESS. - - -After faith, the first thing incumbent on everyone is purification -(_ṭahárat_) and the performance of prayer, i.e. to cleanse the body from -filth and pollution, and to wash the three members,[146] and to wipe the -head with water as the law prescribes, or to use sand in the absence of -water or in severe illness. Purification is of two kinds: outward and -inward. Thus prayer requires purification of the body, and gnosis -requires purification of the heart. As, in the former case, the water -must be clean, so in the latter case unification must be pure and belief -undefiled. The Ṣúfís are always engaged in purification outwardly and in -unification inwardly. The Apostle said to one of his Companions: “Be -constant in ablution, that thy two guardian angels may love thee,” and -God hath said: “_God loves those who often repent and those who purify -themselves_” (Kor. ii, 222). And the Apostle used to say in his -invocations: “O God, purify my heart from hypocrisy.” Even consciousness -of the miraculous grace (_karámát_) vouchsafed to him he regarded as an -affirmation of other than God, for in unification it is hypocrisy -(_nifáq_) to affirm other than God. So long as a disciple’s eye is -obscured by a single atom of the miracles of the Shaykhs, from the -standpoint of perfection that atom is a potential veil (between him and -God). Hence Abú Yazíd said: “The hypocrisy of gnostics is better than -the sincerity of disciples,” i.e. that which is a “station” (_maqám_) to -the novice is a veil to the adept. The novice desires to gain miracles, -but the adept desires to gain the Giver of miracles. In short, the -affirmation of miracles, or of anything that involves the sight of other -than God, appears hypocrisy to the people of the Truth (the Ṣúfís). -Accordingly, what is noxious to the friends of God is a means of -deliverance for all sinners, and what is noxious to sinners is a means -of salvation for all infidels, because, if infidels knew, as sinners -know, that their sins are displeasing to God, they would all be saved -from infidelity; and if sinners knew, as the friends of God know, that -all their actions are defective, they would all be saved from sin and -purged of contamination. Therefore, outward and inward purification must -go together; e.g., when a man washes his hands he must wash his heart -clean of worldliness, and when he puts water in his mouth he must purify -his mouth from the mention of other than God, and when he washes his -face he must turn away from all familiar objects and turn towards God, -and when he wipes his head he must resign his affairs to God, and when -he washes his feet he must not form the intention of taking his stand on -anything except according to the command of God. Thus he will be doubly -purified. In all religious ordinances the external is combined with the -internal; e.g. in faith, the tongue’s profession with the heart’s -belief. The method of spiritual purification is to reflect and meditate -on the evil of this world and to perceive that it is false and fleeting, -and to make the heart empty of it. This result can be attained only by -much self-mortification (_mujáhadat_), and the most important act of -mortification is to observe the external rules of discipline (_ádáb-i -ẕáhir_) assiduously in all circumstances. It is related that Ibráhím -Khawwáṣ said: “I desire God to give me an everlasting life in this -world, in order that, while mankind are engrossed in the pleasures of -the world and forget God, I may observe the rules of religion amidst the -affliction of the world and remember God.” And it is related that Abú -Ṭáhir Ḥaramí lived forty years at Mecca, and went outside of the sacred -territory whenever he purified himself, because he would not pour the -water which he had used for that purpose on ground that God had called -His. When Ibráhím Khawwáṣ was ill of dysentery in the congregational -mosque at Rayy, he performed sixty complete ablutions in the course of a -day and night, and he died in the water. Abú `Alí Rúdbárí was for some -time afflicted with distracting thoughts (_waswás_) in purification. -“One day,” he said, “I went into the sea at dawn and stayed there till -sunrise. During that interval my mind was troubled. I cried out: ‘O God, -restore me to spiritual health!’ A voice answered from the sea: ‘Health -consists in knowledge.’” It is related that when Sufyán Thawrí was -dying, he purified himself sixty times for one prayer and said: “I shall -at least be clean when I leave this world.” They relate of Shiblí that -one day he purified himself with the intention of entering the mosque. -He heard a voice cry: “Thou hast washed thy outward self, but where is -thy inward purity?” He turned back and gave away all that he possessed, -and during a year he put on no more clothes than were necessary for -prayer. Then he came to Junayd, who said to him: “O Abú Bakr, that was a -very beneficial purification which you have performed; may God always -keep you purified!” After that, Shiblí engaged in continual -purification. When he was dying and could no longer purify himself, he -made a sign to one of his disciples that he should purify him. The -disciple did so, but forgot to let the water flow through his beard -(_takhlíl-i maḥásin_). Shiblí was unable to speak. He seized the -disciple’s hand and pointed to his beard, whereupon the rite was duly -performed. And it is also related of him that he said: “Whenever I have -neglected any rule of purification, some vain conceit has always arisen -in my heart.” And Abú Yazíd said: “Whenever a thought of this world -occurs to my mind, I perform a purification (_ṭaháratí_); and whenever a -thought of the next world occurs to me, I perform a complete ablution -(_ghuslí_),” because this world is non-eternal (_muḥdath_), and the -result of thinking of it is legal impurity (_ḥadath_), whereas the next -world is the place of absence and repose (_ghaybat ú árám_), and the -result of thinking of it is pollution (_janábat_): hence legal impurity -involves purification and pollution involves total ablution. One day -Shiblí purified himself. When he came to the door of the mosque a voice -whispered in his heart: “Art thou so pure that thou enterest My house -with this boldness?” He turned back, but the voice asked: “Dost thou -turn back from My door? Whither wilt thou go?” He uttered a loud cry. -The voice said: “Dost thou revile me?” He stood silent. The voice said: -“Dost thou pretend to endure My affliction?” Shiblí exclaimed: “O God, I -implore Thee to help me against Thyself.” - -Footnote 146: - - The face, hands, and feet. - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs have fully discussed the true meaning of purification, -and have commanded their disciples not to cease from purifying -themselves both outwardly and inwardly. He who would serve God must -purify himself outwardly with water, and he who would come nigh unto God -must purify himself inwardly with repentance. Now I will explain the -principles of repentance (_tawbat_) and its corollaries. - - _Chapter concerning Repentance and its Corollaries._ - -You must know that repentance (_tawbat_) is the first station of -pilgrims on the way to the Truth, just as purification (_ṭahárat_) is -the first step of those who desire to serve God. Hence God hath said: -“_O believers, repent unto God with a sincere repentance_” (Kor. lxvi, -8). And the Apostle said, “There is nothing that God loves more than a -youth who repents”; and he also said, “He who repents of sin is even as -one who has no sin”; then he added, “When God loves a man, sin shall not -hurt him,” i.e. he will not become an infidel on account of sin, and his -faith will not be impaired. Etymologically _tawbat_ means “return”, and -_tawbat_ really involves the turning back from what God has forbidden -through fear of what He has commanded. The Apostle said: “Penitence is -the act of returning” (_al-nadam al-tawbat_). This saying comprises -three things which are involved in _tawbat_, namely, (1) remorse for -disobedience, (2) immediate abandonment of sin, and (3) determination -not to sin again. As repentance (_tawbat_) involves these three -conditions, so contrition (_nadámat_) may be due to three causes: (1) -fear of Divine chastisement and sorrow for evil actions, (2) desire of -Divine favour and certainty that it cannot be gained by evil conduct and -disobedience, (3) shame before God. In the first case the penitent is -_tá´ib_, in the second case he is _muníb_, in the third case he is -_awwáb_. Similarly, _tawbat_ has three stations, viz., _tawbat_, through -fear of Divine punishment; _inábat_, through desire of Divine reward; -and _awbat_, for the sake of keeping the Divine command. _Tawbat_ is the -station of the mass of believers, and implies repentance from great sins -(_kabírat_);[147] and _inábat_ is the station of the saints and -favourites of God (_awliyá ú muqarrabán_);[148] and _awbat_ is the -station of the prophets and apostles.[149] _Tawbat_ is to return from -great sins to obedience; _inábat_ is to return from minor sins to love; -and _awbat_ is to return from one’s self to God. Repentance (_tawbat_) -has its origin in the stern prohibitions of God and in the heart’s being -aroused from the slumber of heedlessness. When a man considers his evil -conduct and abominable deeds he seeks deliverance therefrom, and God -makes it easy for him to repent and leads him back to the sweetness of -obedience. According to the opinion of orthodox Moslems and all the Ṣúfí -Shaykhs, a man who has repented of one sin may continue to commit other -sins and nevertheless receive Divine recompense for having abstained -from that one sin; and it may be that through the blessing of that -recompense he will abstain from other sins. But the Bahshamí[150] sect -of the Mu`tazilites hold that no one can properly be called repentant -unless he avoids all great sins, a doctrine which is absurd, because a -man is not punished for the sins that he does not commit, but if he -renounces a certain kind of sin he has no fear of being punished for -sins of that particular kind: consequently, he is repentant. Similarly, -if he performs some religious duties and neglects others, he will be -rewarded for those which he performed and will be punished for those -which he neglected. Moreover, if anyone should have repented of a sin -which he has not the means of committing at the moment, he is repentant, -because through that past repentance he has gained contrition -(_nadámat_), which is a fundamental part of repentance (_tawbat_), and -at the moment he has turned his back on that kind of sin and is resolved -not to commit it again, even though he should have the power and means -of doing so at some future time. As regards the nature and property of -repentance, the Ṣúfí Shaykhs hold diverse opinions. Sahl b. `Abdalláh -(al-Tustarí) and others believe that repentance consists in not -forgetting your sins, but always regretting them, so that, although you -have many good works to your credit, you will not be pleased with -yourself on that account; since remorse for an evil action is superior -to good works, and one who never forgets his sins will never become -conceited. Junayd and others take the opposite view, that repentance -consists in forgetting the sin. They argue that the penitent is a lover -of God, and the lover of God is in contemplation of God, and in -contemplation it is wrong to remember sin, for remembrance of sin is a -veil between God and those who contemplate Him. This controversy goes -back to the difference of opinion concerning mortification (_mujáhadat_) -and contemplation (_musháhadat_), which has been discussed in my account -of the doctrine of the Sahlís. Those who hold the penitent to be -self-dependent regard his forgetfulness of sin as heedlessness, while -those who hold that he is dependent on God deem his remembrance of sin -to be polytheism. Moses, while his attributes were subsistent, said, “_I -repent towards Thee_” (Kor. vii, 140), but the Apostle, while his -attributes were annihilated, said, “I cannot tell Thy praise.” Inasmuch -as it behoves the penitent not to remember his own selfhood, how should -he remember his sin? Indeed, remembrance of sin is a sin, for sin is an -occasion of turning away from God, and so is the remembrance of it or -the forgetting of it, since both remembrance and forgetfulness are -connected with one’s self. Junayd says: “I have read many books, but I -have never found anything so instructive as this verse:— - - ‘_Idhá qultu má adhnabtu qálat mujíbat^{an} - ḥayátuka dhanb^{un} lá yuqásu bihi dhanbu._’ - - When I say: ‘What is my sin?’ she says in reply: - ‘Thy existence is a sin with which no other sin can be compared.’“ - -In short, repentance is a Divine strengthening and sin is a corporeal -act: when contrition (_nadámat_) enters the heart the body has no means -of expelling it; and as in the beginning no human act can expel -repentance, so in the end no human act can maintain it. God hath said: -”_And He turned_ (tába) _unto him_ (Adam), _for He is the Disposer -towards repentance_ (al—tawwáb), _the Merciful_” (Kor. ii, 35). The -Koran contains many texts to the same effect, which are too well known -to require citation. - -Footnote 147: - - Cf. Kor. lxvi, 8. - -Footnote 148: - - Cf. Kor. l, 32. - -Footnote 149: - - Cf. Kor. xxxviii, 44. - -Footnote 150: - - Text, قهشميان. See Shahristání, Haarbrücker’s translation, i, 80. - -Repentance is of three kinds: (1) from what is wrong to what is right, -(2) from what is right to what is more right, (3) from selfhood to God. -The first kind is the repentance of ordinary men; the second kind is the -repentance of the elect; and the third kind of repentance belongs to the -degree of Divine love (_maḥabbat_). As regards the elect, it is -impossible that they should repent of sin. Do not you perceive that all -the world feel regret for having lost the vision of God? Moses desired -that vision and repented (Kor. vii, 140), because he asked for it with -his own volition (_ikhtiyár_), for in love personal volition is a taint. -The people thought he had renounced the vision of God, but what he -really renounced was his personal volition. As regards those who love -God, they repent not only of the imperfection of a station below the -station to which they have attained, but also of being conscious of any -“station” or “state” whatsoever. - - - SECTION. - -Repentance does not necessarily continue after the resolution not to -return to sin has been duly made. A penitent who in those circumstances -returns to sin has in principle earned the Divine reward for repentance. -Many novices of this sect (the Ṣúfís) have repented and gone back to -wickedness and then once more, in consequence of an admonition, have -returned to God. A certain Shaykh relates that he repented seventy times -and went back to sin on every occasion, until at the seventy-first time -he became steadfast. And Abú `Amr b. Nujayd[151] tells the following -story: “As a novice, I repented in the assembly-room of Abú `Uthmán Ḥírí -and persevered in my repentance for some while. Then I fell into sin and -left the society of that spiritual director, and whenever I saw him from -afar my remorse caused me to flee from his sight. One day I met him -unexpectedly. He said to me: ‘O son, do not associate with your enemies -unless you are sinless (_ma`ṣúm_), for an enemy will see your faults and -rejoice. If you must sin, come to us, that we may bear your affliction.’ -On hearing his words, I felt surfeited with sin and my repentance was -established.” A certain man, having repented of sin, returned to it and -then repented once more. “How will it be,” he said, “if I now turn to -God?” A heavenly voice answered, saying: “Thou didst obey Me and I -recompensed thee, then thou didst abandon Me and I showed indulgence -towards thee; and if thou wilt return to Me, I will receive thee.” - -Footnote 151: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 281. - - - SECTION. - -Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian says: “Ordinary men repent of their sins, but -the elect repent of their heedlessness,” because ordinary men shall be -questioned concerning their outward behaviour, but the elect shall be -questioned concerning the real nature of their conduct. Heedlessness, -which to ordinary men is a pleasure, is a veil to the elect. Abú Ḥafṣ -Ḥaddád says: “Man has no part in repentance, because repentance is from -God to Man, not from Man to God.” According to this saying, repentance -is not acquired by Man, but is one of God’s gifts, a doctrine which is -closely akin to that of Junayd. Abu ´l-Ḥasan Búshanjí says: “When you -feel no delight in remembering a sin, that is repentance,” because the -recollection of a sin is accompanied either by regret or by desire: one -who regrets that he has committed a sin is repentant, whereas one who -desires to commit a sin is a sinner. The actual sin is not so evil as -the desire of it, for the act is momentary, but the desire is perpetual. -Dhu ´l-Nún the Egyptian says: “There are two kinds of repentance, the -repentance of return (_tawbat al-inábat_) and the repentance of shame -(_tawbat al-istiḥyá_): the former is repentance through fear of Divine -punishment, the latter is repentance through shame of Divine clemency.” -The repentance of fear is caused by revelation of God’s majesty, while -the repentance of shame is caused by vision of God’s beauty. Those who -feel shame are intoxicated, and those who feel fear are sober. - - - - - CHAPTER XIX. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE FIFTH VEIL: CONCERNING PRAYER (_al-ṣalát_). - - -Etymologically, prayer (_namáz_) means remembrance (of God) and -submissiveness (_dhikr ú inqiyád_), but in the correct usage of lawyers -the term is specially applied to the five prayers which God has ordered -to be performed at five different times, and which involve certain -preliminary conditions, viz.: (1) purification outwardly from filth and -inwardly from lust; (2) that one’s outward garment should be clean and -one’s inner garment undefiled by anything unlawful; (3) that the place -where one purifies one’s self should be outwardly free from -contamination and inwardly free from corruptness and sin; (4) turning -towards the _qibla_, the outward _qibla_ being the Ka`ba and the inward -_qibla_ being the Throne of God, by which is meant the mystery of Divine -contemplation; (5) standing outwardly in the state of power (_qudrat_) -and inwardly in the garden of proximity to God (_qurbat_); (6) sincere -intention to approach unto God; (7) saying “_Allah akbar_” in the -station of awe and annihilation, and standing in the abode of union, and -reciting the Koran distinctly and reverently, and bowing the head with -humility, and prostrating one’s self with abasement, and making the -profession of faith with concentration, and saluting with annihilation -of one’s attributes. It is recorded in the Traditions that when the -Apostle prayed, there was heard within him a sound like the boiling of a -kettle. And when `Alí was about to pray, his hair stood on end and he -trembled and said: “The hour has come to fulfil a trust which the -heavens and the earth were unable to bear.”[152] - -Footnote 152: - - Here the author cites a description given by Ḥátim al-Aṣamm of his - manner of praying. - - - SECTION. - -Prayer is a term in which novices find the whole way to God, from -beginning to end, and in which their stations (_maqámát_) are revealed. -Thus, for novices, purification takes the place of repentance, and -dependence on a spiritual director takes the place of ascertaining the -_qibla_, and standing in prayer takes the place of self-mortification, -and reciting the Koran takes the place of inward meditation (_dhikr_), -and bowing the head takes the place of humility, and prostration takes -the place of self-knowledge, and profession of faith takes the place of -intimacy (_uns_), and salutation takes the place of detachment from the -world and escape from the bondage of “stations”. Hence, when the Apostle -became divested of all feelings of delight (_mashárib_) in complete -bewilderment, he used to say: “O Bilál, comfort us by the call to -prayer.” The Ṣúfí Shaykhs have discussed this matter and each of them -occupies a position of his own. Some hold that prayer is a means of -obtaining “presence” with God (_ḥudúr_), and others regard it as a means -of obtaining “absence” (_ghaybat_); some who have been “absent” become -“present” in prayer, while others who have been “present” become -“absent”. Similarly, in the next world where God is seen, some, who are -“absent”, when they see God shall become “present”, and _vice versâ_. I, -`Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, assert that prayer is a Divine command and -is not a means of obtaining either “presence” or “absence”, because a -Divine command is not a means to anything. The cause of “presence” is -“presence” itself, and the cause of “absence” is “absence” itself. If -prayer were the cause or means of “presence”, it could be performed only -by one who was “present”, and if it were the cause of “absence”, one who -was “absent” would necessarily become “present” by neglecting to perform -it. But inasmuch as it must be performed by all, whether they be -“present” or “absent”, prayer is sovereign in its essence and -independent. - -Prayer is mostly performed and prescribed by those who are engaged in -self-mortification or who have attained to steadfastness (_istiqámat_). -Thus the Shaykhs order their disciples to perform four hundred bowings -in prayer during a day and night, that their bodies may be habituated to -devotion; and the steadfast likewise perform many prayers in -thanksgiving for the favour which God has bestowed upon them. As regards -those who possess “states” (_arbáb-i aḥwál_), their prayers, in the -perfection of ecstasy, correspond to the “station” of union, so that -through their prayers they become united; or again, when ecstasy is -withdrawn, their prayers correspond to the “station” of separation, so -that thereby they become separated. The former, who are united in their -prayers, pray by day and night and add supererogatory prayers to those -which are incumbent on them, but the latter, who are separated, perform -no more prayers than they need. The Apostle said: “In prayer lies my -delight,” because prayer is a source of joy to the steadfast. When the -Apostle was brought nigh unto God on the night of the Ascension, and his -soul was loosed from the fetters of phenomenal being, and his spirit -lost consciousness of all degrees and stations, and his natural powers -were annihilated, he said, not of his own will, but inspired by longing: -“O God, do not transport me to yonder world of affliction! Do not throw -me under the sway of nature and passion!” God answered: “It is My decree -that thou shalt return to the world for the sake of establishing the -religious law, in order that I may give thee there what I have given -thee here.” When he returned to this world, he used to say as often as -he felt a longing for that exalted station: “O Bilál, comfort us by the -call to prayer!” Thus to him every time of prayer was an Ascension and a -new nearness to God. Sahl b. `Abdalláh says: “It is a sign of a man’s -sincerity that he has an attendant angel who urges him to pray when the -hour of prayer is come, and wakes him if he be asleep.” This mark (of -sincerity) was apparent in Sahl himself, for although he had become -palsied in his old age he used to recover the use of his limbs whenever -the hour of prayer arrived; and after having performed his prayers he -was unable to move from his place. One of the Shaykhs says: “Four things -are necessary to him who prays: annihilation of the lower soul (_nafs_), -loss of the natural powers, purity of the inmost heart, and perfect -contemplation.” Annihilation of the lower soul is to be attained only by -concentration of thought; loss of the natural powers only by affirmation -of the Divine majesty, which involves the destruction of all that is -other than God; purity of the inmost heart only by love; and perfect -contemplation only by purity of the inmost heart. It is related that -Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) used to lay upon himself the obligation of -performing four hundred bowings of prayer in a day and a night. On being -asked why he took so much trouble in the high degree which he enjoyed, -he answered: “Pain and pleasure indicate your feelings, but those whose -attributes are annihilated feel no effect either of pleasure or of pain. -Beware lest you call remissness maturity and desire of the world search -for God.” A certain man relates: “I was praying behind Dhu ´l-Nún. When -he began to pronounce the _takbír_, he cried ‘_Allah akbar_’ and fell in -a swoon like a lifeless body.” Junayd, after he had grown old, did not -omit any item of the litanies (_awrád_) of his youth. When he was urged -to refrain from some of these supererogatory acts of devotion to which -his strength was unequal, he replied that he could not abandon at the -last those exercises which had been the means of his acquiring spiritual -welfare at the first. It is well known that the angels are ceaselessly -engaged in worship, because they are spiritual and have no lower soul -(_nafs_). The lower soul deters men from obedience, and the more it is -subdued the more easy does the performance of worship become; and when -it is entirely annihilated, worship becomes the food and drink of Man, -even as it is the food and drink of the angels. `Abdalláh b. Mubárak -says: “In my boyhood I remember seeing a female ascetic who was bitten -by a scorpion in forty places while she was praying, but no change of -expression was visible in her countenance. When she had finished, I -said: ‘O mother, why didst not thou fling the scorpion away from thee?’ -She answered: ‘Ignorant boy! dost thou deem it right that while I am -engaged in God’s business I should attend to my own?’” - -Abu ´l-Khayr Aqṭa`[153] had a gangrene in his foot. The physicians -declared that his foot must be amputated, but he would not allow this to -be done. His disciples said: “Cut it off while he is praying, for at -that time he is unconscious.” The physicians acted on this advice. When -Abu ´l-Khayr finished his prayers he found that his foot had been -amputated.[154] - -Footnote 153: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 259. - -Footnote 154: - - Here follows a story, already related in the notice of Abú Bakr (p. - 70), concerning the different manner in which Abú Bakr and `Umar - recited the Koran when they performed their prayers. - -Some Ṣúfís perform obligatory acts of devotion openly, but conceal those -which are supererogatory in order that they may escape from ostentation -(_riyá_). Anyone (they say) who desires that others should take notice -of his religious practices becomes a hypocrite; and if he says that -although other people see his devotions he himself is unconscious of -them, that too is hypocrisy. Other Ṣúfís, however, exhibit both their -obligatory and supererogatory acts of devotion, on the ground that -ostentation is unreal and piety real: therefore, it is absurd to hide -reality for the sake of unreality. “Do not let any thought of -ostentation (they say) enter your heart, and worship God wherever you -will.” The Shaykhs have observed the true spirit of the rules of -devotional practice, and have enjoined their disciples to do the same. -One of them says: “I travelled for forty years, and during that time I -did not miss a single public service of prayer, but was in some town -every Friday.” - -The corollaries of prayer belong to the stations of love, of which I -will now set forth the principles in full. - - _Chapter concerning Love and matters connected therewith._ - -God hath said, “_O believers, whosoever among you apostatize from their -religion, God will assuredly bring in their stead a people whom He will -love and who will love Him_” (Kor. v, 59); and He hath also said, “_Some -men take idols beside God and love them as they love God, but the -believers love God best_” (Kor. ii, 160). And the Apostle said: “I heard -Gabriel say that God said, ‘Whoever despises any of My friends has -declared war against Me. I do not hesitate in anything as I hesitate to -seize the soul of My faithful servant who dislikes death and whom I -dislike to hurt, but he cannot escape therefrom; and no means whereby My -servant seeks My favour is more pleasing to Me than the performance of -the obligations which I have laid upon him; and My servant continuously -seeks My favour by works of supererogation until I love him, and when I -love him I am his hearing and his sight and his hand and his helper.’” -And the Apostle also said, “God loves to meet those who love to meet -Him, and dislikes to meet those who dislike to meet Him”; and again, -“When God loves a man He says to Gabriel, ‘O Gabriel, I love such and -such a one, so do thou love him’; then Gabriel loves him and says to the -dwellers in Heaven, ‘God loves such and such a one,’ and they love him -too; then he bestows on him favour in the earth, so that he is loved by -the inhabitants of the earth; and as it happens with regard to love, so -does it happen with regard to hate.” - -_Maḥabbat_ (love) is said to be derived from _ḥibbat_, which are seeds -that fall to the earth in the desert. The name _ḥubb_ (love) was given -to such desert seeds (_ḥibb_), because love is the source of life just -as seeds are the origin of plants. As, when the seeds are scattered in -the desert, they become hidden in the earth, and rain falls upon them -and the sun shines upon them and cold and heat pass over them, yet they -are not corrupted by the changing seasons, but grow up and bear flowers -and give fruit, so love, when it takes its dwelling in the heart, is not -corrupted by presence or absence, by pleasure or pain, by separation or -union. Others say that _maḥabbat_ is derived from _ḥubb_, meaning “a jar -full of stagnant water”, because when love is collected in the heart and -fills it, there is no room there for any thought except of the beloved, -as Shiblí says: “Love is called _maḥabbat_ because it obliterates -(_tamḥú_) from the heart everything except the beloved.” Others say that -_maḥabbat_ is derived from _ḥubb_, meaning “the four conjoined pieces of -wood on which a water-jug is placed, because a lover lightly bears -whatever his beloved metes out to him—honour or disgrace, pain or -pleasure, fair treatment or foul”. According to others, _maḥabbat_ is -derived from _ḥabb_, the plural of _ḥabbat_, and _ḥabbat_ is the core of -the heart, where love resides. In this case, _maḥabbat_ is called by the -name of its dwelling-place, a principle of which there are numerous -examples in Arabic. Others derive it from _ḥabáb_, “bubbles of water and -the effervescence thereof in a heavy rainfall,” because love is the -effervescence of the heart in longing for union with the beloved. As the -body subsists through the spirit, so the heart subsists through love, -and love subsists through vision of, and union with, the beloved. -Others, again, declare that _ḥubb_ is a name applied to pure love, -because the Arabs call the pure white of the human eye _ḥabbat -al-insán_, just as they call the pure black (core) of the heart _ḥabbat -al-qalb_: the latter is the seat of love, the former of vision. Hence -the heart and the eye are rivals in love, as the poet says: - - “_My heart envies mine eye the pleasure of seeing, - And mine eye envies my heart the pleasure of meditating._” - - - SECTION. - -You must know that the term “love” (_maḥabbat_) is used by theologians -in three significations. Firstly, as meaning restless desire for the -object of love, and inclination and passion, in which sense it refers -only to created beings and their mutual affection towards one another, -but cannot be applied to God, who is exalted far above anything of this -sort. Secondly, as meaning God’s beneficence and His conferment of -special privileges on those whom He chooses and causes to attain the -perfection of saintship and peculiarly distinguishes by diverse kinds of -His miraculous grace. Thirdly, as meaning praise which God bestows on a -man for a good action (_thaná-yi jamíl_).[155] - -Footnote 155: - - Cf. Qushayrí (Cairo, 1318 A.H.), 170, 14 sqq. - -Some scholastic philosophers say that God’s love, which He has made -known to us, belongs to those traditional attributes, like His face and -His hand and His settling Himself firmly on His throne (_istiwá_), of -which the existence from the standpoint of reason would appear to be -impossible if they had not been proclaimed as Divine attributes in the -Koran and the Sunna. Therefore we affirm them and believe in them, but -suspend our own judgment concerning them. These scholastics mean to deny -that the term “love” can be applied to God in all the senses which I -have mentioned. I will now explain to you the truth of this matter. - -God’s love of Man is His good will towards him and His having mercy on -him. Love is one of the names of His will (_irádat_), like -“satisfaction”, “anger”, “mercy”, etc., and His will is an eternal -attribute whereby He wills His actions. In short, God’s love towards Man -consists in showing much favour to him, and giving him a recompense in -this world and the next, and making him secure from punishment and -keeping him safe from sin, and bestowing on him lofty “states” and -exalted “stations” and causing him to turn his thoughts away from all -that is other than God. When God peculiarly distinguishes anyone in this -way, that specialization of His will is called love. This is the -doctrine of Ḥárith Muḥásibí and Junayd and a large number of the Ṣúfí -Shaykhs as well as of the lawyers belonging to both the sects; and most -of the Sunní scholastics hold the same opinion. As regards their -assertion that Divine love is “praise given to a man for a good action” -(_thaná-yi jamíl bar banda_), God’s praise is His word (_kalám_), which -is uncreated; and as regards their assertion that Divine love means -“beneficence”, His beneficence consists in His actions. Hence the -different views are substantially in close relation to each other. - -Man’s love towards God is a quality which manifests itself in the heart -of the pious believer, in the form of veneration and magnification, so -that he seeks to satisfy his Beloved and becomes impatient and restless -in his desire for vision of Him, and cannot rest with anyone except Him, -and grows familiar with the remembrance (_dhikr_) of Him, and abjures -the remembrance of everything besides. Repose becomes unlawful to him -and rest flees from him. He is cut off from all habits and associations, -and renounces sensual passion and turns towards the court of love and -submits to the law of love and knows God by His attributes of -perfection. It is impossible that Man’s love of God should be similar in -kind to the love of His creatures towards one another, for the former is -desire to comprehend and attain the beloved object, while the latter is -a property of bodies. The lovers of God are those who devote themselves -to death in nearness to Him, not those who seek His nature -(_kayfiyyat_), because the seeker stands by himself, but he who devotes -himself to death (_mustahlik_) stands by his Beloved; and the truest -lovers are they who would fain die thus, and are overpowered, because a -phenomenal being has no means of approaching the Eternal save through -the omnipotence of the Eternal. He who knows what is real love feels no -more difficulties, and all his doubts depart. Love, then, is of two -kinds—(1) the love of like towards like, which is a desire instigated by -the lower soul and which seeks the essence (_dhát_) of the beloved -object by means of sexual intercourse; (2) the love of one who is unlike -the object of his love and who seeks to become intimately attached to an -attribute of that object, e.g. hearing without speech or seeing without -eye. And believers who love God are of two kinds—(1) those who regard -the favour and beneficence of God towards them, and are led by that -regard to love the Benefactor; (2) those who are so enraptured by love -that they reckon all favours as a veil (between themselves and God) and -by regarding the Benefactor are led to (consciousness of) His favours. -The latter way is the more exalted of the two. - - - SECTION. - -Among the Ṣúfí Shaykhs Sumnún al-Muḥibb holds a peculiar doctrine -concerning love. He asserts that love is the foundation and principle of -the way to God, that all “states” and “stations” are stages of love, and -that every stage and abode in which the seeker may be admits of -destruction, except the abode of love, which is not destructible in any -circumstances so long as the way itself remains in existence. All the -other Shaykhs agree with him in this matter, but since the term “love” -is current and well known, and they wished the doctrine of Divine love -to remain hidden, instead of calling it “love” they gave it the name of -“purity” (_ṣafwat_), and the lover they called “Ṣúfí”; or they used the -word “poverty” (_faqr_) to denote the renunciation of the lover’s -personal will in his affirmation of the Beloved’s will, and they called -the lover “poor” (_faqír_). I have explained the theory of “purity” and -“poverty” in the beginning of this book. - -`Amr b. `Uthmán Makkí says in the _Kitáb-i Maḥabbat_[156] that God -created the souls (_dilhá_) seven thousand years before the bodies and -kept them in the station of proximity (_qurb_), and that he created the -spirits (_jánhá_) seven thousand years before the souls and kept them in -the degree of intimacy (_uns_), and that he created the hearts -(_sirrhá_) seven thousand years before the spirits and kept them in the -degree of union (_waṣl_), and revealed the epiphany of His beauty to the -heart three hundred and sixty times every day and bestowed on it three -hundred and sixty looks of grace, and He caused the spirits to hear the -word of love and manifested three hundred and sixty exquisite favours of -intimacy to the soul, so that they all surveyed the phenomenal universe -and saw nothing more precious than themselves and were filled with -vanity and pride. Therefore God subjected them to probation: He -imprisoned the heart in the spirit and the spirit in the soul and the -soul in the body; then He mingled reason (_`aql_) with them, and sent -prophets and gave commands; then each of them began to seek its original -station. God ordered them to pray. The body betook itself to prayer, the -soul attained to love, the spirit arrived at proximity to God, and the -heart found rest in union with Him. The explanation of love is not love, -because love is a feeling (_ḥál_), and feelings are never mere words -(_qál_). If the whole world wished to attract love, they could not; and -if they made the utmost efforts to repel it, they could not. Love is a -Divine gift, not anything that can be acquired. - -Footnote 156: - - “The Book of Love.” - - - SECTION. - -Concerning excessive love (_`ishq_) there is much controversy among the -Shaykhs. Some Ṣúfís hold that excessive love towards God is allowable, -but that it does not proceed from God. Such love, they say, is the -attribute of one who is debarred from his beloved, and Man is debarred -from God, but God is not debarred from Man: therefore Man may love God -excessively, but the term is not applicable to God. Others, again, take -the view that God cannot be the object of Man’s excessive love, because -such love involves a passing beyond limits, whereas God is not limited. -The moderns assert that excessive love, in this world and the next, is -properly applied only to the desire of attaining the essence, and -inasmuch as the essence of God is not attainable, the term (_`ishq_) is -not rightly used in reference to Man’s love towards God, although the -terms “love” (_maḥabbat_) and “pure love” (_ṣafwat_) are correct. They -say, moreover, that while love (_maḥabbat_) may be produced by hearing, -excessive love (_`ishq_) cannot possibly arise without actual vision: -therefore it cannot be felt towards God, who is not seen in this world. -The essence of God is not attainable or perceptible, that Man should be -able to feel excessive love towards Him; but Man feels love (_maḥabbat_) -towards God, because God, through His attributes and actions, is a -gracious benefactor to His friends. Since Jacob was absorbed in love -(_maḥabbat_) for Joseph, from whom he was separated, his eyes became -bright and clear as soon as he smelt Joseph’s shirt; but since Zulaykhá -was ready to die on account of her excessive love (_`ishq_) for Joseph, -her eyes were not opened until she was united with him. It has also been -said that excessive love is applicable to God, on the ground that -neither God nor excessive love has any opposite. - - - SECTION. - -I will now mention a few of the innumerable indications which the Ṣúfí -Shaykhs have given as to the true nature of love. Master Abu ´l-Qásim -Qushayrí says: “Love is the effacement of the lover’s attributes and the -establishment of the Beloved’s essence,” i.e. since the Beloved is -subsistent (_báqí_) and the lover is annihilated (_fání_) the jealousy -of love requires that the lover should make the subsistence of the -Beloved absolute by negating himself, and he cannot negate his own -attributes except by affirming the essence of the Beloved. No lover can -stand by his own attributes, for in that case he would not need the -Beloved’s beauty; but when he knows that his life depends on the -Beloved’s beauty, he necessarily seeks to annihilate his own attributes, -which veil him from his Beloved; and thus in love for his Friend he -becomes an enemy to himself. It is well known that the last words of -Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj) on the scaffold were _Ḥasb al-wájid ifrád -al-wáḥid_, “It is enough for the lover that he should make the One -single,” i.e. that his existence should be cleared away from the path of -love and that the dominion of his lower soul should be utterly -destroyed. Abú Yazíd Bisṭámí says: “Love consists in regarding your own -much as little and your Beloved’s little as much.” This is how God -Himself deals with His servants, for He calls “little” that which He has -given to them in this world (Kor. iv, 79), but calls their praise of Him -“much”—“_the men and women who praise God much_” (Kor. xxxiii, 35)—in -order that all His creatures may know that He is the real Beloved, -because nothing is little that God bestows on Man, and all is little -that Man offers to God. Sahl b. `Abdalláh al-Tustarí says: “Love -consists in embracing acts of obedience (_mu`ánaqat al-ṭá`át_) and in -avoiding acts of disobedience,” because a man performs the command of -his beloved more easily in proportion to the strength of love in his -heart. This is a refutation of those heretics who declare that a man may -attain to such a degree of love that obedience is no longer required of -him, a doctrine which is sheer heresy. It is impossible that any person, -while his understanding is sound, should be relieved of his religious -obligations, because the law of Muḥammad will never be abrogated, and if -one such person may be thus relieved why not all? The case of persons -overcome with rapture (_maghlúb_) and idiots (_ma`túh_) is different. It -is possible, however, that God in His love should bring a man to such a -degree that it costs him no trouble to perform his religious duties, -because the more one loves Him who gives the command the less trouble -will he have in executing it. When the Apostle abandoned himself -entirely to devotion both by day and night, so that his blessed feet -became swollen, God said: “_We have not sent down the Koran to thee in -order that thou shouldst be miserable_” (Kor. xx, 1). And it is also -possible that one should be relieved of the consciousness of performing -the Divine command, as the Apostle said: “Verily, a veil is drawn over -my heart, and I ask forgiveness of God seventy times daily,” i.e. he -asked to be forgiven for his actions, because he was not regarding -himself and his actions, that he should be pleased with his obedience, -but was paying regard to the majesty of God’s command and was thinking -that his actions were not worthy of God’s acceptance. Sumnún Muḥibb -says: “The lovers of God have borne away the glory of this world and the -next, for the Prophet said, ‘A man is with the object of his love.’” -Therefore they are with God in both worlds, and those who are with God -can do no wrong. The glory of this world is God’s being with them, and -the glory of the next world is their being with God. Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh -al-Rází says: “Real love is neither diminished by unkindness nor -increased by kindness and bounty,” because in love both kindness and -unkindness are causes, and the cause of a thing is reduced to nothing -when the thing itself actually exists. A lover delights in the -affliction that his beloved makes him suffer, and having love he regards -kindness and unkindness with the same indifference. The story is well -known how Shiblí was supposed to be insane and was confined in a -madhouse. Some persons came to visit him. “Who are you?” he asked. They -answered: “Thy friends,” whereupon he pelted them with stones and put -them to flight. Then he said: “Had you been my friends, you would not -have fled from my affliction.” - - - - - CHAPTER XX. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE SIXTH VEIL: CONCERNING ALMS (_al-zakát_). - - -Alms is one of the obligatory ordinances of the faith. It becomes due on -the completion of a benefit; e.g., two hundred dirhems constitute a -complete benefit (_ni`matí tamám_), and anyone who is in possession of -that sum ought to pay five dirhems; or if he possesses twenty dínárs he -ought to pay half a dínár; or if he possesses five camels he ought to -pay one sheep, and so forth. Alms is also due on account of dignity -(_jáh_), because that too is a complete benefit. The Apostle said: -“Verily, God has made it incumbent upon you to pay the alms of your -dignity, even as He has made it incumbent upon you to pay the alms of -your property”; and he said also: “Everything has its alms, and the alms -of a house is the guest-room.” - -Alms is really thanksgiving for a benefit received, the thanks being -similar in kind to the benefit. Thus health is a great blessing, for -which every limb owes alms. Therefore healthy persons ought to occupy -all their limbs with devotion and not yield them to pleasure and -pastime, in order that the alms due for the blessing of health may be -fully paid. Moreover, there is an alms for every spiritual blessing, -namely, outward and inward acknowledgment of that blessing in proportion -to its worth. Thus, when a man knows that the blessings bestowed upon -him by God are infinite, he should render infinite thanks by way of -alms. The Ṣúfís do not consider it praiseworthy to give alms on account -of worldly blessings, because they disapprove of avarice, and a man must -needs be extremely avaricious to keep two hundred dirhems in his -possession for a whole year and then give away five dirhems in alms. -Since it is the custom of the generous to lavish their wealth, and since -they are disposed to be liberal, how should almsgiving be incumbent upon -them? - -I have read in the Anecdotes that a certain formal theologian, wishing -to make trial of Shiblí, asked him what sum ought to be given in alms. -Shiblí replied: “Where avarice is present and property exists, five -dirhems out of every two hundred dirhems, and half a dínár out of every -twenty dínárs. That is according to thy doctrine; but according to mine, -a man ought not to possess anything, in which case he will be saved from -the trouble of giving alms.” The divine asked: “Whose authority do you -follow in this matter?” Shiblí said: “The authority of Abú Bakr the -Veracious, who gave away all that he possessed, and on being asked by -the Apostle what he had left behind for his family, answered, ‘God and -His Apostle.’” And it is related that `Alí said in an ode— - - “_Almsgiving is not incumbent on me, - For how can a generous man be required to give alms?_” - -But it is absurd for anyone to cultivate ignorance and to say that -because he has no property he need not be acquainted with the theory of -almsgiving. To learn and obtain knowledge is an essential obligation, -and to profess one’s self independent of knowledge is mere infidelity. -It is one of the evils of the present age that many who pretend to be -pious dervishes reject knowledge in favour of ignorance. The author -says: “Once I was giving devotional instruction to some novices in -Ṣúfiism and was discussing the chapter on the poor-rate of camels -(_ṣadaqat al-ibil_) and explaining the rules in regard to she-camels -that have entered on their third or second or fourth year (_bint-i labún -ú bint-i makháḍ ú ḥiqqa_). An ignorant fellow, tired of listening to my -discourse, rose and said: ‘I have no camels: what use is this knowledge -to me?’ I answered: ‘Knowledge is necessary in taking alms no less than -in giving alms: if anyone should give you a she-camel in her third year -and you should accept her, you ought to be informed on this point; and -even though one has no property and does not want to have any property, -he is not thereby relieved from the obligation of knowledge.’” - - - SECTION. - -Some of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs have accepted alms, while others have declined -to do so. Those whose poverty is voluntary (_ba-ikhtiyár_) belong to the -latter class. “We do not amass property,” they say, “therefore we need -not give alms; nor will we accept alms from worldlings, lest they should -have the upper hand (_yad-i `ulyá_) and we the lower (_yad-i suflá_).“ -But those who in their poverty are under Divine compulsion (_muḍtarr_) -accept alms, not for their own wants but with the purpose of relieving a -brother Moslem of his obligation. In this case the receiver of alms, not -the giver, has the upper hand; otherwise, the words of God, ”_And He -accepteth the alms_” (Kor. ix, 105), are meaningless, and the giver of -alms must be superior to the receiver, a belief which is utterly false. -No; the upper hand belongs to him who takes something from a brother -Moslem in order that the latter may escape from a heavy responsibility. -Dervishes are not of this world (_dunyá´í_), but of the next world -(_`uqbá´í_), and if a dervish fails to relieve a worldling of his -responsibility, the worldling will be held accountable and punished at -the Resurrection for having neglected to fulfil his obligation. -Therefore God afflicts the dervish with a slight want in order that -worldlings may be able to perform what is incumbent upon them. The upper -hand is necessarily the hand of the dervish who receives alms in -accordance with the requirement of the law, because it behoves him to -take that which is due to God. If the hand of the recipient were the -lower hand, as some anthropomorphists (_ahl-i ḥashw_) declare, then the -hands of the Apostles, who often received alms due to God and delivered -it to the proper authority, must have been lower (than the hands of -those who gave the alms to them). This view is erroneous; its adherents -do not see that the Apostles received alms in consequence of the Divine -command. The religious Imáms have acted in the same manner as the -Apostles, for they have always received payments due to the public -treasury. Those are in the wrong who assert that the hand of the -receiver is the lower and that of the giver is the higher. - -_Chapter on Liberality and Generosity._ - -In the opinion of theologians liberality (_júd_) and generosity -(_sakhá_), when regarded as human attributes, are synonymous; but God, -although He is called liberal (_jawád_), is not called generous -(_sakhí_), because He has not called Himself by the latter name, nor is -He so called in any Apostolic Tradition. All orthodox Moslems are agreed -that it is not allowable to apply to God any name that is not proclaimed -in the Koran and the Sunna: thus He may be called knowing (_`álim_), but -not intelligent (_`áqil_) or wise (_faqíh_), although the three terms -bear the same signification. Hence God is called liberal, since that -name is accompanied by His blessing; and He is not called generous, -since that name lacks His blessing. Men have made a distinction between -liberality (_júd_) and generosity (_sakhá_), and have said that the -generous man discriminates in his liberality, and that his actions are -connected with a selfish motive (_gharaḍ_) and a cause (_sabab_). This -is a rudimentary stage in liberality, for the liberal man does not -discriminate, and his actions are devoid of self-interest and without -any secondary cause. These two qualities were exhibited by two Apostles, -viz., Abraham, the Friend of God (_Khalíl_), and Muḥammad, the Beloved -of God (_Ḥabíb_). It is related in the genuine Traditions that Abraham -was accustomed not to eat anything until a guest came to him. Once, -after three days had passed without the arrival of a guest, a -fire—worshipper appeared at the door, but Abraham, on hearing who he -was, refused to give him entertainment. God reproached him on this -account, saying: “Wilt not thou give a piece of bread to one whom I have -nourished for seventy years?” But Muḥammad, when the son of Ḥátim -visited him, spread his own mantle on the ground for him and said: -“Honour the noble chieftain of a people when he comes to you.” Abraham’s -position was generosity, but our Apostle’s was liberality. - -The best rule in this matter is set forth in the maxim that liberality -consists in following one’s first thought, and that it is a sign of -avarice when the second thought prevails over the first; for the first -thought is unquestionably from God. I have read that at Níshápúr there -was a merchant who used regularly to attend the meetings held by Shaykh -Abú Sa`íd. One day a dervish who was present begged the Shaykh to give -him something. The merchant had a dínár and a small piece of clipped -money (_quráḍa_). His first thought was: “I will give the dínár,” but on -second thoughts he gave the clipped piece. When the Shaykh finished his -discourse the merchant asked: “Is it right for anyone to contend with -God?” The Shaykh answered: “You contended with Him: He bade you give the -dínár, but you gave the clipping.” I have also read that Shaykh Abú -`Abdalláh Rúdbárí came to the house of a disciple in his absence, and -ordered that all the effects in the house should be taken to the bazaar. -When the disciple returned he was delighted that the Shaykh had behaved -with such freedom, but he said nothing. His wife, however, tore off her -dress and flung it down, saying: “This belongs to the effects of the -house.” The husband exclaimed: “You are doing more than is necessary and -showing self-will.” “O husband,” said she, “what the Shaykh did was the -result of his liberality: we too must exert ourselves (_takalluf kuním_) -to display liberality.” “Yes,” replied the husband, “but if we allow the -Shaykh to be liberal, that is real liberality in us, whereas liberality, -regarded as a human quality, is forced and unreal.” A disciple ought -always to sacrifice his property and himself in obedience to the command -of God. Hence Sahl b. `Abdalláh (al-Tustarí) said: “The Ṣúfí’s blood may -be shed with impunity, and his property may be seized.” I have heard the -following story of Shaykh Abú Muslim Fárisí: “Once (he said) I set out -with a number of people for the Ḥijáz. In the neighbourhood of Ḥulwán we -were attacked by Kurds, who stripped us of our patched frocks. We -offered no resistance. One man, however, became greatly excited, -whereupon a Kurd drew his scimitar and killed him, notwithstanding our -entreaties that his life might be spared. On our asking why he had -killed him he answered: ‘Because he is no Ṣúfí and acts disloyally in -the company of saints: such a one is better dead.’ We said: ‘How so?’ He -replied: ‘The first step in Ṣúfiism is liberality. This fellow, who was -so desperately attached to these rags that he quarrelled with his own -friends, how should he be a Ṣúfí? His own friends, I say, for it is a -long time since we have been doing as you do, and plundering you and -stripping you of worldly encumbrances.’”[157] A man came to the house of -Ḥasan b. `Alí and said that he owed four hundred dirhems. Ḥasan gave him -four hundred dínárs and went into the house, weeping. They asked him why -he wept. He answered: “I have been remiss in making inquiry into the -circumstances of this man, and have reduced him to the humiliation of -begging.” Abú Sahl Ṣu`lúkí never put alms into the hand of a dervish, -and always used to lay on the ground anything that he gave. “Worldly -goods,” he said, “are too worthless to be placed in the hand of a -Moslem, so that my hand should be the upper and his the lower.”[158] I -once met a dervish to whom a Sultan had sent three hundred drachms of -pure gold. He went to a bath-house, and gave the whole sum to the -superintendent and immediately departed. I have already discussed the -subject of liberality in the chapter on preference (_íthár_), where I -have dealt with the doctrine of the Núrís. - -Footnote 157: - - Here follows a story of `Abdalláh b. Ja`far and an Abyssinian slave, - who let a dog eat the whole of his daily portion of food. - -Footnote 158: - - Here the author relates three short anecdotes illustrating the - liberality of Muḥammad. - - - - - CHAPTER XXI. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE SEVENTH VEIL: ON FASTING (_al-ṣawm_). - - -God hath said: “_O believers, fasting is prescribed unto you_” (Kor. ii, -179). And the Apostle said that he was informed by Gabriel that God -said: “Fasting is mine, and I have the best right to give recompense for -it” (_al-ṣawm lí wa-ana ajzá bihi_),[159] because the religious practice -of fasting is a mystery unconnected with any external thing, a mystery -in which none other than God participates: hence its recompense is -infinite. It has been said that mankind enter Paradise through God’s -mercy, and that their rank therein depends on their religious devotion, -and that their abiding therein for ever is the recompense of their -fasting, because God said: “I have the best right to give recompense for -it.” Junayd said: “Fasting is half of the Way.” I have seen Shaykhs who -fasted without intermission, and others who fasted only during the month -of Ramaḍán: the former were seeking recompense, and the latter were -renouncing self-will and ostentation. Again, I have seen others who -fasted and were not conscious of anyone and ate only when food was set -before them. This is more in accordance with the Sunna. It is related -that the Apostle came to `Á´isha and Ḥafṣa, who said to him: “We have -kept some dates and butter (_ḥays_) for thee.” “Bring it,” said he; “I -was intending to fast, but I will fast another day instead.” I have seen -others who fasted on the “white days” (from the 13th to the 15th of -every month), and on the ten (last nights) of the blessed month -(Ramaḍán), and also during Rajab, Sha`bán, and Ramaḍán. Others I have -seen who observed the fast of David, which the Apostle called the best -of fasts, i.e. they fasted one day and broke their fast the next day. -Once I came into the presence of Shaykh Aḥmad Bukhárí. He had a dish of -sweetmeat (_ḥalwá_) before him, from which he was eating, and he made a -sign to me that I should do the same. As is the way of young men, I -answered (without consideration) that I was fasting. He asked why. I -said: “In conformity with such and such a one.” He said: “It is not -right for human beings to conform with human beings.” I was about to -break my fast, but he said: “Since you wish to be quit of conformity -with him, do not conform with me, for I too am a human being.” Fasting -is really abstinence, and this includes the whole method of Ṣúfiism -(_ṭaríqat_). The least degree in fasting is hunger, which is God’s food -on earth, and is universally commended in the eye of the law and of -reason. One month’s continual fasting is incumbent on every reasonable -Moslem who has attained to manhood. The fast begins on the appearance of -the moon of Ramaḍán, and continues until the appearance of the moon of -Shawwál, and for every day a sincere intention and firm obligation are -necessary. Abstinence involves many obligations, e.g., keeping the belly -without food and drink, and guarding the eye from lustful looks, and the -ear from listening to evil speech about anyone in his absence, and the -tongue from vain or foul words, and the body from following after -worldly things and disobedience to God. One who acts in this manner is -truly keeping his fast, for the Apostle said to a certain man, “When you -fast, let your ear fast and your eye and your tongue and your hand and -every limb;” and he also said, “Many a one has no good of his fasting -except hunger and thirst.” - -Footnote 159: - - The usual reading is _ajzí_, “I give recompense,” but the Persian - translation, _ba-jazá-yi án man awlátaram_, is equivalent to _ana ajzá - bihi_. - -I dreamed that I saw the Apostle and asked him to give me a word of -counsel, and that he replied: “Imprison thy tongue and thy senses.” To -imprison the senses is complete self-mortification, because all kinds of -knowledge are acquired through the five senses: sight, hearing, taste, -smell, and touch. Four of the senses have a particular _locus_, but the -fifth, namely touch, is spread over the whole body. Everything that -becomes known to human beings passes through these five doors, except -intuitive knowledge and Divine inspiration, and in each sense there is a -purity and an impurity; for, just as they are open to knowledge, reason, -and spirit, so they are open to imagination and passion, being organs -which partake of piety and sin and of felicity and misery. Therefore it -behoves him who is keeping a fast to imprison all the senses in order -that they may return from disobedience to obedience. To abstain only -from food and drink is child’s play. One must abstain from idle -pleasures and unlawful acts, not from eating lawful food. I marvel at -those who say that they are keeping a voluntary fast and yet fail to -perform an obligatory duty. Not to commit sin is obligatory, whereas -continual fasting is an apostolic custom (which may be observed or -neglected). When a man is divinely protected from sin all his -circumstances are a fast. It is related by Abú Ṭalḥa al-Málikí that Sahl -b. `Abdalláh of Tustar was fasting on the day of his birth and also on -the day of his death, because he was born in the forenoon and tasted no -milk until the evening prayer, and on the day of his decease he was -keeping a fast. But continual fasting (_rúza-i wiṣál_) has been -forbidden by the Apostle, for when he fasted continually, and his -Companions conformed with him in that respect, he forbade them, saying: -“I am not as one of you: I pass the night with my Lord, who gives me -food and drink.” The votaries of self-mortification assert that this -prohibition was an act of indulgence, not a veto declaring such fasts to -be unlawful, and others regard them as being contrary to the Sunna, but -the fact is that continuance (_wiṣál_) is impossible, because the day’s -fast is interrupted by night or, at any rate, does not continue beyond a -certain period. It is related that Sahl b. `Abdalláh of Tustar used to -eat only once in fifteen days, and when the month of Ramaḍán arrived he -ate nothing until the Feast, and performed four hundred bowings in -prayer every night. This exceeds the limit of human endurance, and -cannot be accomplished by anyone without Divine aid, which itself -becomes his nourishment. It is well known that Shaykh Abú Naṣr -Sarráj,[160] the author of the _Luma`_,[161] who was surnamed the -Peacock of the Poor (_Ṭá´ús al-fuqará_), came to Baghdád in the month of -Ramaḍán, and was given a private chamber in the Shúníziyya mosque, and -was appointed to preside over the dervishes until the Feast. During the -nightly prayers of Ramaḍán (_taráwíḥ_) he recited the whole Koran five -times. Every night a servant brought a loaf of bread to his room. When -he departed, on the day of the Feast, the servant found all the thirty -loaves untouched. `Alí b. Bakkár relates that Ḥafṣ Miṣṣísí ate nothing -in Ramaḍán except on the fifteenth day of that month. We are told that -Ibráhím Adham fasted from the beginning to the end of Ramaḍán, and, -although it was the month of Tammúz (July), worked every day as a -harvester and gave his wages to the dervishes, and prayed from nightfall -to daybreak; they watched him closely and saw that he neither ate nor -slept. It is said that Shaykh Abú `Abdalláh Khafíf during his life kept -forty uninterrupted fasts of forty days, and I have met with an old man -who used annually to keep two fasts of forty days in the desert. I was -present at the death-bed of Dánishmand Abú Muḥammad Bángharí; he had -tasted no food for eighty days and had not missed a single occasion of -public worship. At Merv there were two spiritual directors; one was -called Mas`úd and the other was Shaykh Abú `Alí Siyáh. Mas`úd sent a -message to Abú `Alí, saying: “How long shall we make empty pretensions? -Come, let us sit fasting for forty days.” Abú `Alí replied: “No; let us -eat three times a day and nevertheless require only one purification -during these forty days.” The difficulties of this question are not yet -removed. Ignorant persons conclude that continuance in fasting is -possible, while physicians allege that such a theory is entirely -baseless. I will now explain the matter in full. To fast continuously, -without infringing the Divine command, is a miracle (_karámat_). -Miracles have a special, not a general, application: if they were -vouchsafed to all, faith would be an act of necessity (_jabr_) and -gnostics would not be recompensed on account of gnosis. The Apostle -wrought evidentiary miracles (_mu`jizát_) and therefore divulged his -continuance in fasting; but he forbade the saints (_ahl-i karámat_) to -divulge it, because a _karámat_ involves concealment, whereas a -_mu`jizat_ involves revelation. This is a clear distinction between the -miracles performed by Apostles and those performed by saints, and will -be sufficient for anyone who is divinely guided. The forty days’ fasts -(_chilla_) of the saints are derived from the fast of Moses (Kor. vii, -138). When the saints desire to hear the word of God spiritually, they -remain fasting for forty days. After thirty days have passed they rub -their teeth; then they fast ten days more, and God speaks to their -hearts, because whatever the prophets enjoy openly the saints may enjoy -secretly. Now, hearing the word of God is not compatible with the -subsistence of the natural temperament: therefore the four humours must -be deprived of food and drink for forty days in order that they may be -utterly subdued, and that the purity of love and the subtlety of the -spirit may hold absolute sway. - -Footnote 160: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 353. - -Footnote 161: - - “Brilliancies.” _Naf._ entitles it لمعه. - - _Chapter on Hunger and matters connected with it._ - -Hunger sharpens the intelligence and improves the mind and health. The -Apostle said: “Make your bellies hungry and your livers thirsty and your -bodies naked, that perchance your hearts may see God in this world.” -Although hunger is an affliction to the body, it illumines the heart and -purifies the soul, and leads the spirit into the presence of God. To eat -one’s fill is an act worthy of a beast. One who cultivates his spiritual -nature by means of hunger, in order to devote himself entirely to God -and detach himself from worldly ties, is not on the same level with one -who cultivates his body by means of gluttony, and serves his lusts. “The -men of old ate to live, but ye live to eat.” For the sake of a morsel of -food Adam fell from Paradise, and was banished far from the -neighbourhood of God. - -He whose hunger is compulsory is not really hungry, because one who -desires to eat after God has decreed the contrary is virtually eating; -the merit of hunger belongs to him who abstains from eating, not to him -who is debarred from eating. Kattání[162] says: “The novice shall sleep -only when he is overpowered by slumber, and speak only when he must, and -eat only when he is starving.” According to some, starvation (_fáqa_) -involves abstention from food for two days and nights; others say three -days and nights, or a week, or forty days, because true mystics believe -that a sincere man (_ṣádiq_) is only once hungry in forty days; his -hunger merely serves to keep him alive, and all hunger besides is -natural appetite and vanity. You must know that all the veins in the -bodies of gnostics are evidences of the Divine mysteries, and that their -hearts are tenanted by visions of the Most High. Their hearts are doors -opened in their breasts, and at these doors are stationed reason and -passion: reason is reinforced by the spirit, and passion by the lower -soul. The more the natural humours are nourished by food, the stronger -does the lower soul become, and the more impetuously is passion diffused -through the members of the body; and in every vein a different kind of -veil (_ḥijábí_) is produced. But when food is withheld from the lower -soul it grows weak, and the reason gains strength, and the mysteries and -evidences of God become more visible, until, when the lower soul is -unable to work and passion is annihilated, every vain desire is effaced -in the manifestation of the Truth, and the seeker of God attains to the -whole of his desire. It is related that Abu ´l-`Abbás Qaṣṣáb said: “My -obedience and disobedience depend on two cakes of bread: when I eat I -find in myself the stuff of every sin, but when I abstain from eating I -find in myself the foundation of every act of piety.” The fruit of -hunger is contemplation of God (_musháhadat_), of which the forerunner -is mortification (_mujáhadat_). Repletion combined with contemplation is -better than hunger combined with mortification, because contemplation is -the battle-field of men, whereas mortification is the playground of -children. - -Footnote 162: - - _Nafahát_, No. 215. - - - - - CHAPTER XXII. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE EIGHTH VEIL: CONCERNING THE PILGRIMAGE. - - -The pilgrimage (_ḥajj_) is binding on every Moslem of sound mind who is -able to perform it and has reached manhood. It consists in putting on -the pilgrim’s garb at the proper place, in standing on `Arafát, in -circumambulating the Ka`ba, and in running between Ṣafá and Marwa. One -must not enter the sacred territory without being clad as a pilgrim (_bé -iḥrám_). The sacred territory (_ḥaram_) is so called because it contains -the Station of Abraham (_Maqám-i Ibráhím_). Abraham had two stations: -the station of his body, namely, Mecca, and the station of his soul, -namely, friendship (_khullat_). Whoever seeks his bodily station must -renounce all lusts and pleasures and put on the pilgrim’s garb and -clothe himself in a winding-sheet (_kafan_) and refrain from hunting -lawful game, and keep all his senses under strict control, and be -present at `Arafát and go thence to Muzdalifa and Mash`ar al-Ḥarám, and -pick up stones and circumambulate the Ka`ba and visit Miná and stay -there three days and throw stones in the prescribed manner and cut his -hair and perform the sacrifice and put on his (ordinary) clothes. But -whoever seeks his spiritual station must renounce familiar associations -and bid farewell to pleasures and take no thought of other than God (for -his looking towards the phenomenal world is interdicted); then he must -stand on the `Arafát of gnosis (_ma`rifat_) and from there set out for -the Muzdalifa of amity (_ulfat_) and from there send his heart to -circumambulate the temple of Divine purification (_tanzíh_), and throw -away the stones of passion and corrupt thoughts in the Miná of faith, -and sacrifice his lower soul on the altar of mortification and arrive at -the station of friendship (_khullat_). To enter the bodily station is to -be secure from enemies and their swords, but to enter the spiritual -station is to be secure from separation (from God) and its -consequences.[163] - -Footnote 163: - - Here follows the story of Abraham and Nimrod which has occurred - before, p. 73. - -Muḥammad b. al-Faḍl says: “I wonder at those who seek His temple in this -world: why do not they seek contemplation of Him in their hearts? The -temple they sometimes attain and sometimes miss, but contemplation they -might enjoy always. If they are bound to visit a stone, which is looked -at only once a year, surely they are more bound to visit the temple of -the heart, where He may be seen three hundred and sixty times in a day -and night. But the mystic’s every step is a symbol of the journey to -Mecca, and when he reaches the sanctuary he wins a robe of honour for -every step.” Abú Yazíd says: “If anyone’s recompense for worshipping God -is deferred until to-morrow he has not worshipped God aright to-day,” -for the recompense of every moment of worship and mortification is -immediate. And Abú Yazíd also says: “On my first pilgrimage I saw only -the temple; the second time, I saw both the temple and the Lord of the -temple; and the third time I saw the Lord alone.” In short, where -mortification is, there is no sanctuary: the sanctuary is where -contemplation is. Unless the whole universe is a man’s trysting-place -where he comes nigh unto God and a retired chamber where he enjoys -intimacy with God, he is still a stranger to Divine love; but when he -has vision the whole universe is his sanctuary. - - “_The darkest thing in the world is the Beloved’s house without the - Beloved._” - -Accordingly, what is truly valuable is not the Ka`ba, but contemplation -and annihilation in the abode of friendship, of which things the sight -of the Ka`ba is indirectly a cause. But we must recognize that every -cause depends on the author of causes (_musabbib_), from whatever hidden -place the providence of God may appear, and whencesoever the desire of -the seeker may be fulfilled. The object of mystics (_mardán_) in -traversing wildernesses and deserts is not the sanctuary itself, for to -a lover of God it is unlawful to look upon His sanctuary. No; their -object is mortification in a longing that leaves them no rest, and eager -dissolution in a love that has no end. A certain man came to Junayd. -Junayd asked him whence he came. He replied: “I have been on the -pilgrimage.” Junayd said: “From the time when you first journeyed from -your home have you also journeyed away from all sins?” He said: “No.” -“Then,” said Junayd, “you have made no journey. At every stage where you -halted for the night did you traverse a station on the way to God?” He -said: “No.” “Then,” said Junayd, “you have not trodden the road stage by -stage. When you put on the pilgrim’s garb at the proper place did you -discard the attributes of humanity as you cast off your ordinary -clothes?” “No.” “Then you have not put on the pilgrim’s garb. When you -stood on `Arafát did you stand one instant in contemplation of God?” -“No.” “Then you have not stood on `Arafát. When you went to Muzdalifa -and achieved your desire did you renounce all sensual desires?” “No.” -“Then you have not gone to Muzdalifa. When you circumambulated the -Temple did you behold the immaterial beauty of God in the abode of -purification?” “No.” “Then you have not circumambulated the Temple. When -you ran between Ṣafá and Marwa did you attain to the rank of purity -(_ṣafá_) and virtue (_muruwwat_)?” “No.” “Then you have not run. When -you came to Miná did all your wishes (_munyathá_) cease?” “No.” “Then -you have not yet visited Miná. When you reached the slaughter-place and -offered sacrifice did you sacrifice the objects of sensual desire?” -“No.” “Then you have not sacrificed. When you threw the stones did you -throw away whatever sensual thoughts were accompanying you?” “No.” “Then -you have not yet thrown the stones, and you have not yet performed the -pilgrimage. Return and perform the pilgrimage in the manner which I have -described in order that you may arrive at the station of Abraham.” -Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ says: “I saw at Mount `Arafát a youth who stood silent -with bowed head while all the people were praying aloud, and I asked him -why he did not pray like them. He answered that he was in great -distress, having lost the spiritual state (_waqtí_) which he formerly -enjoyed, and that he could by no means cry aloud unto God. I said: -‘Pray, in order that through the blessings of this multitude God may -accomplish thy desire.’ He was about to lift up his hands and pray, when -suddenly he uttered a shriek and died on the spot.” Dhu ´l-Nún the -Egyptian says: “At Miná I saw a young man sitting quietly while the -people were engaged in the sacrifices. I looked at him to see what he -was doing. He cried: ‘O God, all the people are offering sacrifice. I -wish to sacrifice my lower soul to Thee; do Thou accept it.’ Having -spoken, he pointed with his forefinger to his throat and fell dead—may -God have mercy on him!” - -Pilgrimages, then, are of two kinds: (1) in absence (from God) and (2) -in presence (of God). Anyone who is absent from God at Mecca is in the -same position as if he were absent from God in his own house, and anyone -who is present with God in his own house is in the same position as if -he were present with God at Mecca. Pilgrimage is an act of mortification -(_mujáhadat_) for the sake of obtaining contemplation (_musháhadat_), -and mortification does not become the direct cause of contemplation, but -is only a means to it. Therefore, inasmuch as a means has no further -effect on the reality of things, the true object of pilgrimage is not to -visit the Ka`ba, but to obtain contemplation of God. - -_Chapter on Contemplation._ - -The Apostle said: “Make your bellies hungry and your livers thirsty and -leave the world alone, that perchance ye may see God with your hearts”; -and he also said, “Worship God as though thou sawest Him, for if thou -dost not see Him, yet He sees thee.” God said to David: “Dost thou know -what is knowledge of Me? It is the life of the heart in contemplation of -Me.” By “contemplation” the Ṣúfís mean spiritual vision of God in public -and private, without asking how or in what manner. Abu ´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá -says in reference to the words of God: “_As to those who say, ‘Our Lord -is God,’ and who become steadfast_” (Kor. xli, 30), i.e. “they say ‘Our -Lord is God’ in self-mortification and they ‘become steadfast’ on the -carpet of contemplation”. - -There are really two kinds of contemplation. The former is the result of -perfect faith (_ṣihhat-i yaqín_), the latter of rapturous love, for in -the rapture of love a man attains to such a degree that his whole being -is absorbed in the thought of his Beloved and he sees nothing else. -Muḥammad b. Wási` says: “I never saw anything without seeing God -therein,” i.e. through perfect faith. This vision is from God to His -creatures. Shiblí says: “I never saw anything except God,” i.e. in the -rapture of love and the fervour of contemplation. One sees the act with -his bodily eye and, as he looks, beholds the Agent with his spiritual -eye; another is rapt by love of the Agent from all things else, so that -he sees only the Agent. The one method is demonstrative (_istidlálí_), -the other is ecstatic (_jadhbí_). In the former case, a manifest proof -is derived from the evidences of God; in the latter case, the seer is -enraptured and transported by desire: evidences and verities are a veil -to him, because he who knows a thing does not reverence aught besides, -and he who loves a thing does not regard aught besides, but renounces -contention with God and interference with Him in His decrees and His -acts. God hath said of the Apostle at the time of his Ascension: “_His -eyes did not swerve or transgress_” (Kor. liii, 17), on account of the -intensity of his longing for God. When the lover turns his eye away from -created things, he will inevitably see the Creator with his heart. God -hath said: “_Tell the believers to close their eyes_” (Kor. xxiv, 30), -i.e. to close their bodily eyes to lusts and their spiritual eyes to -created things. He who is most sincere in self-mortification is most -firmly grounded in contemplation for inward contemplation is connected -with outward mortification. Sahl b. `Abdalláh of Tustar says: “If anyone -shuts his eye to God for a single moment, he will never be rightly -guided all his life long,” because to regard other than God is to be -handed over to other than God, and one who is left at the mercy of other -than God is lost. Therefore the life of contemplatives is the time -during which they enjoy contemplation (_musháhadat_): time spent in -seeing ocularly (_mu`áyanat_) they do not reckon as life, for that to -them is really death. Thus, when Abú Yazíd was asked how old he was, he -replied: “Four years.” They said: “How can that be?” He answered: “I -have been veiled (from God) by this world for seventy years, but I have -seen Him during the last four years: the period in which one is veiled -does not belong to one’s life.” Shiblí cried in his prayers: “O God, -hide Paradise and Hell in Thy unseen places, that Thou mayest be -worshipped disinterestedly.” One who is forgetful of God nevertheless -worships Him, through faith, because human nature has an interest in -Paradise; but inasmuch as the heart has no interest in loving God, one -who is forgetful of God is debarred from contemplating Him. The Apostle -told `Á´isha that he did not see God on the night of the Ascension, but -Ibn `Abbás relates that the Apostle told him that he saw God on that -occasion. Accordingly, this remains a matter of controversy; but in -saying that he did not see God the Apostle was referring to his bodily -eye, whereas in saying the contrary he was referring to his spiritual -eye. Since `Á´isha was a formalist and Ibn `Abbás a spiritualist, the -Apostle spoke with each of them according to their insight. Junayd said: -“If God should say to me, ‘Behold Me,’ I should reply, ‘I will not -behold Thee,’ because in love the eye is other (than God) and alien: the -jealousy of other-ness would prevent me from beholding Him. Since in -this world I was wont to behold Him without the mediation of the eye, -how should I use such mediation in the next world?“ - - ”_Truly, I envy mine eye the sight of Thee, - And I close mine eye when I look on Thee._” - -Junayd was asked: “Do you wish to see God?” He said: “No.” They asked -why. He answered: “When Moses wished, he did not see Him, and when -Muḥammad did not wish, he saw Him.” Our wishing is the greatest of the -veils that hinder us from seeing God, because in love the existence of -self-will is disobedience, and disobedience is a veil. When self-will -vanishes in this world, contemplation is attained, and when -contemplation is firmly established, there is no difference between this -world and the next. Abú Yazíd says: “God has servants who would -apostatize if they were veiled from Him in this world or in the next,” -i.e. He sustains them with perpetual contemplation and keeps them alive -with the life of love; and when one who enjoys revelation is deprived of -it, he necessarily becomes an apostate. Dhu ´l-Nún says: “One day, when -I was journeying in Egypt, I saw some boys who were throwing stones at a -young man. I asked them what they wanted of him. They said: ‘He is mad.’ -I asked how his madness showed itself, and they told me that he -pretended to see God. I turned to the young man and inquired whether he -had really said this. He answered: ‘I say that if I should not see God -for one moment, I should remain veiled and should not be obedient -towards Him.’” Some Ṣúfís have fallen into the mistake of supposing that -spiritual vision and contemplation represent such an idea (_ṣúratí_) of -God as is formed in the mind by the imagination either from memory or -reflection. This is utter anthropomorphism (_tashbíh_) and manifest -error. God is not finite that the imagination should be able to define -Him or that the intellect should comprehend His nature. Whatever can be -imagined is homogeneous with the intellect, but God is not homogeneous -with any _genus_, although in relation to the Eternal all phenomenal -objects—subtle and gross alike—are homogeneous with each other -notwithstanding their mutual contrariety. Therefore contemplation in -this world resembles vision of God in the next world, and since the -Companions of the Apostle (_aṣḥáb_) are unanimously agreed that vision -is possible hereafter, contemplation is possible here. Those who tell of -contemplation either in this or the other world only say that it is -possible, not that they have enjoyed or now enjoy it, because -contemplation is an attribute of the heart (_sirr_) and cannot be -expressed by the tongue except metaphorically. Hence silence ranks -higher than speech, for silence is a sign of contemplation -(_musháhadat_), whereas speech is a sign of ocular testimony -(_shahádat_). Accordingly the Apostle, when he attained proximity to -God, said: “I cannot tell Thy praise,” because he was in contemplation, -and contemplation in the degree of love is perfect unity (_yagánagí_), -and any outward expression in unity is other-ness (_bégánagí_). Then he -said: “Thou hast praised Thyself,” i.e. Thy words are mine, and Thy -praise is mine, and I do not deem my tongue capable of expressing what I -feel. As the poet says: - - “_I desired my beloved, but when I saw him - I was dumbfounded and possessed neither tongue nor eye._” - - - - - CHAPTER XXIII. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE NINTH VEIL: CONCERNING COMPANIONSHIP, TOGETHER - WITH ITS RULES AND PRINCIPLES. - - -The Apostle said: “Good manners (_ḥusn al-adab_) are a part of faith.” -And he also said: “My Lord corrected me (_addabaní_) and gave me an -excellent correction.” You must know that the seemliness and decorum of -all religious and temporal affairs depends on rules of discipline -(_ádáb_), and that every station in which the various classes of mankind -are placed has its own particular rule. Among men good manners consist -in the observance of virtue (_muruwwat_); as regards religion they -consist in the observance of the Apostolic custom (_sunna_); and as -regards love they consist in the observance of respect (_ḥurmat_). These -three categories are connected with each other, because one who is -without virtue does not comply with the custom of the Apostle, and -whoever fails to comply with the custom of the Apostle does not observe -due respect. In matters of conduct the observance of discipline is the -result of reverence for the object of desire; and reverence for God and -His ordinances springs from fear of God (_taqwá_). Anyone who -disrespectfully tramples on the reverence that is due to the evidences -of God has no part or lot in the Path of Ṣúfiism; and in no case are -rules of discipline neglected by seekers of God, because they are -habituated to such rules, and habit is second nature. It is impossible -that a living creature should be divested of its natural humours: -therefore, so long as the human body remains in existence men are bound -to keep the rules of obedience to God, sometimes with effort -(_takalluf_) and sometimes without effort: with effort when they are -‘sober’, but when they are ‘intoxicated’ God sees that they keep the -rules. A person who neglects the rules cannot possibly be a saint, for -“good manners are characteristic of those whom God loves”. When God -vouchsafes a miracle to anyone, it is a proof that He causes him to -fulfil the duties of religion. This is opposed to the view of some -heretics, who assert that when a man is overpowered by love he is no -longer subject to obedience. I will set forth this matter more lucidly -in another place. - -Rules of discipline are of three kinds. Firstly, those which are -observed towards God in unification (_tawḥíd_). Here the rule is that -one must guard one’s self in public and private from any disrespectful -act, and behave as though one were in the presence of a king. It is -related in the genuine Traditions that one day the Apostle was sitting -with his legs drawn in (_páy gird_). Gabriel came and said: “O Muḥammad, -sit as servants do in their master’s presence.” Ḥárith Muḥásibí is said -never to have leaned his back against a wall, by day or night, for forty -years, and never to have sat except on his knees. On being asked why he -gave himself so much trouble he replied: “I am ashamed to sit otherwise -than as a servant while I am contemplating God.” I, `Alí b. `Uthmán -al-Jullábí, was once in a village called Kamand,[164] at the extremity -of Khurásán. There I saw a well-known and very excellent man, whose name -is Adíb-i Kamandí. For twenty years he had never sat down except in his -prayers, when he was pronouncing the profession of faith. I inquired the -reason of this, and he answered that he had not yet attained such a -degree that he should sit while contemplating God. Abú Yazíd was asked -by what means he had gained so high spiritual rank. He answered: “By -good companionship with God,” i.e. by keeping the rules of discipline -and behaving in private as in public. All human beings ought to learn -from Zulaykhá how to observe good manners in contemplating the object of -their adoration, for when she was alone with Joseph and besought him to -consent to her wishes, she first covered up the face of her idol in -order that it might not witness her want of propriety. And when the -Apostle was borne to Heaven at the Ascension, his observance of -discipline restrained him from paying any regard either to this world or -to the next. - -Footnote 164: - - Kumand, according to _Nafaḥát_, No. 379. - -The second kind of discipline is that which is observed towards one’s -self in one’s conduct, and which consists in avoiding, when one is in -one’s own company, any act that would be improper in the company of -one’s fellow-creatures or of God, e.g., one must not utter an untruth by -declaring one’s self to be what one is not, and one must eat little in -order that one may seldom go to the lavatory, and one must not look at -anything which it is not decent for others to see. It is related that -`Alí never beheld his own nakedness, because he was ashamed to see in -himself what he was forbidden to see in others. - -The third kind of discipline is that which is observed in social -intercourse with one’s fellow-creatures. The most important rule for -such intercourse is to act well, and to observe the custom of the -Apostle at home and abroad. - -These three sorts of discipline cannot be separated from one another. -Now I will set them forth in detail as far as possible, in order that -you and all my readers may follow them more easily. - - _Chapter on Companionship and matters connected therewith._ - -God hath said: “_Verily, the merciful God will bestow love on those who -believe and do good works_” (Kor. xix, 96), i.e., He will love them and -cause them to be loved, because they do their duty towards their -brethren and prefer them to themselves. And the Apostle said: “Three -things render thy brother’s love toward thee sincere: that thou shouldst -salute him when thou meetest him, and that thou shouldst make room for -him when he sits beside thee, and that thou shouldst call him by the -name that he likes best.” And God said, “_The believers are brethren: -therefore reconcile your two brethren_” (Kor. xlix, 10); and the Apostle -said, “Get many brethren, for your Lord is bashful (_ḥayí_) and kind: He -will be ashamed to punish His servant in the presence of his brethren on -the Day of Resurrection.” - -But companionship must be for God’s sake, not for the purpose of -gratifying the lower soul or any selfish interest, in order that a man -may be divinely rewarded for observing the rules of companionship. Málik -b. Dínár said to his son-in-law, Mughíra b. Shu`ba: “If you derive no -religious benefit from a brother and friend, abandon his society, that -you may be saved,” i.e. associate either with one who is superior or -with one who is inferior to yourself. In the former case you will derive -benefit from him, and in the latter case the benefit will be mutual, -since each will learn something from the other. Hence the Apostle said, -“It is the whole of piety to instruct one who is ignorant;” and Yaḥyá b. -Mu`ádh (al-Rází) said, “He is a bad friend to whom you need to say, -‘Remember me in thy prayers’” (because a man ought always to pray for -anyone with whom he has associated even for a moment); and he is a bad -friend with whom you cannot live except on condition of flattering him -(because candour is involved in the principle of companionship); and he -is a bad friend to whom you need to apologize for a fault that you have -committed (because apologies are made by strangers, and in companionship -it is wrong to be on such terms). The Apostle said: “A man follows the -religion of his friend: take heed, therefore, with whom you form a -friendship.” If he associates with the good, their society will make him -good, although he is bad; and if he associates with the wicked, he will -be wicked, although he is good, because he will be consenting to their -wickedness. It is related that a man said, while he was circumambulating -the Ka`ba, “O God, make my brethren good!” On being asked why he did not -implore a boon for himself in such a place, he replied: “I have brethren -to whom I shall return; if they are good, I shall be good with them, and -if they are wicked, I shall be wicked with them.” - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs demand from each other the fulfilment of the duties of -companionship and enjoin their disciples to require the same, so that -amongst them companionship has become like a religious obligation. The -Shaykhs have written many books explaining the rules of Ṣúfí -companionship; e.g., Junayd composed a work entitled _Taṣḥíḥ -al-irádat_,[165] and Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya of Balkh another, entitled -_Al-Ri`áyat bi-ḥuqúq_[166] _Allah_,[167] and Muḥammad b. `Alí of Tirmidh -another, entitled _Ádáb al-murídín_.[168] Other exhaustive treatises on -this subject have been written by Abu ´l-Qásim al-Ḥakím,[169] Abú Bakr -al-Warráq, Sahl b. `Abdalláh (al-Tustarí), Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí, -and Master Abu ´l-Qásim Qushayrí. All those writers are great -authorities on Ṣúfiism, but I desire that my book should enable anyone -who possesses it to dispense with other books and, as I said in the -preface, be sufficient in itself for you and for all students of the -Ṣúfí doctrine. I will now classify in separate chapters their various -rules of discipline relating to conduct. - -Footnote 165: - - “The Rectification of Discipleship.” - -Footnote 166: - - So all the texts, instead of the correct _li-ḥuqúq_. - -Footnote 167: - - “The Observance of what is due to God.” - -Footnote 168: - - “Rules of Conduct for Disciples.” - -Footnote 169: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 129. - - _Chapter concerning the Rules of Companionship._ - -Since you have perceived that the most important thing for the novice is -companionship, the fulfilment of its obligations is necessarily -incumbent on him. Solitude is fatal to the novice, for the Apostle said, -“Satan is with the solitary, but he is farther away from two who are -together;” and God hath said, “_There is no private discourse among -three persons but God is the fourth of them_” (Kor. lviii, 8). I have -read in the Anecdotes that a disciple of Junayd imagined that he had -attained to the degree of perfection, and that it was better for him to -be alone. Accordingly he went into retirement and withdrew from the -society of his brethren. At nightfall a camel used to appear, and he was -told that it would take him to Paradise; on mounting it, he was conveyed -to a pleasant demesne, with beautiful inhabitants and delicious viands -and flowing streams, where he stayed till dawn; then he fell asleep, and -on waking found himself at the door of his cell. These experiences -filled him with pride and he could not refrain from boasting of them. -When Junayd heard the story he hastened to the disciple’s cell, and -having received from him a full account of what had passed, said to him: -“To-night, when you come to that place, remember to say thrice, ‘There -is no strength or power but in God, the High, the Great.’” The same -night he was carried off as usual, and though in his heart he did not -believe Junayd, by way of trial he repeated those words thrice. The crew -around him shrieked and vanished, and he found himself seated on a -dunghill in the midst of rotten bones. He acknowledged his fault and -repented and returned to companionship. - -The principle of the Ṣúfís in companionship is that they should treat -everyone according to his degree. Thus they treat old men with respect, -like fathers; those of their own sort with agreeable familiarity, like -brothers; and young men with affection, like sons. They renounce hate, -envy, and malice, and do not withhold sincere admonition from anyone. In -companionship it is not permissible to speak evil of the absent, or to -behave dishonestly, or to deny one another on account of any word or -deed, because a companionship which is begun for God’s sake should not -be cut short by human words or acts. The author says: “I asked the Grand -Shaykh Abu ´l-Qásim Gurgání what obligations were involved in -companionship. He replied: ‘It involves this, that you should not seek -your own interest; all the evils of companionship arise from -selfishness. Solitude is better for a selfish man. He who neglects his -own interests and looks after the interests of his companion hits the -mark in companionship.’” A certain dervish relates as follows: “Once I -set out from Kúfa to visit Mecca. On the way I met Ibráhím Khawwáṣ and -begged him to let me accompany him. He said: ‘In companionship it is -necessary that one should command and the other should obey: which do -you choose?’ I answered: ‘You be the commander.’ He said: ‘Now do not -fail to comply with my orders.’ When we arrived at the halting-place, he -bade me sit down, and himself drew water from the well and, since the -weather was cold, he gathered sticks and kindled a fire, and whenever I -attempted to do anything he told me to sit down. At nightfall it began -to rain heavily. He took off his patched frock and held it over my head -all night. I was ashamed, but could not say a word on account of the -condition imposed on me. When morning came, I said: ‘To-day it is my -turn to be commander.’ He said: ‘Very well.’ As soon as we reached the -halting-place, he began to perform the same menial offices as before, -and on my telling him not to disobey my orders he retorted that it was -an act of disobedience to let one’s self be served by one’s commander. -He continued to behave in this way until we arrived at Mecca; then I -felt so ashamed that I fled from him. He espied me, however, at Miná and -said to me: ‘O son, when you associate with dervishes see that you treat -them in the same fashion as I treated you.’” - -Dervishes are divided into two classes: residents (_muqímán_) and -travellers (_musáfirán_). According to the custom of the Shaykhs, the -travelling dervishes should regard the resident ones as superior to -themselves, because they go to and fro in their own interest, while the -resident dervishes have settled down in the service of God: in the -former is the sign of search, in the latter is the token of attainment; -hence those who have found and settled down are superior to those who -are still seeking. Similarly, the resident dervishes ought to regard the -travelling ones as superior to themselves, because they are laden with -worldly encumbrances, while the travelling dervishes are unencumbered -and detached from the world. Again, old men should prefer to themselves -the young, who are newer to the world and whose sins are less numerous; -and young men should prefer to themselves the old, who have outstripped -them in devotion and service. - - - SECTION. - -Culture (_adab_) really means “the collection of virtuous qualities”, -though in ordinary language anyone is called “cultured” (_adíb_) who is -acquainted with Arabic philology and grammar. But the Ṣúfís define -culture as “dwelling with praiseworthy qualities”, and say that it means -“to act with propriety towards God in public and private”; if you act -thus, you are “cultured”, even if you are a foreigner (i.e. a non-Arab), -and if not, you are the opposite. Those who have knowledge are in every -case more honoured than those who have intelligence. A certain Shaykh -was asked: “What does culture involve?” He said: ”I will answer you by -quoting a definition which I have heard, ‘If you speak, your speech will -be sincere, and if you act, your actions will be true.’ An excellent -distinction has been made by Shaykh Abú Naṣr Sarráj, the author of the -_Luma`_, who says: “As regards culture (_adab_), there are three classes -of mankind. Firstly, worldlings, whose culture mainly consists in -eloquence and rhetoric and learning and knowledge of the nightly -conversations (_asmár_[170]) of kings and Arabic poetry. Secondly, the -religious, whose culture chiefly consists in disciplining the lower soul -and correcting the limbs and observing the legal ordinances and -renouncing lusts. Thirdly, the elect (i.e. the Ṣúfís), whose culture -consists for the most part in spiritual purity and keeping watch over -their hearts and fulfilling their promises and guarding the ‘state’ in -which they are and paying no heed to extraneous suggestions and behaving -with propriety in the positions of search (for God), in the states of -presence (with God), and in the stations of proximity (to God).” This -saying is comprehensive. The different matters which it includes are -discussed in several places in this book. - -Footnote 170: - - Another reading is _asmá_, “names,” but I find _asmár_ in the MS. of - the _Kitáb al-Luma`_ belonging to Mr. A. G. Ellis, where this passage - occurs on f. 63_a._ - - _Chapter on the Rules of Companionship affecting Residents._ - -Dervishes who choose to reside, and not to travel, are bound to observe -the following rules of discipline. When a traveller comes to them, they -must meet him joyfully and receive him with respect and treat him like -an honoured guest and freely set before him whatever food they have, -modelling their behaviour upon that of Abraham. They must not inquire -whence he has come or whither he is going or what is his name, but must -deem that he has come from God and is going to God and that his name is -“servant of God”; then they must see whether he desires to be alone or -in company: if he prefers to be alone, they must give him an empty room, -and if he prefers company, they must consort with him unceremoniously in -a friendly and sociable manner. When he lays his head on his pillow at -night the resident dervish ought to offer to wash his feet, but if the -traveller should not allow him to do this and should say that he is not -accustomed to it, the resident must not insist, for fear of causing him -annoyance. Next day, he must offer him a bath and take him to the -cleanest bath available and save his clothes from (becoming dirty in) -the latrines of the bath, and not permit a strange attendant to wait -upon him, but wait upon him zealously in order to make him clean of all -stains, and scrape (_bikhárad_) his back and rub his knees and the soles -of his feet and his hands: more than this he is not obliged to do. And -if the resident dervish has sufficient means, he should provide a new -garment for his guest; otherwise, he need not trouble himself, but he -should clean his guest’s clothes so that he may put them on when he -comes out of the bath. If the traveller remains two or three days, he -should be invited to visit any spiritual director or Imám who may be in -the town, but he must not be compelled to pay such visits against his -inclination, because those who seek God are not always masters of their -own feelings; e.g., Ibráhím Khawwáṣ on one occasion refused to accompany -Khiḍr, who desired his society, for he was unwilling that his feelings -should be engaged by anyone except God. Certainly it is not right that a -resident dervish should take a traveller to salute worldly men or to -attend their entertainments, sick-beds, and funerals; and if a resident -hopes to make travellers an instrument of mendicancy (_álat-i gadá´í_) -and conduct them from house to house, it would be better for him to -refrain from serving them instead of subjecting them to humiliation. -Among all the troubles and inconveniences that I have suffered when -travelling none was worse than to be carried off time after time by -ignorant servants and impudent dervishes of this sort and conducted from -the house of such and such a Khwája to the house of such and such a -Dihqán, while, though apparently complaisant, I felt a great dislike to -go with them. I then vowed that, if ever I became resident, I would not -behave towards travellers with this impropriety. Nothing derived from -associating with ill-mannered persons is more useful than the lesson -that you must endure their disagreeable behaviour and must not imitate -it. On the other hand, if a travelling dervish becomes at his ease -(_munbasiṭ_) with a resident and stays for some time and makes a worldly -demand, the resident is bound immediately to give him what he wants; but -if the traveller is an impostor and low-minded, the resident must not -act meanly in order to comply with his impossible requirements, for this -is not the way of those who are devoted to God. What business has a -dervish to associate with devotees if he needs worldly things? Let him -go to the market and buy and sell, or let him be a soldier at the -sultan’s court. It is related that, while Junayd and his pupils were -sitting occupied in some ascetic discipline, a travelling dervish came -in. They exerted themselves to entertain him and placed food before him. -He said: “I want such and such a thing besides this.” Junayd said to -him: “You must go to the bazaar, for you are a man of the market, not of -the mosque and the cell.” Once I set out from Damascus with two -dervishes to visit Ibn al-Mu`allá,[171] who was living in the country -near Ramla. On the way we arranged that each of us should think of the -matter concerning which we were in doubt, in order that that venerable -director might tell us our secret thoughts and solve our difficulties. I -said to myself: “I will desire of him the poems and intimate -supplications (_munáját_) of Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr (al-Ḥalláj).” One of my -companions said, “I will desire him to pray that my disease of the -spleen (_ṭiḥál_) may become better;” and the other said, “I will wish -for sweetmeat of different colours” (_ḥalwá-yi ṣábúní_). As soon as we -arrived, Ibn al-Mu`allá commanded that a manuscript of the poems and -supplications of Ḥusayn should be presented to me, and laid his hand on -the belly of the invalid so that his illness was assuaged, and said to -the other dervish: “Parti-coloured sweetmeat is eaten by soldiers -(_`awánán_); you are dressed as a saint, and the dress of a saint does -not accord with the appetite of a soldier. Choose one or the other.” - -Footnote 171: - - I. Ibn al-`Alá. - -In short, the resident is not obliged to pay attention to the travelling -dervish unless the latter’s attention is paid entirely to God. If he is -devoted to his own interests, it is impossible that another should help -him to gratify his selfishness, for dervishes are guides (_ráhbarán_), -not brigands (_ráhburán_), to each other. So long as anyone perseveres -in a selfish demand, his friend ought to resist it, but when he -renounces it, then his friend ought to satisfy it. In the Traditions of -the Apostle it is related that he made a brotherhood between Salmán -(al-Fárisí) and Abú Dharr Ghifárí, both of whom were leading men among -the People of the Veranda (_ahl-i ṣuffa_) and eminent spiritualists. One -day, when Salmán came to visit Abú Dharr at his house, Abú Dharr’s wife -complained to him that her husband neither ate by day nor slept by -night. Salmán told her to fetch some food, and said to Abú Dharr: “O -brother, I desire thee to eat, since this fasting is not incumbent on -thee.” Abú Dharr complied. And at night Salmán said: “O brother, I beg -thee to sleep: thy body and thy wife have a claim upon thee, as well as -thy Lord.” Next day Abú Dharr went to the Apostle, who said: “I say the -same thing as Salmán said yesterday: verily, thy body has a claim upon -thee.” Inasmuch as Abú Dharr had renounced his selfish pleasures, Salmán -persuaded him to gratify them. Whatever you do on this principle is -sound and impregnable. Once, in the territories of `Iráq, I was -restlessly occupied (_tápákí míkardam_) in seeking wealth and -squandering it, and I had run largely into debt. Everyone who wanted -anything turned to me, and I was troubled and at a loss to know how I -could accomplish their desires. An eminent person wrote to me as -follows: “Beware lest you distract your mind from God by satisfying the -wishes of those whose minds are engrossed in vanity. If you find anyone -whose mind is nobler than your own, you may justly distract your mind in -order to give peace to his. Otherwise, do not distract yourself, since -God is sufficient for His servants.” These words brought me instant -relief. - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Travel._ - -When a dervish chooses to travel, not to reside, he ought to observe the -following rules. In the first place, he must travel for God’s sake, not -for pleasure, and as he journeys outwardly, so he should flee inwardly -from his sensual affections; and he must always keep himself in a state -of purity and not neglect his devotions; and his object in travelling -must be either pilgrimage or war (against infidels) or to see a (holy) -site or to derive instruction or to seek knowledge or to visit a -venerable person, a Shaykh, or the tomb of a saint; otherwise his -journey will be faulty. And he cannot do without a patched frock and a -prayer-rug and a bucket and a rope and a pair of shoes (_kafsh_) or -clogs (_na`layn_) and a staff: the patched frock to cover his nakedness, -the prayer-rug to pray on, the bucket to cleanse himself with, and the -staff to protect him from attacks and for other purposes. Before -stepping on the prayer-rug he must put on his shoes or clogs in a state -of purity. If anyone carries other articles, for the sake of keeping the -Sunna (Apostolic custom), such as a comb and nail-scissors and a needle -and a little box of antimony (_mukḥula_), he does right. If, however, -anyone provides himself with more utensils than those which have been -mentioned, we have to consider in what station he is: if he is a novice -every article will be a shackle and a stumbling-block and a veil to him, -and will afford him the means of showing self-conceit, but if he is a -firmly grounded adept he may carry all these articles and more. I heard -the following story from Shaykh Abú Muslim Fáris b. Ghálib al-Fárisí. -“One day (he said) I paid a visit to Shaykh Abú Sa`íd b. Abi ´l-Khayr -Faḍlalláh b. Muḥammad. I found him sleeping on a couch with four -cushions (_takhtí chahár-bálish_), one of his legs thrown across the -other; and he was dressed in fine Egyptian linen (_diqqí Miṣrí_). My -garment was so dirty that it resembled leather, and my body was -emaciated by austerities. On looking at Abú Sa`íd a feeling of -scepticism overcame me. I said to myself: ‘He is a dervish, and so am I, -yet he is in all this luxury and I in this sore tribulation.’ He -immediately divined my thoughts and was aware of my vainglory. ‘O Abú -Muslim,’ said he, ‘in what díwán have you read that a self-conceited man -is a dervish? Since I see God in all things, God sets me on a throne, -and since you see yourself in everything, God keeps you in affliction: -my lot is contemplation, while yours is mortification. These are two -stations on the Way to God, but God is far aloof from them both, and a -dervish is dead to all stations and free from all states.’ On hearing -these words my senses forsook me, and the whole world grew dark in my -eyes. When I came to myself I repented, and he accepted my repentance. -Then I said: ‘O Shaykh, give me leave to depart, for I cannot bear the -sight of thee.’ He answered, ‘O Abú Muslim, you speak the truth;’ then -he quoted this verse:— - - ‘_That which my ear was unable to hear by report - My eye beheld actually all at once._’” - -The travelling dervish must always observe the custom of the Apostle, -and when he comes to the house of a resident he should enter his -presence respectfully and greet him; and he should first take off the -shoe on his left foot, as the Apostle did; and when he puts his shoes -on, he should first put on the shoe belonging to his right foot; and he -should wash his right foot before his left; and he should perform two -bowings of the head by way of salutation (in prayer) and then occupy -himself with attending to the (religious) duties incumbent on dervishes. -He must not in any case interfere with the residents, or behave -immoderately towards anyone, or talk of the hardships which he may have -suffered in travelling, or discourse on theology, or tell anecdotes, or -recite traditions in company, for all this is a sign of self-conceit. He -must be patient when he is vexed by fools and must tolerate their -irksomeness for God’s sake, for in patience there are many blessings. If -residents or their servants bid him go with them to salute or visit the -townspeople, he must acquiesce if he can, but in his heart he ought to -dislike paying such marks of respect to worldlings, although he should -excuse the behaviour of his brethren who act thus. He must take care not -to trouble them by making any unreasonable demand, and he must not drag -them to the court of high officials with the purpose of seeking an idle -pleasure for himself. Travelling, as well as resident, dervishes must -always, in companionship, endeavour to please God, and must have a good -belief in each other, and not speak ill of any comrade face to face with -him or behind his back, because true mystics in regarding the act see -the Agent, and inasmuch as every human being, of whatever description he -may be—faulty or faultless, veiled or illuminated—belongs to God and is -His creature, to quarrel with a human act is to quarrel with the Divine -Agent. - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Eating._ - -Men cannot dispense with nourishment, but moral virtue requires that -they should not eat or drink in excess. Sháfi`í says: “He who thinks -about that which goes into his belly is worth only that which comes out -of it.” Nothing is more hurtful to a novice in Ṣúfiism than eating too -much. I have read in the Anecdotes that Abú Yazíd was asked why he -praised hunger so highly. He answered: “Because if Pharaoh had been -hungry he would not have said, ‘I am your Supreme Lord,’ and if Qárún -(Korah) had been hungry he would not have been rebellious.” -Tha`laba[172] was praised by all so long as he was hungry, but when he -ate his fill he displayed hypocrisy. Sahl b. `Abdalláh (al-Tustarí) -said: “In my judgment, a belly full of wine is better than one full of -lawful food.” On being asked the reason of this he said: “When a man’s -belly is filled with wine, his intellect is stupefied and the flame of -lust is quenched, and people are secure from his hand and tongue; but -when his belly is filled with lawful food he desires foolishness, and -his lust waxes great and his lower soul rises to seek her pleasures.” -The Shaykhs have said, describing the Ṣúfís: “They eat like sick men, -and sleep like shipwrecked men, and speak like one whose children have -died.” - -Footnote 172: - - See Bayḍáwí on Kor. ix, 76. - -It is an obligatory rule that they should not eat alone, but should -unselfishly share their food with one another; and when seated at table -they should not be silent, and should begin by saying “In God’s name”; -and they should not put anything down or lift anything up in such a way -as to offend their comrades, and they should dip the first mouthful in -salt, and should deal fairly by their friends. Sahl b. `Abdalláh -(al-Tustarí) was asked about the meaning of the verse: “_Verily God -enjoins justice and beneficence_” (Kor. xvi, 92). He replied: “Justice -consists in dealing fairly with one’s friend in regard to a morsel of -food, and beneficence consists in deeming him to have a better claim to -that morsel than yourself.” My Shaykh used to say: “I am astonished at -the impostor who declares that he has renounced the world, and is -anxious about a morsel of food.” Furthermore, the Ṣúfí should eat with -his right hand and should look only at his own morsel, and while eating -he should not drink unless he is extremely thirsty, and if he drinks he -should drink only as much as will moisten his liver. He should not eat -large mouthfuls, and should chew his food well and not make haste; -otherwise he will be acting contrary to the custom of the Apostle, and -will probably suffer from indigestion (_tukhama_). When he has finished -eating, he should give praise to God and wash his hands. If two or three -or more persons belonging to a community of dervishes go to a dinner and -eat something without informing their brethren, according to some -Shaykhs this is unlawful and constitutes a breach of companionship, but -some hold it to be allowable when a number of persons act thus in union -with each other, and some allow it in the case of a single person, on -the ground that he is not obliged to deal fairly when he is alone but -when he is in company; consequently, being alone, he is relieved of the -obligations of companionship and is not responsible for his act. Now, -the most important principle in this matter is that the invitation of a -dervish should not be refused, and that the invitation of a rich man -should not be accepted. Dervishes ought not to go to the houses of rich -men or beg anything of them: such conduct is demoralizing for Ṣúfís, -because worldlings are not on confidential terms (_maḥram_) with the -dervish. Much wealth, however, does not make a man “rich” (_dunyá-dár_), -nor does little wealth make him “poor”. No one who acknowledges that -poverty is better than riches is “rich”, even though he be a king; and -anyone who disbelieves in poverty is “rich”, even though he be reduced -to want. When a dervish attends a party he should not constrain himself -either to eat or not to eat, but should behave in accordance with his -feelings at the time (_bar ḥukm-i waqt_). If the host is a congenial -person (_maḥram_), it is right that a married man (_muta´ahhil_) should -condone a fault; and if the host is uncongenial, it is not allowable to -go to his house. But in any case it is better not to commit a fault, for -Sahl b. `Abdalláh (al-Tustarí) says: “Backsliding is abasement” -(_al-zillat dhillat_). - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Walking._ - -God hath said: “_And the servants of the Merciful are they who walk on -the earth meekly_” (Kor. xxv, 64). The seeker of God, as he walks, -should know at each step he makes whether that step is against God or of -God: if it is against God, he must ask for pardon, and if it is of God, -he must persevere in it, that it may be increased. One day Dáwud Ṭá´í -had taken some medicine. They said to him: “Go into the court of this -house for a little while, in order that the good result of the medicine -may become apparent.” He replied: “I am ashamed that on the Day of -Judgment God should ask me why I made a few steps for my own selfish -pleasure. God Almighty hath said: ‘_And their feet shall bear witness of -that which they used to commit_’“ (Kor. xxxvi, 65). Therefore the -dervish should walk circumspectly, with his head bowed in meditation -(_muráqabat_), and not look in any direction but in front. If any person -meets him on the way, he must not draw himself back from him for the -sake of saving his dress, for all Moslems are clean, and their clothes -too; such an act is mere conceit and self-ostentation. If, however, the -person who meets him is an unbeliever, or manifestly filthy, he may turn -from him unobtrusively. And when he walks with a number of people, he -must not attempt to go in front of them, since that is an excess of -pride; nor must he attempt to go behind them, since that is an excess of -humility, and humility of which one is conscious is essentially pride. -He must keep his clogs and shoes as clean as he can by day in order that -God, through the blessings thereof, may keep his clothes (clean) by -night. And when one or more dervishes are with anyone, he should not -stop on the way (to talk) with any person, nor should he tell that -person to wait for him. He should walk quietly and should not hurry, -else his walk will resemble that of the covetous; nor should he walk -slowly, for then his walk will resemble that of the proud; and he should -take steps of the full length (_gám-i tamám nihad_). In fine, the walk -of the seeker of God should always be of such a description that if -anyone should ask him whither he is going he should be able to answer -decisively: ”_Verily, I am going to my Lord: He will direct me_” (Kor. -xxxvii, 97). Otherwise his walking is a curse to him, because right -steps (_khaṭawát_) proceed from right thoughts (_khaṭarát_): accordingly -if a man’s thoughts are concentrated on God, his feet will follow his -thoughts. It is related that Abú Yazíd said: “The inconsiderate walk -(_rawish-i bé muráqabat_) of a dervish is a sign that he is heedless (of -God), because all that exists is attained in two steps: one step away -from self-interest and the other step firmly planted on the commandments -of God.” The walk of the seeker is a sign that he is traversing a -certain distance, and since proximity to God is not a matter of -distance, what can the seeker do but cut off his feet in the abode of -rest? - -_Chapter concerning their Rules of Sleeping in travel and at home._ - -There is a great difference of opinion among the Shaykhs on this -subject. Some hold that it is not permissible for a novice to sleep -except when he is overpowered by slumber, for the Apostle said: “Sleep -is the brother of Death,” and inasmuch as life is a benefit conferred by -God, whereas death is an affliction, the former must be more excellent -than the latter. And it is related that Shiblí said: “God looked upon me -and said, ‘He who sleeps is heedless, and he who is heedless is -veiled.’” Others, again, hold that a novice may sleep at will and even -constrain himself to sleep after having performed the Divine commands, -for the Apostle said: “The Pen does not record (evil actions) against -the sleeper until he awakes, or against the boy until he reaches -puberty, or against the madman until he recovers his wits.” When a man -is asleep, people are secure from his mischief and he is deprived of his -personal volition and his lower soul is prevented from gaining its -desires and the Recording Angels cease to write; his tongue makes no -false assertion and speaks no evil of the absent, and his will places no -hope in conceit and ostentation; “he does not possess for himself either -bane or boon or death or life or resurrection.” Hence Ibn `Abbás says: -“Nothing is more grievous to Iblís than a sinner’s sleep; whenever the -sinner sleeps, Iblís says, ‘When will he wake and rise up that he may -disobey God?’” This was a point of controversy between Junayd and `Alí -b. Sahl al-Iṣfahání. The latter wrote to Junayd a very fine epistle, -which I have heard, to the effect that sleep is heedlessness and rest is -a turning away from God: the lover must not sleep or rest by day or by -night, otherwise he will lose the object of his desire and will forget -himself and his state and will fail to attain to God, as God said to -David, “O David, he who pretends to love Me and sleeps when night covers -him is a liar.” Junayd said in his reply to that letter: “Our -wakefulness consists in our acts of devotion to God, whereas our sleep -is God’s act towards us: that which proceeds from God to us without our -will is more perfect than that which proceeds from us to God with our -will. Sleep is a gift which God bestows on those who love Him.” This -question depends on the doctrine of sobriety and intoxication, which has -been fully discussed above. It is remarkable that Junayd, who was -himself a “sober” man, here supports intoxication. Seemingly, he was -enraptured at the time when he wrote and his temporary state may have -expressed itself by his tongue; or, again, it may be that the opposite -is the case and that sleep is actually sobriety, while wakefulness is -actually intoxication, because sleep is an attribute of humanity, and a -man is “sober” so long as he is in the shadow of his attributes: -wakefulness, on the other hand, is an attribute of God, and when a man -transcends his own attribute he is enraptured. I have met with a number -of Shaykhs who agree with Junayd in preferring sleep to wakefulness, -because the visions of the saints and of most of the apostles occurred -during sleep. And the Apostle said: “Verily, God takes pride in the -servant who sleeps while he prostrates himself in prayer; and He says to -His angels, ‘Behold My servant, whose spirit is in the abode of secret -conversation (_najwá_) while his body is on the carpet of worship.’” The -Apostle also said: “Whoever sleeps in a state of purification, his -spirit is permitted to circumambulate the Throne and prostrate itself -before God.” I have read in the Anecdotes that Sháh Shujá` of Kirmán -kept awake for forty years. One night he fell asleep and saw God, and -afterwards he used always to sleep in hope of seeing the same vision. -This is the meaning of the verse of Qays of the Banú `Ámir[173]— - - “_Truly I wish to sleep, although I am not drowsy, - That perchance thy beloved image may encounter mine._” - -Footnote 173: - - Generally known as Majnún, the lover of Laylá. See Brockelmann, i, 48. - -Other Shaykhs whom I have seen agree with `Alí b. Sahl in preferring -wakefulness to sleep, because the apostles received their revelations -and the saints their miracles while they were awake. One of the Shaykhs -says: “If there were any good in sleep there would be sleep in -Paradise,” i.e., if sleep were the cause of love and proximity to God, -it would follow that there must be sleep in Paradise, which is the -dwelling-place of proximity; since neither sleep nor any veil is in -Paradise, we know that sleep is a veil. Those who are fond of subtleties -(_arbáb-i láṭá´if_) say that when Adam fell asleep in Paradise Eve came -forth from his left side, and Eve was the source of all his afflictions. -They say also that when Abraham told Ishmael that he had been ordered in -a dream to sacrifice him, Ishmael replied: “This is the punishment due -to one who sleeps and forgets his beloved. If you had not fallen asleep -you would not have been commanded to sacrifice your son.” It is related -that Shiblí every night used to place in front of him a bowl of salt -water and a needle for applying collyrium, and whenever he was about to -fall asleep he would dip the needle in the salt water and draw it along -his eyelids. I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, have met with a spiritual -director who used to sleep after finishing the performance of his -obligatory acts of devotion; and I have seen Shaykh Aḥmad Samarqandí, -who was living at Bukhárá: during forty years he had never slept at -night, but he used to sleep a little in the daytime. This question turns -on the view taken of life and death. Those who prefer death to life must -prefer sleep to waking, while those who prefer life to death must prefer -waking to sleep. Merit belongs, not to the man who forces himself to -keep awake, but to the man who is kept awake. The Apostle, whom God -chose and whom He raised to the highest rank, did not force himself -either to sleep or to wake. God commanded him, saying: “_Rise and pray -during the night, except a small part: half thereof or less_” (Kor. -lxxiii, 2-3). Similarly, merit does not belong to the man who forces -himself to sleep, but only to the man who is put to sleep. The Men of -the Cave did not constrain themselves to sleep or to wake, but God threw -slumber upon them and nourished them without their will. When a man -attains to such a degree that his will no longer exists, and his hand is -withdrawn from everything, and his thoughts are averted from all except -God, it matters not whether he is asleep or awake: in either case he is -full of honour. Now, as regards the sleep of the novice, he ought to -deem that his first sleep is his last, and repent of his sins and -satisfy all who have a claim against him; and he ought to perform a -comely purification and sleep on his right side, facing the _qibla_; and -having set his worldly affairs in order, he ought to give thanks for the -blessing of Islam, and make a vow that if he should wake again he will -not return to sin. One who has set his affairs in order while he is -awake has no fear of sleep or of death. A well-known story is told of a -certain spiritual director, that he used to visit an Imám who was -engrossed in maintaining his dignity and was a prey to self-conceit, and -that he used to say to him: “O So-and-so, you must die.” This offended -the Imám, for “why (he said) should this beggar be always repeating -these words to me?” One day he answered: “I will begin to-morrow.” Next -day when the spiritual director came in the Imám said to him: “O -So-and-so, you must die.” He put down his prayer-rug and spread it out, -and laid his head on it and exclaimed, “I am dead,” and immediately -yielded up his soul. The Imám took warning, and perceived that this -spiritual director had been bidding him prepare for death, as he himself -had done. My Shaykh used to enjoin his disciples not to sleep unless -overpowered by slumber, and when they had once awaked not to fall asleep -again, since a second sleep is unlawful and unprofitable to those who -seek God. - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Speech and Silence._ - -God hath commanded His servants to speak well, e.g. to acknowledge His -lordship and to praise Him and to call mankind to His court. Speech is a -great blessing conferred on Man by God, and thereby is Man distinguished -from all other things. Some interpreters of the text, “_We have honoured -the sons of Adam_” (Kor. xvii, 72), explain it as meaning “by the gift -of speech”. Nevertheless, in speech there are also great evils, for the -Apostle said: “The worst that I fear for my people is the tongue.” In -short, speech is like wine: it intoxicates the mind, and those who begin -to have a taste for it cannot abstain from it. Accordingly, the Ṣúfís, -knowing that speech is harmful, never spoke except when it was -necessary, i.e. they considered the beginning and end of their -discourse; if the whole was for God’s sake, they spoke; otherwise they -kept silence, because they firmly believed that God knows our secret -thoughts (cf. Kor. xliii, 80). The Apostle said: “He who keeps silence -is saved.” In silence there are many advantages and spiritual favours -(_futúḥ_), and in speech there are many evils. Some Shaykhs have -preferred silence to speech, while others have set speech above silence. -Among the former is Junayd, who said: “Expressions are wholly -pretensions, and where realities are established pretensions are idle.” -Sometimes it is excusable not to speak although one has the will to do -so, i.e. fear becomes an excuse for not speaking in spite of one’s -having the will and the power to speak; and refusal to speak of God does -not impair the essence of gnosis. But at no time is a man excused for -mere pretension devoid of reality, which is the principle of hypocrites. -Pretension without reality is hypocrisy, and reality without pretension -is sincerity, because “he who is grounded in eloquence needs no tongue -to communicate with his Lord”. Expressions only serve to inform another -than God, for God Himself requires no explanation of our circumstances, -and others than God are not worth so much that we should occupy -ourselves with them. This is corroborated by the saying of Junayd, “He -who knows God is dumb,” for in actual vision (_`iyán_) exposition -(_bayán_) is a veil. It is related that Shiblí rose up in Junayd’s -meeting-place and cried aloud, “O my object of desire!” and pointed to -God. Junayd said: “O Abú Bakr, if God is the object of your desire, why -do you point to Him, who is independent of this? And if the object of -your desire is another, God knows what you say: why do you speak -falsely?” Shiblí asked God to pardon him for having uttered those words. - -Those who put speech above silence argue that we are commanded by God to -set forth our circumstances, for the pretension subsists in the reality, -and _vice versâ_. If a man continues for a thousand years to know God in -his heart and soul, but has not confessed that he knows God, he is -virtually an infidel unless his silence has been due to compulsion. God -has bidden all believers give Him thanks and praise and rehearse His -bounties, and He has promised to answer the prayers of those who invoke -Him. One of the Shaykhs has said that whoever does not declare his -spiritual state is without any spiritual state, since the state -proclaims itself. - - “_The tongue of the state_ (lisán al-ḥál) _is more eloquent than my - tongue, - And my silence is the interpreter of my question_.” - -I have read in the Anecdotes that one day when Abú Bakr Shiblí was -walking in the Karkh quarter of Baghdád he heard an impostor saying: -“Silence is better than speech.” Shiblí replied: “Thy silence is better -than thy speech, but my speech is better than my silence, because thy -speech is vanity and thy silence is an idle jest, whereas my silence is -modesty and my speech is knowledge.” I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, -declare that there are two kinds of speech and two kinds of silence: -speech is either real or unreal, and silence is either fruition or -forgetfulness. If one speaks truth, his speech is better than his -silence, but if one speaks falsehood, his silence is better than his -speech. “He who speaks hits the mark or misses it, but he who is made to -speak is preserved from transgression.” Thus Iblís said, “_I am better -than he_” (Kor. xxxviii, 77), but Adam was made to say, “_O Lord, we -have done wrong unto ourselves_” (Kor. vii, 22). The missionaries -(_dá`iyán_) of this sect are permitted or compelled to speak, and shame -or helplessness strikes them dumb: “he whose silence is shame, his -speech is life.” Their speech is the result of vision, and speech -without vision appears to them despicable. They prefer silence to speech -so long as they are with themselves, but when they are beside themselves -their words are written on the hearts of men. Hence that spiritual -director said: “He whose silence to God is gold, his speech to another -than God is gilt.” The seeker of God, who is absorbed in servantship, -must be silent, in order that the adept, who proclaims Lordship, may -speak, and by his utterances may captivate the hearts of his disciples. -The rule in speaking is not to speak unless bidden, and then only of the -thing that is bidden; and the rule in silence is not to be ignorant or -satisfied with ignorance or forgetful. The disciple must not interrupt -the speech of spiritual directors, or let his personal judgment intrude -therein, or use far-fetched expressions in answering them. He must never -tell a lie, or speak ill of the absent, or offend any Moslem with that -tongue which has made the profession of faith and acknowledged the unity -of God. He must not address dervishes by their bare names or speak to -them until they ask a question. It behoves the dervish, when he is -silent, not to be silent in falsehood, and when he speaks, to speak only -the truth. This principle has many derivatives and innumerable -refinements, but I will not pursue the subject, lest my book should -become too long. - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Asking._ - -God hath said: “_They ask not men with importunity_” (Kor. ii, 274). Any -one of them who asks should not be repulsed, for God said to the -Apostle: “_Do not drive away the beggar_” (Kor. xciii, 10). As far as -possible they should beg of God only, for begging involves turning away -from God to another, and when a man turns away from God there is danger -that God may leave him in that predicament. I have read that a certain -worldling said to Rábi`a `Adawiyya[174]: “O Rábi`a, ask something of me -that I may procure what you wish.” “O sir,” she replied, “I am ashamed -to ask anything of the Creator of the world; how, then, should I not be -ashamed to ask anything of a fellow-creature?” It is related that in the -time of Abú Muslim, the head of the (`Abbásid) propaganda, an innocent -dervish was seized on suspicion of theft, and was imprisoned at Chahár -Ṭáq.[175] On the same night Abú Muslim dreamed that the Apostle came to -him and said: “God has sent me to tell you that one of His friends is in -your prison. Arise and set him free.” Abú Muslim leapt from his bed, and -ran with bare head and feet to the prison gate, and gave orders to -release the dervish, and begged his pardon and bade him ask a boon. “O -prince,” he replied, “one whose Master rouses Abú Muslim at midnight, -and sends him to deliver a poor dervish from affliction—how should that -one ask a boon of others?” Abú Muslim began to weep, and the dervish -went on his way. Some, however, hold that a dervish may beg of his -fellow-creatures, since God says: “_They ask not men with importunity_,” -i.e. they may ask but not importune. The Apostle begged for the sake of -providing for his companions, and he said to us: “Seek your wants from -those whose faces are comely.” - -Footnote 174: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 578; Ibn Khallikán, No. 230. - -Footnote 175: - - A village, mentioned by Ibn al-Athír (x, 428, 24), in the vicinity of - Baghdád. - -The Ṣúfí Shaykhs consider begging to be permissible in three cases. -Firstly, with the object of freeing one’s mind from preoccupation, for, -as they have said, we should not attach so much importance to two cakes -of bread that we should spend the whole day and night in expecting them; -and when we are starving we want nothing else of God, because no anxiety -is so engrossing as anxiety on account of food. Therefore, when the -disciple of Shaqíq visited Báyazíd, and in answer to Báyazíd’s question -as to the state of Shaqíq informed him that he was entirely disengaged -from mankind, and was putting all his trust in God, Báyazíd said: “When -you return to Shaqíq, tell him to beware of again testing God with two -loaves: if he is hungry, let him beg of his fellow-creatures and have -done with the cant of trust in God.” Secondly, it is permissible to beg -with the object of training the lower soul. The Ṣúfís beg in order that -they may endure the humiliation of begging, and may perceive what is -their worth in the eyes of other men, and may not be proud. When Shiblí -came to Junayd, Junayd said to him: “O Abú Bakr, your head is full of -conceit, because you are the son of the Caliph’s principal chamberlain -and the governor of Sámarrá. No good will come from you until you go to -the market and beg of everyone whom you see, that you may know your true -worth.” Shiblí obeyed. He begged in the market for three years, with -ever decreasing success. One day, having gone through the whole market -and got nothing, he returned to Junayd and told him. Junayd said: “Now, -Abú Bakr, you see that you have no worth in the eyes of men: do not fix -your heart on them. This matter (i.e. begging) is for the sake of -discipline, not for the sake of profit.” It is related that Dhu ´l-Nún -the Egyptian said: “I had a friend who was in accord with God. After his -death I saw him in a dream, and asked him how God had dealt with him. He -answered that God had forgiven him. I asked him: ‘On account of what -virtue?’ He replied that God raised him to his feet and said: ‘My -servant, you suffered with patience much contumely and tribulation from -base and avaricious men, to whom you stretched out your hands: therefore -I forgive you.’” Thirdly, they beg from mankind because of their -reverence for God. They recognize that all worldly possessions belong to -God, and they regard all mankind as His agents, from whom—not from God -Himself—they beg anything that is for the benefit of the lower soul; and -in the eyes of one who beholds his own want, the servant that makes a -petition to an agent is more reverent and obedient than he that makes a -petition to God. Therefore, their begging from another is a sign of -presence and of turning towards God, not a sign of absence and of -turning away from Him. I have read that Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh (al-Rází) had a -daughter, who one day asked her mother for something. “Ask it of God,” -said the mother. “I am ashamed,” the girl replied, “to ask a material -want from Him. What you give me is His too and is my allotted portion.” -The rules of begging are as follows: If you beg unsuccessfully you -should be more cheerful than when you succeed, and you should not regard -any human creature as coming between God and yourself. You should not -beg of women or market-folk (_aṣḥáb-i aswáq_), and you should not tell -your secret to anyone unless you are sure that his money is lawful. As -far as possible you should beg unselfishly, and should not use the -proceeds for worldly show and for housekeeping, or convert them into -property. You should live in the present, and let no thought of the -morrow enter your mind, else you will incur everlasting perdition. You -should not make God a springe to catch alms, and you should not display -piety in order that more alms may be given to you on account of your -piety. I once met an old and venerable Ṣúfí, who had lost his way in the -desert and came, hunger-stricken, into the market-place at Kúfa with a -sparrow perched on his hand, crying: “Give me something for the sake of -this sparrow!” The people asked him why he said this. He replied: “It is -impossible that I should say ‘Give me something for God’s sake!’ One -must employ the intercession of an insignificant creature to obtain -worldly goods.“ - -This is but a small part of the obligations involved in begging. I have -abridged the topic for fear of being tedious. - -_Chapter concerning their Rules in Marriage and Celibacy and matters -connected therewith._ - -God hath said: ”_They_ (women) _are a garment unto you and ye are a -garment unto them_” (Kor. ii, 183). And the Apostle said: “Marry, that -ye may multiply; for I will vaunt you against all other nations on the -Day of Resurrection, even in respect of the still-born.” And he said -also: “The women who bring the greatest blessing are they who cost least -to maintain, whose faces are comeliest, and whose dowries are cheapest.” -Marriage is permitted to all men and women, and is obligatory on those -who cannot abstain from what is unlawful, and is a _sunna_ (i.e. -sanctioned by the custom of the Apostle) for those who are able to -support a family. Some of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs hold marriage to be desirable -as a means of quelling lust, and acquisition (of sustenance) to be -desirable as a means of freeing the mind from anxiety. Others hold that -the object of marriage is procreation; for, if the child dies before its -father, it will intercede for him (before God), and if the father dies -first, the child will remain to pray for him.[176] The Apostle said: -“Women are married for four things: wealth, nobility, beauty, and -religion. Do ye take one that is religious, for, after Islam, there is -nothing that profits a man so much as a believing and obedient wife who -gladdens him whenever he looks on her.” And the Apostle said: “Satan is -with the solitary,” because Satan decks out lust and presents it to -their minds. No companionship is equal in reverence and security to -marriage, when husband and wife are congenial and well-suited to each -other, and no torment and anxiety is so great as an uncongenial wife. -Therefore the dervish must, in the first place, consider what he is -doing and picture in his mind the evils of celibacy and of marriage, in -order that he may choose the state of which he can more easily overcome -the evils. The evils of celibacy are two: (1) the neglect of an -Apostolic custom, (2) the fostering of lust in the heart and the danger -of falling into unlawful ways. The evils of marriage are also two: (1) -the preoccupation of the mind with other than God, (2) the distraction -of the body for the sake of sensual pleasure. The root of this matter -lies in retirement and companionship. Marriage is proper for those who -prefer to associate with mankind, and celibacy is an ornament to those -who seek retirement from mankind. The Apostle said: “Go: the recluses -(_al-mufarridún_) have preceded you.” And Ḥasan of Baṣra says: “The -lightly burdened shall be saved and the heavily laden shall perish.” -Ibráhím Khawwáṣ relates the following story: “I went to a certain -village to visit a reverend man who lived there. When I entered his -house I saw that it was clean, like a saint’s place of worship. In its -two corners two niches (_miḥráb_) had been made; the old man was seated -in one of them, and in the other niche an old woman was sitting, clean -and bright: both had become weak through much devotion. They showed -great joy at my coming, and I stayed with them for three days. When I -was about to depart I asked the old man, ‘What relation is this chaste -woman to you?’ He answered, ‘She is my cousin and my wife.’ I said, -‘During these three days your intercourse with one another has been very -like that of strangers.’ ‘Yes,’ said he, ‘it has been so for five and -sixty years.’ I asked him the cause of this. He replied: ‘When we were -young we fell in love, but her father would not give her to me, for he -had discovered our fondness for each other. I bore this sorrow for a -long while, but on her father’s death my father, who was her uncle, gave -me her hand. On the wedding-night she said to me: “You know what -happiness God has bestowed upon us in bringing us together and taking -all fear away from our hearts. Let us therefore to-night refrain from -sensual passion and trample on our desires and worship God in -thanksgiving for this happiness.” I said, “It is well.” Next night she -bade me do the same. On the third night I said, “Now we have given -thanks for two nights for your sake; to-night let us worship God for my -sake.” Five and sixty years have passed since then, and we have never -touched one another, but spend all our lives in giving thanks for our -happiness.’” Accordingly, when a dervish chooses companionship, it -behoves him to provide his wife with lawful food and pay her dowry out -of lawful property, and not indulge in sensual pleasure so long as any -obligation towards God, or any part of His commandments, is unfulfilled. -And when he performs his devotions and is about to go to bed, let him -say, as in secret converse with God: “O Lord God, Thou hast mingled lust -with Adam’s clay in order that the world may be populated, and Thou in -Thy knowledge hast willed that I should have this intercourse. Cause it -to be for the sake of two things: firstly, to guard that which is -unlawful by means of that which is lawful; and secondly, vouchsafe to me -a child, saintly and acceptable, not one who will divert my thoughts -from Thee.” It is related that a son was born to Sahl b. `Abdalláh -al-Tustarí. Whenever the child asked his mother for food, she used to -bid him ask God, and while he went to the niche (_miḥráb_) and bowed -himself in prayer, she used secretly to give him what he wanted, without -letting him know that his mother had given it to him. Thus he grew -accustomed to turn unto God. One day he came back from school when his -mother was absent, and bowed himself in prayer. God caused the thing -that he sought to appear before him. When his mother came in she asked, -“Where did you get this?” He answered, “From the place whence it comes -always.” - -Footnote 176: - - Here a story is told of the Caliph `Umar, who asked Umm Kulthúm, the - Prophet’s granddaughter, in marriage from her father `Alí. - -The practice of an Apostolic rule of life must not lead the dervish to -seek worldly wealth and unlawful gain or preoccupy his heart, for the -dervish is ruined by the destruction of his heart, just as the rich man -is ruined by the destruction of his house and furniture; but the rich -man can repair his loss, while the dervish cannot. In our time it is -impossible for anyone to have a suitable wife, whose wants are not -excessive and whose demands are not unreasonable. Therefore many persons -have adopted celibacy and observe the Apostolic Tradition: “The best of -men in latter days will be those who are light of back,” i.e. who have -neither wife nor child. It is the unanimous opinion of the Shaykhs of -this sect that the best and most excellent Ṣúfís are the celibates, if -their hearts are uncontaminated and if their natures are not inclined to -sins and lusts. The vulgar, in gratifying their lusts, appeal to the -Apostle’s saying, that the three things he loved in the world were -scent, women, and prayer, and argue that since he loved women marriage -must be more excellent than celibacy. I reply: “The Apostle also said -that he had two trades, namely, poverty (_faqr_) and the spiritual -combat (_jihád_): why, then, do ye shun these things? If he loved that -(viz. marriage), this (viz. celibacy) was his trade. Your desires have a -greater propensity to the former, but it is absurd, on that ground, to -say that he loves what you desire. Anyone who follows his desires for -fifty years and supposes that he is following the practice of the -Apostle is in grave error.” A woman was the cause of the first calamity -that overtook Adam in Paradise, and also of the first quarrel that -happened in this world, i.e. the quarrel of Abel and Cain. A woman was -the cause of the punishment inflicted on the two angels (Hárút and -Márút); and down to the present day all mischiefs, worldly and religious -have been caused by women. After God had preserved me for eleven years -from the dangers of matrimony, it was my destiny to fall in love with -the description of a woman whom I had never seen, and during a whole -year my passion so absorbed me that my religion was near being ruined, -until at last God in His bounty gave protection to my wretched heart and -mercifully delivered me. In short, Ṣúfiism was founded on celibacy; the -introduction of marriage brought about a change. There is no flame of -lust that cannot be extinguished by strenuous effort, because, whatever -vice proceeds from yourself, you possess the instrument that will remove -it: another is not necessary for that purpose. Now the removal of lust -may be effected by two things, one of which involves self-constraint -(_takalluf_) while the other lies outside the sphere of human action and -mortification. The former is hunger, the latter is an agitating fear or -a true love, which is collected by the dispersion of (sensual) thoughts: -a love which extends its empire over the different parts of the body and -divests all the senses of their sensual quality. Aḥmad Ḥammádí of -Sarakhs, who went to Transoxania and lived there, was a venerable man. -On being asked whether he desired to marry, he answered: “No, because I -am either absent from myself or present with myself: when I am absent, I -have no consciousness of the two worlds; and when I am present, I keep -my lower soul in such wise that when it gets a loaf of bread it thinks -that it has got a thousand houris. It is a great thing to occupy the -mind: let it be anxious about whatsoever you will.” Others, again, -recommend that neither state (marriage or celibacy) should be regarded -with predilection, in order that we may see what the decree of Divine -providence will bring to light: if celibacy be our lot, we should strive -to be chaste, and if marriage be our destiny, we should comply with the -custom of the Apostle and strive to clear our hearts (of worldly -anxieties). When God ordains celibacy unto a man, his celibacy should be -like that of Joseph, who, although he was able to satisfy his desire for -Zulaykhá, turned away from her and busied himself with subduing his -passion and considering the vices of his lower soul at the moment when -Zulaykhá was alone with him. And if God ordains marriage unto a man, his -marriage should be like that of Abraham, who by reason of his absolute -confidence in God put aside all care for his wife; and when Sarah became -jealous he took Hagar and brought her to a barren valley and committed -her to the care of God. Accordingly, a man is not ruined by marriage or -by celibacy, but the mischief consists in asserting one’s will and in -yielding to one’s desires. The married man ought to observe the -following rules. He should not leave any act of devotion undone, or let -any “state” be lost or any “time” be wasted. He should be kind to his -wife and should provide her with lawful expenses, and he should not pay -court to tyrants and governors with the object of meeting her expenses. -He should behave thus, in order that, if a child is born, it may be such -as it ought to be. A well-known story is told of Aḥmad b. Ḥarb of -Níshápúr, that one day, when he was sitting with the chiefs and nobles -of Níshápúr who had come to offer their respects to him, his son entered -the room, drunk, playing a guitar, and singing, and passed by insolently -without heeding them. Aḥmad, perceiving that they were put out of -countenance, said: “What is the matter?” They replied: “We are ashamed -that this lad should pass by you in such a state.” Aḥmad said: “He is -excusable. One night my wife and I partook of some food that was brought -to us from a neighbour’s house. That same night this son was begotten, -and we fell asleep and let our devotions go. Next morning we inquired of -our neighbour as to the source of the food that he had sent to us, and -we found that it came from a wedding-feast in the house of a government -official.” The following rules should be observed by the celibate. He -must not see what is improper to see or think what is improper to think, -and he must quench the flames of lust by hunger and guard his heart from -this world and from preoccupation with phenomena, and he must not call -the desire of his lower soul “knowledge” or “inspiration”, and he must -not make the wiles (_bu ´l-`ajabí_) of Satan a pretext (for sin). If he -acts thus he will be approved in Ṣúfiism. - - - - - CHAPTER XXIV. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE TENTH VEIL: EXPLAINING THEIR PHRASEOLOGY AND THE - DEFINITIONS OF THEIR TERMS AND THE VERITIES OF THE IDEAS WHICH ARE - SIGNIFIED. - - -Those employed in every craft and business, while discussing its -mysteries with one another, make use of certain words and expressions of -which the meaning is known only to themselves. Such expressions are -invented for a double purpose: firstly, in order to facilitate the -understanding of difficulties and bring them nearer to the comprehension -of the novice; and secondly, in order to conceal the mysteries of that -science from the uninitiated. The Ṣúfís also have technical terms for -the purpose of expressing the matter of their discourse and in order -that they may reveal or disguise their meaning as they please. I will -now explain some of these terms and distinguish between the -significations attached to various pairs of words. - -_Ḥál_ and _Waqt_. - -_Waqt_ (time) is a term with which Ṣúfís are familiar, and concerning -which much has been said by the Shaykhs, but my object is to establish -the truth, not to give long explanations. _Waqt_ is that whereby a man -becomes independent of the past and the future, as, for example, when an -influence from God descends into his soul and makes his heart collected -(_mujtami`_) he has no memory of the past and no thought of that which -is not yet come. All people fail in this, and do not know what our past -has been or what our future will be, except the possessors of _waqt_, -who say: “Our knowledge cannot apprehend the future and the past, and we -are happy with God in the present (_andar waqt_). If we occupy ourselves -with to-morrow, or let any thought of it enter our minds, we shall be -veiled (from God), and a veil is a great distraction (_parágandagí_).” -It is absurd to think of the unattainable. Thus Abú Sa`íd Kharráz says: -“Do not occupy your precious time except with the most precious of -things, and the most precious of human things is the state of being -occupied between the past and the future.” And the Apostle said: “I have -a time (_waqt_) with God, in which none of the cherubim nor any prophet -rivals me,” that is to say, “in which the eighteen thousand worlds do -not occur to my mind and have no worth in my eyes.” Therefore, on the -night of the Ascension, when the kingdom of earth and heaven was arrayed -before him in all its beauty, he did not look at anything (Kor. liii, -17), for Muṣṭafá was noble (_`azíz_), and the noble are not engrossed -save by that which is noble. The “times” (_awqát_) of the Unitarian are -two: one in the state of loss (_faqd_) and one in the state of gain -(_wajd_), one in the place of union and one in the place of separation. -At both these times he is overpowered (_maqhúr_), because both his union -and his separation are effected by God without such volition or -acquisition on his part as would make it possible to invest him with any -attribute. When a man’s power of volition is cut off from him, whatever -he does or experiences is the result of “time” (_waqt_). It is related -that Junayd said: ”I saw a dervish in the desert, sitting under a -mimosa-tree in a hard and uncomfortable spot, and asked him what made -him sit there so still. He answered: ‘I had a “time” and lost it here; -now I am sitting and mourning.’ I inquired how long he had been there. -He answered: ‘Twelve years. Will not the Shaykh offer up a prayer -(_himmatí kunad_) on my behalf, that perchance I may find my “time” -again?’ I left him,” said Junayd, ”and performed the pilgrimage and -prayed for him. My prayer was granted. On my return I found him seated -in the same place. ‘Why,’ I said, ‘do you not go from here, since you -have obtained your wish?’ He replied: ‘O Shaykh, I settled myself in -this place of desolation where I lost my capital: is it right that I -should leave the place where I have found my capital once more and where -I enjoy the society of God? Let the Shaykh go in peace, for I will mix -my dust with the dust of this spot, that I may rise at the Resurrection -from this dust which is the abode of my delight.’ No man can attain to -the reality of “time” by exerting his choice, for “time” is a thing that -does not come within the scope of human acquisition, that it should be -gained by effort, nor is it sold in the market, that anyone should give -his life in exchange for it, and the will has no power either to attract -or to repel it. The Shaykhs have said, “Time is a cutting sword,” -because it is characteristic of a sword to cut, and “time” cuts the root -of the future and the past, and obliterates care of yesterday and -to-morrow from the heart. The sword is a dangerous companion: either it -makes its master a king or it destroys him. Although one should pay -homage to the sword and carry it on one’s own shoulder for a thousand -years, in the moment of cutting it does not discriminate between its -master’s neck and the neck of another. Violence (_qahr_) is its -characteristic, and violence will not depart from it at the wish of its -master. - -_Ḥál_ (state) is that which descends upon “time” (_waqt_) and adorns it, -as the spirit adorns the body. _Waqt_ has need of _ḥál_, for _waqt_ is -beautified by _ḥál_ and subsists thereby. When the owner of _waqt_ comes -into possession of _ḥál_, he is no more subject to change and is made -steadfast (_mustaqím_) in his state; for, when he has _waqt_ without -_ḥál_, he may lose it, but when _ḥál_ attaches itself to him, all his -state (_rúzgár_) becomes _waqt_, and that cannot be lost: what seems to -be coming and going (_ámad shud_) is really the result of becoming and -manifestation (_takawwun ú ẕuhúr_), just as, before this, _waqt_ -descended on him who has it. He who is in the state of becoming -(_mutakawwin_) may be forgetful, and on him who is thus forgetful _ḥál_ -descends and _waqt_ is made stable (_mutamakkin_); for the possessor of -_waqt_ may become forgetful, but the possessor of _ḥál_ cannot possibly -be so. The tongue of the possessor of _ḥál_ is silent concerning his -_ḥál_, but his actions proclaim the reality of his _ḥál_. Hence that -spiritual director said: “To ask about _ḥál_ is absurd,” because _ḥál_ -is the annihilation of speech (_maqál_). Master Abú `Alí Daqqáq says: -“If there is joy or woe in this world or the next world, the portion of -_waqt_ is that (feeling) in which thou art.” But _ḥál_ is not like this; -when _ḥál_ comes on a man from God, it banishes all these feelings from -his heart. Thus Jacob was a possessor of _waqt_: now he was blinded by -separation, now he was restored to sight by union, now he was mourning -and wailing, now he was calm and joyful. But Abraham was a possessor of -_ḥál_: he was not conscious of separation, that he should be stricken -with grief, nor of union, that he should be filled with joy. The sun and -moon and stars contributed to his _ḥál_, but he, while he gazed, was -independent of them: whatever he looked on, he saw only God, and he -said: “_I love not them that set_” (Kor. vi, 76). Accordingly, the world -sometimes becomes a hell to the possessor of _waqt_, because he is -contemplating absence (_ghaybat_) and his heart is distressed by the -loss of his beloved; and sometimes his heart is like a Paradise in the -blessedness of contemplation, and every moment brings to him a gift and -a glad message from God. On the other hand, it makes no difference to -the possessor of _ḥál_ whether he is veiled by affliction or unveiled by -happiness; for he is always in the place of actual vision (_`iyán_). -_Ḥál_ is an attribute of the object desired (_murád_), while _waqt_ is -the rank of the desirer (_muríd_). The latter is with himself in the -pleasure of _waqt_, the former with God in the delight of _ḥál_. How far -apart are the two degrees! - -_Maqám_ and _Tamkín_, and the difference between them. - -_Maqám_ (station) denotes the perseverance of the seeker in fulfilling -his obligations towards the object of his search with strenuous exertion -and flawless intention. Everyone who desires God has a station -(_maqám_), which, in the beginning of his search, is a means whereby he -seeks God. Although the seeker derives some benefit from every station -through which he passes, he finally rests in one, because a station and -the quest thereof involve contrivance and design (_tarkíb ú ḥíla_), not -conduct and practice (_rawish ú mu`ámalat_). God hath said: “_None of us -but hath a certain station_” (Kor. xxxvii, 164). The station of Adam was -repentance (_tawbat_), that of Noah was renunciation (_zuhd_), that of -Abraham was resignation (_taslím_), that of Moses was contrition -(_inábat_), that of David was sorrow (_ḥuzn_), that of Jesus was hope -(_rajá_), that of John (the Baptist) was fear (_khawf_), and that of our -Apostle was praise (_dhikr_). They drew something from other sources by -which they abode, but each of them returned at last to his original -station. In discussing the doctrine of the Muḥásibís, I gave a partial -explanation of the stations and distinguished between _ḥál_ and _maqám_. -Here, however, it is necessary to make some further remarks on this -subject. You must know that the Way to God is of three kinds: (1) -_maqám_, (2) _ḥál_, (3) _tamkín_. God sent all the prophets to explain -the Way and to elucidate the principle of the different stations. One -hundred and twenty-four thousand apostles, and a few over that number, -came with as many stations. On the advent of our Apostle a _ḥál_ -appeared to those in each station and attained a pitch where all human -acquisition was left behind, until religion was made perfect unto men, -as God hath said: “_To-day I have perfected your religion for you and -have completed My bounty unto you_” (Kor. v, 5); then the _tamkín_ -(steadfastness) of the steadfast appeared; but if I were to enumerate -every _ḥál_ and explain every _maqám_, my purpose would be defeated. - -_Tamkín_ denotes the residence of spiritual adepts in the abode of -perfection and in the highest grade. Those in stations can pass on from -their stations, but it is impossible to pass beyond the grade of -_tamkín_, because _maqám_ is the grade of beginners, whereas _tamkín_ is -the resting-place of adepts, and _maqámát_ (stations) are stages on the -way, whereas _tamkín_ is repose within the shrine. The friends of God -are absent (from themselves) on the way and are strangers (to -themselves) in the stages: their hearts are in the presence (of God), -and in the presence every instrument is evil and every tool is (a token -of) absence (from God) and infirmity. In the epoch of Paganism the poets -used to praise men for noble deeds, but they did not recite their -panegyric until some time had elapsed. When a poet came into the -presence of the person whom he had celebrated, he used to draw his sword -and hamstring his camel and then break his sword, as though to say: “I -needed a camel to bring me from a far distance to thy presence, and a -sword to repel the envious who would have hindered me from paying homage -to thee: now that I have reached thee, I kill my camel, for I will never -depart from thee again; and I break my sword, for I will not admit into -my mind the thought of being severed from thy court.” Then, after a few -days, he used to recite his poem. Similarly, when Moses attained to -_tamkín_, God bade him put off his shoes and cast away his staff (Kor. -xx, 12), these being articles of travel and Moses being in the presence -of God. The beginning of love is search, but the end is rest: water -flows in the river-bed, but when it reaches the ocean it ceases to flow -and changes its taste, so that those who desire water avoid it, but -those who desire pearls devote themselves to death and fasten the -plummet of search to their feet and plunge headlong into the sea, that -they may either gain the hidden pearl or lose their dear lives. And one -of the Shaykhs says: “_Tamkín_ is the removal of _talwín_.” _Talwín_ -also is a technical term of the Ṣúfís, and is closely connected in -meaning with _tamkín_, just as _ḥál_ is connected with _maqám_. The -signification of _talwín_ is change and turning from one state to -another, and the above-mentioned saying means that he who is steadfast -(_mutamakkin_) is not vacillating (_mutaraddid_), for he has carried all -that belongs to him into the presence of God and has erased every -thought of other than God from his mind, so that no act that passes over -him alters his outward predicament and no state changes his inward -predicament. Thus Moses was subject to _talwín_: he fell in a swoon -(Kor. vii, 139) when God revealed His glory to Mount Sinai; but Muḥammad -was steadfast: he suffered no change, although he was in the very -revelation of glory from Mecca to a space of two bow-lengths from God; -and this is the highest grade. Now _tamkín_ is of two kinds—one -referring to the dominant influence of God (_sháhid-i ḥaqq_), and the -other referring to the dominant influence of one’s self (_sháhid-i -khud_). He whose _tamkín_ is of the latter kind retains his attributes -unimpaired, but he whose _tamkín_ is of the former kind has no -attributes; and the terms effacement (_maḥw_), sobriety (_ṣaḥw_), -attainment (_laḥq_), destruction (_maḥq_),[177] annihilation (_faná_), -subsistence (_baqá_), being (_wujúd_), and not-being (_`adam_) are not -properly applied to one whose attributes are annihilated, because a -subject is necessary for the maintenance of these qualities, and when -the subject is absorbed (_mustaghriq_) he loses the capacity for -maintaining them. - -Footnote 177: - - _Maḥq_ denotes annihilation of a man’s being in the essence of God, - while _maḥw_ denotes annihilation of his actions in the action of God - (Jurjání, _Ta`rífát_). - - _Muḥáḍarat_ and _Mukáshafat_, and the difference between them. - -_Muḥáḍarat_ denotes the presence of the heart in the subtleties of -demonstration (_bayán_), while _mukáshafat_ denotes the presence of the -spirit (_sirr_) in the domain of actual vision (_`iyán_). _Muḥáḍarat_ -refers to the evidences of God’s signs (_áyát_), and _mukáshafat_ to the -evidences of contemplation (_musháhadát_). The mark of _muḥáḍarat_ is -continual meditation upon God’s signs, while the mark of _mukáshafat_ is -continual amazement at God’s infinite greatness. There is a difference -between one who meditates upon the Divine acts and one who is amazed at -the Divine majesty: the one is a follower of friendship, the other is a -companion of love. When the Friend of God (Abraham) looked on the -kingdom of heaven and meditated on the reality of its existence, his -heart was made “present” (_ḥáḍir_) thereby: through beholding the act he -became a seeker of the Agent; his “presence” (_ḥuḍúr_) made the act a -proof of the Agent, and in perfect gnosis he exclaimed: “_I turn my face -with true belief unto Him who created the heavens and the earth_” (Kor. -vi, 79). But when the Beloved of God (Muḥammad) was borne to Heaven he -shut his eyes from the sight of all things; he saw neither God’s act nor -created beings nor himself, but the Agent was revealed to him, and in -that revelation (_kashf_) his desire increased: in vain he sought -vision, proximity, union; in proportion as the exemption (_tanzíh_) of -his Beloved (from all such conceptions) became more manifest to him the -more did his desire increase; he could neither turn back nor go forward, -hence he fell into amazement. Where friendship was, amazement seemed -infidelity, but where love was, union was polytheism, and amazement -became the sole resource, because in friendship the object of amazement -was being (_hastí_), and such amazement is polytheism, but in love the -object of amazement was nature and quality (_chigúnagí_), and this -amazement is unification (_tawḥíd_). In this sense Shiblí used always to -say: “O Guide of the amazed, increase my amazement!” for in -contemplation (of God) the greater one’s amazement the higher one’s -degree. The story of Abú Sa`íd Kharráz and Ibráhím b. Sa`d `Alawí[178] -is well known—how they saw a friend of God on the seashore and asked him -“What is the Way to God?” and how he answered that there are two ways to -God, one for the vulgar and one for the elect. When they desired him to -explain this he said: “The way of the vulgar is that on which you are -going: you accept for some cause and you decline for some cause; but the -way of the elect is to see only the Causer, and not to see the cause.” -The true meaning of these anecdotes has already been set forth. - -Footnote 178: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 15. - - _Qabḍ_ and _Basṭ_, and the difference between them. - -_Qabḍ_ (contraction) and _basṭ_ (expansion) are two involuntary states -which cannot be induced by any human act or banished by any human -exertion. God hath said: “_God contracts and expands_” (Kor. ii, 246). -_Qabḍ_ denotes the contraction of the heart in the state of being veiled -(_ḥijáb_), and _basṭ_ denotes the expansion of the heart in the state of -revelation (_kashf_). Both states proceed from God without effort on the -part of Man. The _qabḍ_ of gnostics is like the fear of novices, and the -_basṭ_ of gnostics is like the hope of novices. This is the sense in -which the Ṣúfís use the terms _qabḍ_ and _basṭ_. Some Shaykhs hold that -_qabḍ_ is superior in degree to _basṭ_, for two reasons: (1) it is -mentioned before _basṭ_ in the Koran, (2) _qabḍ_ involves dissolution -and oppression, whereas _basṭ_ involves nutrition and favour: it is -undoubtedly better to dissolve one’s humanity and oppress one’s lower -soul than to foster and favour them, since they are the greatest veil -(between Man and God). Others, again, hold that _basṭ_ is superior to -_qabḍ_. The fact, they say, that _qabḍ_ is mentioned before _basṭ_ in -the Koran shows the superiority of _basṭ_, for the Arabs are accustomed -to mention in the first place that which is inferior in merit, e.g. God -hath said: “_There is one of them who injures his own soul, and one who -keeps the middle way, and one who outstrips the others in good works by -the permission of God_” (Kor. xxxv, 29). Moreover, they argue that in -_basṭ_ there is joy and in _qabḍ_ grief; gnostics feel joy only in union -with the object of knowledge, and grief only in separation from the -object of desire, therefore rest in the abode of union is better than -rest in the abode of separation. My Shaykh used to say that both _qabḍ_ -and _basṭ_ are the result of one spiritual influence, which descends -from God on Man, and either fills the heart with joy and subdues the -lower soul or subdues the heart and fills the lower soul with joy; in -the latter case contraction (_qabḍ_) of the heart is expansion (_basṭ_) -of the lower soul, and in the former case expansion of the heart is -contraction of the lower soul. He who interprets this matter otherwise -is wasting his breath. Hence Báyazíd said: “The contraction of hearts -consists in the expansion of souls, and the expansion of hearts in the -contraction of souls.” The contracted soul is guarded from injury, and -the expanded heart is restrained from falling into defect, because -jealousy is the rule in love, and contraction is a sign of God’s -jealousy; and it is necessary that lovers should reproach one another, -and expansion is a sign of mutual reproach. It is a well-known tradition -that John wept ever since he was born, while Jesus smiled ever since he -was born, because John was in contraction and Jesus in expansion. When -they met John used to say, “O Jesus, hast thou no fear of being cut off -(from God)?” and Jesus used to say, “O John, hast thou no hope of God’s -mercy? Neither thy tears nor my smiles will change the eternal decree of -God.” - -_Uns_ and _Haybat_, and the difference between them. - -_Uns_ (intimacy) and _haybat_ (awe) are two states of the dervishes who -travel on the Way to God. When God manifests His glory to a man’s heart -so that His majesty (_jalál_) predominates, he feels awe (_haybat_), but -when God’s beauty (_jamál_) predominates he feels intimacy (_uns_): -those who feel awe are distressed, while those who feel intimacy are -rejoiced. There is a difference between one who is burned by His majesty -in the fire of love and one who is illuminated by His beauty in the -light of contemplation. Some Shaykhs have said that _haybat_ is the -degree of gnostics and _uns_ the degree of novices, because the farther -one has advanced in the presence of God and in divesting Him of -attributes the more his heart is overwhelmed with awe and the more -averse he is to intimacy, for one is intimate with those of one’s own -kind, and intimacy with God is inconceivable, since no homogeneity or -resemblance can possibly exist between God and Man. If intimacy is -possible, it is possible only with the praise (_dhikr_) of Him, which is -something different from Himself, because that is an attribute of Man; -and in love, to be satisfied with another than the Beloved is falsehood -and pretension and self-conceit. _Haybat_, on the other hand, arises -from contemplating greatness, which is an attribute of God, and there is -a vast difference between one whose experience proceeds from himself -through himself and one whose experience proceeds from the annihilation -of himself through the subsistence of God. It is related that Shiblí -said: “For a long time I used to think that I was rejoicing in the love -of God and was intimate with contemplation of Him: now I know that -intimacy is impossible except with a congener.” Some, however, allege -that _haybat_ is a corollary of separation and punishment, while _uns_ -is the result of union and mercy; therefore the friends of God must be -guarded from the consequences of _haybat_ and be attached to _uns_, for -_uns_ involves love, and as homogeneity is impossible in love (of God), -so it is impossible in _uns_. My Shaykh used to say: ”I wonder at those -who declare intimacy with God to be impossible, after God has said, -‘_Verily My servants_,’ and ‘_Say to My servants_’, and ‘_When My -servants shall ask thee_’, and ‘_O My servants, no fear shall come on -you this day, and ye shall not grieve_’ (Kor. xliii, 68). A servant of -God, seeing this favour, cannot fail to love Him, and when he has loved -he will become intimate, because awe of one’s beloved is estrangement -(_bégánagí_), whereas intimacy is oneness (_yagánagí_). It is -characteristic of men to become intimate with their benefactors, and -inasmuch as God has conferred on us so great benefits and we have -knowledge of Him, it is impossible that we should talk of awe.” I, `Alí -b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, say that both parties in this controversy are -right, because the power of _haybat_ is exerted upon the lower soul and -its desires, and tends to annihilate human nature, while the power of -_uns_ is exerted upon the heart and tends to foster gnosis in the heart. -Therefore God annihilates the souls of those who love Him by revealing -His majesty and endows their hearts with everlasting life by revealing -His beauty. The followers of annihilation (_faná_) regard _haybat_ as -superior, but the followers of subsistence (_baqá_) prefer _uns_. - -_Qahr_ and _Luṭf_, and the difference between them. - -These two expressions are used by the Ṣúfís in reference to their own -state. By _qahr_ (violence) they signify the reinforcement given to them -by God in annihilating their desires and in restraining the lower soul -from its concupiscence; and by _luṭf_ (kindness) they signify God’s help -towards the subsistence of their hearts and towards the continuance of -contemplation and towards the permanence of ecstasy in the degree of -steadfastness (_istiqámat_). The adherents of _luṭf_ say Divine grace -(_karámat_) is the attainment of one’s desire, but the others say that -Divine grace is this—that God through His will should restrain a man -from his own will and should overpower him with will-lessness -(_bémurádí_), so that if he were thirsty and plunged into a river, the -river would become dry. It is related that in Baghdád were two eminent -dervishes, the one a believer in _qahr_ and the other a believer in -_luṭf_, who were always quarrelling and each preferring his own state to -that of his neighbour. The dervish who preferred _luṭf_ set out for -Mecca and entered the desert, but never reached his destination. No news -of him was heard for many years, but at last he was seen by a traveller -on the road between Mecca and Baghdád. “O my brother,” he said, “when -you return to `Iráq tell my friend at Karkh that if he wishes to see a -desert, with all its hardships, like Karkh of Baghdád, with all its -marvels, let him come here, for this desert is Karkh to me!” When the -traveller arrived at Karkh he delivered this message to the other -dervish, who said: “On your return, tell him that there is no -superiority in the fact that the desert has been made like Karkh to him, -in order that he may not flee from the court (of God); the superiority -lies in the fact that Karkh, with all its wondrous opulence, has been -made to me like a painful desert, and that nevertheless I am happy -here.” And it is related that Shiblí said, in his secret converse with -God: “O Lord, I will not turn from Thee, although Thou shouldst make the -heaven a collar for my neck and the earth a shackle for my foot and the -whole universe athirst for my blood.” My Shaykh used to say: “One year a -meeting of the saints of God took place in the midst of the desert, and -I accompanied my spiritual director, Ḥuṣrí, to that spot. I saw some of -them approaching on camels, some borne on thrones, and some flying, but -Ḥuṣrí paid no heed to them. Then I saw a youth with torn shoes and a -broken staff. His feet could scarcely support him, and his head was bare -and his body emaciated. As soon as he appeared Ḥuṣrí sprang up and ran -to meet him and led him to a lofty seat. This astonished me, and -afterwards I questioned the Shaykh about the youth. He replied: ‘He is -one of God’s saints who does not follow saintship, but saintship follows -him; and he pays no attention to miracles (_karámát_).’” In short, what -we choose for ourselves is noxious to us. I desire only that God should -desire for me, and therein preserve me from the evil thereof and save me -from the wickedness of my soul. If He keep me in _qahr_ I do not wish -for _luṭf_, and if He keep me in _luṭf_ I do not wish for _qahr_. I have -no choice beyond His choice. - -_Nafy_ and _Ithbát_, and the difference between them. - -The Shaykhs of this Path give the names of _nafy_ (negation) and -_ithbát_ (affirmation) to the effacement of the attributes of humanity -by the affirmation of Divine aid (_ta´yíd_). By negation they signify -the negation of the attributes of humanity, and by affirmation they mean -the affirmation of the power of the Truth, because effacement (_maḥw_) -is total loss, and total negation is applicable only to the attributes; -for negation of the essence is impossible while the Universal -(_kulliyyat_) subsists. It is necessary, therefore, that blameworthy -attributes should be negated by the affirmation of praiseworthy -qualities, i.e. the pretension to love of God is negated by affirmation -of the reality, for pretension is one of the vanities of the lower soul. -But the Ṣúfís, when their attributes are overpowered by the might of the -Truth, habitually say that the attributes of humanity are negated by -affirming the subsistence of God. This matter has already been discussed -in the chapter on poverty and purity and in that on annihilation and -subsistence. They say also that the words in question signify the -negation of Man’s choice by the affirmation of God’s choice. Hence that -blessed one said: “God’s choice for His servant with His knowledge of -His servant is better than His servant’s choice for himself with his -ignorance of his Lord,” because love, as all agree, is the negation of -the lover’s choice by affirmation of the Beloved’s choice. I have read -in the Anecdotes that a dervish was drowning in the sea, when some one -cried: “Brother, do you wish to be saved?” He said: “No.” “Then do you -wish to be drowned?” “No.” “It is a wonder that you will not choose -either to die or to be saved.” “What have I to do with safety,” said the -dervish, “that I should choose it? My choice is that God should choose -for me.” The Shaykhs have said that negation of one’s own choice is the -least grade in love. Now, God’s choice has no beginning in time and -cannot possibly be negated, but Man’s choice is accidental (_`araḍí_) -and admits of negation, and must be trodden under foot, that the eternal -choice of God may subsist for ever.[179] There has been much debate on -this matter, but my sole aim is that you should know the signification -of the terms used by the Ṣúfís. I have mentioned some of these, e.g., -_jam`_ and _tafriqa_, and _faná_ and _baqá_, and _ghaybat_ and _ḥuḍúr_, -and _sukr_ and _ṣaḥw_, in the chapter treating of the doctrines of the -Ṣúfís, and you must look there for the explanation of them. - -Footnote 179: - - Here the author refers to the example of Moses, whose prayer for - vision of God was refused (Kor. vii, 139), because he was exercising - his own choice. - - _Musámarat_ and _Muḥádathat_, and the difference between them. - -These terms denote two states of the perfect Ṣúfí. _Muḥádathat_ -(conversation) is really spiritual talk conjoined with silence of the -tongue, and _musámarat_ (nocturnal discourse) is really continuance of -unrestraint (_inbisáṭ_) combined with concealment of the most secret -thoughts (_kitmán-i sirr_). The outward meaning of _musámarat_ is a -spiritual state (_waqtí_) existing between God and Man at night, and -_muḥádathat_ is a similar state, existing by day, in which there is -exoteric and esoteric conversation. Hence secret prayers (_munáját_) by -night are called _musámarat_, while invocations made by day are called -_muḥádathat_. The daily state is based on revelation (_kashf_), and the -nightly state on occupation (_satr_). In love _musámarat_ is more -perfect than _muḥádathat_, and is connected with the state of the -Apostle, when God sent Gabriel to him with Buráq and conveyed him by -night from Mecca to a space of two bow-lengths from His presence. The -Apostle conversed secretly with God, and when he reached the goal his -tongue became dumb before the revelation of God’s majesty, and his heart -was amazed at His infinite greatness, and he said: “I cannot tell Thy -praise.” _Muḥádathat_ is connected with the state of Moses, who, seeking -communion with God, after forty days came to Mount Sinai and heard the -speech of God and asked for vision of Him, and failed of his desire. -There is a plain difference between one who was conducted (Kor. xvii, 1) -and one who came (Kor. vii, 139). Night is the time when lovers are -alone with each other, and day is the time when servants wait upon their -masters. When a servant transgresses he is reprimanded, but a lover has -no law by the transgression of which he should incur blame, for lovers -cannot do anything displeasing to each other. - -_`Ilm al-Yaqín_ and _`Ayn al-Yaqín_ and _Ḥaqq al-Yaqín_, and the -difference between them. - -According to the principles of theology, all these expressions denote -knowledge (_`ilm_). Knowledge without certain faith (_yaqín_) in the -reality of the object known is not knowledge, but when knowledge is -gained that which is hidden is as that which is actually seen. The -believers who shall see God on the Day of Judgment shall see Him then in -the same wise as they know Him now: if they shall see Him otherwise, -either their vision will be imperfect then or their knowledge is faulty -now. Both these alternatives are in contradiction with unification -(_tawḥíd_), which requires that men’s knowledge of God should be sound -to-day and their vision of God should be sound to-morrow. Therefore -certain knowledge (_`ilm-i yaqín_) is like certain sight (_`ayn-i -yaqín_), and certain truth (_ḥaqq-i yaqín_) is like certain knowledge. -Some have said that _`ayn al-yaqín_ is the complete absorption -(_istighráq_) of knowledge in vision, but this is impossible, because -vision is an instrument for the attainment of knowledge, like hearing, -etc.: since knowledge cannot be absorbed in hearing, its absorption in -vision is equally impossible. By _`ilm al-yaqín_ the Ṣúfís mean -knowledge of (religious) practice in this world according to the Divine -commandments; by _`ayn al-yaqín_ they mean knowledge of the state of -dying (_naz`_) and the time of departure from this world; and by _ḥaqq -al-yaqín_ they mean intuitive knowledge of the vision (of God) that will -be revealed in Paradise, and of its nature. Therefore _`ilm al-yaqín_ is -the rank of theologians (_`ulamá_) on account of their correct -observance of the Divine commands, and _`ayn al-yaqín_ is the station of -gnostics (_`árifán_) on account of their readiness for death, and _ḥaqq -al-yaqín_ is the annihilation-point of lovers (_dústán_) on account of -their rejection of all created things. Hence _`ilm al-yaqín_ is obtained -by self-mortification (_mujáhadat_), and _`ayn al-yaqín_ by intimate -familiarity (_mu´ánasat_), and _ḥaqq al-yaqín_ by contemplation -(_musháhadat_). The first is vulgar, the second is elect, and the third -is super-elect (_kháṣṣ al-kháṣṣ_). - -_`Ilm_ and _Ma`rifat_, and the difference between them. - -Theologians have made no distinction between _`ilm_ and _ma`rifat_, -except when they say that God may be called _`álim_ (knowing), but not -_`árif_ (gnostic), inasmuch as the latter epithet lacks Divine blessing. -But the Ṣúfí Shaykhs give the name of _ma`rifat_ (gnosis) to every -knowledge that is allied with (religious) practice and feeling (_ḥál_), -and the knower of which expresses his feeling; and the knower thereof -they call _`árif_. On the other hand, they give the name of _`ilm_ to -every knowledge that is stripped of spiritual meaning and devoid of -religious practice, and one who has such knowledge they call _`álim_. -One, then, who knows the meaning and reality of a thing they call -_`árif_ (gnostic), and one who knows merely the verbal expression and -keeps it in his memory without keeping the spiritual reality they call -_`álim_. For this reason, when the Ṣúfís wish to disparage a rival they -call him _dánishmand_ (possessing knowledge). To the vulgar this seems -objectionable, but the Ṣúfís do not intend to blame the man for having -acquired knowledge, they blame him for neglecting the practice of -religion, because the _`álim_ depends on himself, but the _`árif_ -depends on his Lord. This question has been discussed at length in the -chapter entitled “The Removal of the Veil of Gnosis”, and I need not say -any more now. - -_Sharí`at_ and _Ḥaqíqat_, and the difference between them. - -These terms are used by the Ṣúfís to denote soundness of the outward -state and maintenance of the inward state. Two parties err in this -matter: firstly, the formal theologians, who assert that there is no -distinction between _sharí`at_ (law) and _ḥaqíqat_ (truth), since the -Law is the Truth and the Truth is the Law; secondly, some heretics, who -hold that it is possible for one of these things to subsist without the -other, and declare that when the Truth is revealed the Law is abolished. -This is the doctrine of the Carmathians (_Qarámiṭa_) and the Shí`ites -and their satanically inspired followers (_muwaswisán_). The proof that -the Law is virtually separate from the Truth lies in the fact that in -faith belief is separate from profession; and the proof that the Law and -the Truth are not fundamentally separate, but are one, lies in the fact -that belief without profession is not faith, and conversely profession -without belief is not faith; and there is a manifest difference between -profession and belief. _Ḥaqíqat_, then, signifies a reality which does -not admit of abrogation and remains in equal force from the time of Adam -to the end of the world, like knowledge of God and like religious -practice, which is made perfect by sincere intention; and _sharí`at_ -signifies a reality which admits of abrogation and alteration, like -ordinances and commandments. Therefore _sharí`at_ is Man’s act, while -_ḥaqíqat_ is God’s keeping and preservation and protection, whence it -follows that _sharí`at_ cannot possibly be maintained without the -existence of _ḥaqíqat_, and _ḥaqíqat_ cannot be maintained without -observance of _sharí`at_. Their mutual relation may be compared to that -of body and spirit: when the spirit departs from the body the living -body becomes a corpse and the spirit vanishes like wind, for their value -depends on their conjunction with one another. Similarly, the Law -without the Truth is ostentation, and the Truth without the Law is -hypocrisy. God hath said: “_Whosoever mortify themselves for Our sake, -We will assuredly guide them in Our ways_” (Kor. xxix, 69): -mortification is Law, guidance is Truth; the former consists in a man’s -observance of the external ordinances, while the latter consists in -God’s maintenance of a man’s spiritual feelings. Hence the Law is one of -the acts acquired by Man, but the Truth is one of the gifts bestowed by -God. - -Another class of terms and expressions are used by the Ṣúfís -metaphorically. These metaphorical terms are more difficult to analyse -and interpret, but I will explain them concisely. - -_Ḥaqq._ By _ḥaqq_ (truth) the Ṣúfís mean God, for _ḥaqq_ is one of the -names of God, as He hath said: “_This is because God is the Truth_” -(Kor. xxii, 6). - -_Ḥaqíqat._ By this word they mean a man’s dwelling in the place of union -with God, and the standing of his heart in the place of abstraction -(_tanzíh_). - -_Khaṭarát._ Any judgments of separation (_aḥkám-i tafríq_) that occur to -the mind. - -_Waṭanát._ Any Divine meanings that make their abode in the heart. - -_Ṭams._ Negation of a substance of which some trace is left. - -_Rams._ Negation of a substance, together with every trace thereof, from -the heart. - -_`Alá´iq._ Secondary causes to which seekers of God attach themselves -and thereby fail to gain the object of their desire. - -_Wasá´iṭ._ Secondary causes to which seekers of God attach themselves -and thereby gain the object of their desire. - -_Zawá´id._ Excess of lights (spiritual illumination) in the heart. - -_Fawá´id._ The apprehension by the spirit of what it cannot do without. - -_Malja´._ The heart’s confidence in the attainment of its desire. - -_Manjá._ The heart’s escape from the place of imperfection. - -_Kulliyyat._ The absorption (_istighráq_) of the attributes of humanity -in the Universal (_kulliyyat_). - -_Lawá´iḥ._ Affirmation of the object of desire, notwithstanding the -advent of the negation thereof (_ithbát-i murád bá wurúd-i nafy-i án_). - -_Lawámi`._ The manifestation of (spiritual) light to the heart while its -acquirements (_fawá´id_) continue to subsist. - -_Ṭawáli`._ The appearance of the splendours of (mystical) knowledge to -the heart. - -_Ṭawáriq._ That which comes into the heart, either with glad tidings or -with rebuke, in secret converse (with God) at night. - -_Laṭá´if._ A symbol (_isháratí_), presented to the heart, of subtleties -of feeling. - -_Sirr._ Concealment of feelings of love. - -_Najwá._ Concealment of imperfections from the knowledge of other (than -God). - -_Ishárat._ Giving information to another of the object of desire, -without uttering it on the tongue. - -_Ímá._ Addressing anyone allusively, without spoken or unspoken -explanation (_bé `ibárat ú ishárat_). - -_Wárid._ The descent of spiritual meanings upon the heart. - -_Intibáh._ The departure of heedlessness from the heart. - -_Ishtibáh._ Perplexity felt in deciding between truth and falsehood. - -_Qarár._ The departure of vacillation from the reality of one’s feeling. - -_Inzi`áj._ The agitation of the heart in the state of ecstasy (_wajd_). - -Another class of technical terms are those which the Ṣúfís employ, -without metaphor, in unification (_tawḥíd_) and in setting forth their -firm belief in spiritual realities. - -_`Álam._ The term _`álam_ (world) denotes the creatures of God. It is -said that there are 18,000 or 50,000 worlds. Philosophers say there are -two worlds, an upper and a lower, while theologians say that _`álam_ is -whatever exists between the Throne of God and the earth. In short, -_`álam_ is the collective mass of created things. The Ṣúfís speak of the -world of spirits (_arwáḥ_) and the world of souls (_nufús_), but they do -not mean the same thing as the philosophers. What they mean is “the -collective mass of spirits and souls”. - -_Muḥdath._ Posterior in existence, i.e. it was not and afterwards was. - -_Qadím._ Anterior in existence, i.e. it always was, and its being was -anterior to all beings. This is nothing but God. - -_Azal._ That which has no beginning. - -_Abad._ That which has no end. - -_Dhát._ The being and reality of a thing. - -_Ṣifat._ That which does not admit of qualification (_na`t_), because it -is not self-subsistent. - -_Ism._ That which is not the object named (_ghayr-i musammá_). - -_Tasmiyat._ Information concerning the object named. - -_Nafy._ That which entails the non-existence of every object of -negation. - -_Ithbát._ That which entails the existence of every object of -affirmation. - -_Siyyán._ The possibility of the existence of one thing with another. - -_Ḍiddán._ The impossibility of the existence of one thing simultaneously -with the existence of another. - -_Ghayrán._ The possibility of the existence of either of two things, -notwithstanding the annihilation of the other. - -_Jawhar._ The basis (_aṣl_) of a thing; that which is self-subsistent. - -_`Araḍ._ That which subsists in _jawhar_ (substance). - -_Jism._ That which is composed of separate parts. - -_Su´ál._ Seeking a reality. - -_Jawáb._ Giving information concerning the subject-matter of a question -(_su´ál_). - -_Ḥusn._ That which is conformable to the (Divine) command. - -_Qubḥ._ That which is not conformable to the (Divine) command. - -_Safah._ Neglect of the (Divine) command. - -_Ẓulm._ Putting a thing in a place that is not worthy of it. - -_`Adl._ Putting everything in its proper place. - -_Malik._ He with whose actions it is impossible to interfere. - -Another class of terms requiring explanation are those which are -commonly used by the Ṣúfís in a mystical sense that is not familiar to -philologists. - -_Kháṭir._ By _kháṭir_ (passing thought) the Ṣúfís signify the occurrence -in the mind of something which is quickly removed by another thought, -and which its owner is able to repel from his mind. Those who have such -thoughts follow the first thought in matters which come directly from -God to Man. It is said that the thought occurred to Khayr Nassáj that -Junayd was waiting at his door, but he wished to repel it. The same -thought returned twice and thrice, whereupon he went out and discovered -Junayd, who said to him: “If you had followed the first thought it would -not have been necessary for me to stand here all this time.” How was -Junayd acquainted with the thought which occurred to Khayr? This -question has been asked, and has been answered by the remark that Junayd -was Khayr’s spiritual director, and a spiritual director cannot fail to -be acquainted with all that happens to one of his disciples. - -_Wáqi`a._ By _wáqi`a_ they signify a thought which appears in the mind -and remains there, unlike _kháṭir_, and which the seeker has no means -whatever of repelling: thus they say, _khaṭara `alá qalbí_, “it occurred -to my mind,” but _waqa`a fí qalbí_, “it sank into my mind.” All minds -are subject to _kháṭir_ (passing thought), but _wáqi`a_ is possible only -in a mind that is entirely filled with the notion of God. Hence, when -any obstacle appears to the novice on the Way to God, they call it “a -fetter” (_qayd_) and say: “A _wáqi`a_ has befallen him.” Philologists -also use the term _wáqi`a_ to signify any difficult question, and when -it is answered satisfactorily they say, _wáqi`a ḥall shud_, “the -difficulty is solved.” But the mystics say that _wáqi`a_ is that which -is insoluble, and that whatever is solved is a _kháṭir_, not a _wáqi`a_, -since the obstacles which confront mystics are not unimportant matters -on which varying judgments are continually being formed. - -_Ikhtiyár._ By _ikhtiyár_ they signify their preference of God’s choice -to their own, i.e. they are content with the good and evil which God has -chosen for them. A man’s preference of God’s choice is itself the result -of God’s choice, for unless God had caused him to have no choice, he -would never have let his own choice go. When Abú Yazíd was asked, “Who -is the prince (_amír_)?” he replied, “He to whom no choice is left, and -to whom God’s choice has become the only choice.” It is related that -Junayd, having caught fever, implored God to give him health. A voice -spoke in his heart: “Who art thou to plead in My kingdom and make a -choice? I can manage My kingdom better than thou. Do thou choose My -choice instead of coming forward with thine.” - -_Imtiḥán._ By this expression they signify the probation of the hearts -of the saints by diverse afflictions which come to them from God, such -as fear, grief, contraction, awe, etc. God hath said: “_They whose -hearts God hath proved for piety’s sake: they shall win pardon and a -great reward_” (Kor. xlix, 3). This is a lofty grade. - -_Balá._ By _balá_ (affliction) they signify the probation of the bodies -of God’s friends by diverse troubles and sicknesses and tribulations. -The more severely a man is afflicted the nearer does he approach unto -God, for affliction is the vesture of the saints and the cradle of the -pure and the nourishment of the prophets. The Apostle said, “We prophets -are the most afflicted of mankind;” and he also said, “The prophets are -the most afflicted of mankind, then the saints, and then other men -according to their respective ranks.” _Balá_ is the name of a -tribulation, which descends on the heart and body of a true believer and -which is really a blessing; and inasmuch as the mystery thereof is -concealed from him, he is divinely recompensed for supporting the pains -thereof. Tribulation that befalls unbelievers is not affliction -(_balá_), but misery (_shaqáwat_), and unbelievers never obtain relief -from misery. The degree of _balá_ is more honourable than that of -_imtiḥán_, for _imtiḥán_ affects the heart only, whereas _balá_ affects -both the heart and the body and is thus more powerful. - -_Taḥallí._ Imitation of praiseworthy people in word and deed. The -Apostle said: “Faith is not acquired by _taḥallí_ (adorning one’s self -with the qualities of others) and _tamanní_ (wishing), but it is that -which sinks deep into the heart and is verified by action.” _Taḥallí_, -then, is to imitate people without really acting like them. Those who -seem to be what they are not will soon be put to shame, and their secret -character will be revealed. In the view of spiritualists, however, they -are already disgraced and their secret character is clear. - -_Tajallí._ The blessed effect of Divine illumination on the hearts of -the blest, whereby they are made capable of seeing God with their -hearts. The difference between spiritual vision (_ru´yat ba-dil_) and -actual vision (_ru´yat-i `iyán_) is this, that those who experience -_tajallí_ (manifestation of God) see or do not see, according as they -wish, or see at one time and do not see at another time, while those who -experience actual vision in Paradise cannot but see, even though they -wish not to see; for it is possible that _tajallí_ should be hidden, -whereas _ru´yat_ (vision) cannot possibly be veiled. - -_Takhallí._ Turning away from distractions which prevent a man from -attaining to God. One of these is the present world, of which he should -empty his hands; another is desire for the next world, of which he -should empty his heart; a third is indulgence in vanity, of which he -should empty his spirit; and a fourth is association with created -beings, of which he should empty himself and from the thought of which -he should disengage his mind. - -_Shurúd._ The meaning of _shurúd_ is “seeking restlessly to escape from -(worldly) corruptions and veils”; for all the misfortunes of the seeker -arise from his being veiled, and when the veil is lifted he becomes -united with God. The Ṣúfís apply the term _shurúd_ to his becoming -unveiled (_isfár_) and his using every resource for that purpose; for in -the beginning, i.e. in search, he is more restless; in the end, i.e. in -union, he becomes more steadfast. - -_Quṣúd._ By _quṣúd_ (aims) they signify perfect resolution to seek the -reality of the object of search. The aims of the Ṣúfís do not depend on -motion and rest, because the lover, although he be at rest in love, is -still pursuing an aim (_qáṣid_). In this respect the Ṣúfís differ from -ordinary men, whose aims produce in them some effect outwardly or -inwardly; whereas the lovers of God seek Him without any cause and -pursue their aim without movement of their own, and all their qualities -are directed towards that goal. Where love exists, all is an aim. - -_Iṣṭiná`._ By this term they mean that God makes a man faultless through -the annihilation of all his selfish interests and sensual pleasures, and -transforms in him the attributes of his lower soul, so that he becomes -selfless. This degree belongs exclusively to the prophets, but some -Shaykhs hold that it may be attained by the saints also. - -_Iṣṭifá._ This signifies that God makes a man’s heart empty to receive -the knowledge of Himself, so that His knowledge (_ma`rifat_) diffuses -its purity through his heart. In this degree all believers, the vulgar -as well as the elect, are alike, whether they are sinful or pious or -saints or prophets, for God hath said: “_We have given the Book as a -heritage unto those of our servants whom We have chosen_ (iṣṭafayná): -_some of them are they who injure their own souls; some are they who -keep the mean; and some are they who excel in good works_” (Kor. xxxv, -29). - -_Iṣṭilám._ The manifestations (_tajalliyát_) of God which cause a man to -be entirely overpowered by a merciful probation (_imtiḥán_), while his -will is reduced to naught. _Qalb-i mumtaḥan_, “a proved heart,” and -_qalb-i muṣṭalam_, “a destroyed heart,” bear the same meaning, although -in the current usage of Ṣúfí phraseology _iṣṭilám_ is more particular -and exquisite than _imtiḥán_. - -_Rayn._ A veil on the heart, i.e. the veil of infidelity and error, -which cannot be removed except by faith. God hath said, describing the -hearts of the unbelievers (Kor. lxxxiii, 14): “_By no means, but what -they used to do hath covered their hearts_” (rána `alá qulúbihim). Some -have said that _rayn_ cannot possibly be removed in any manner, since -the hearts of unbelievers are not capable of receiving Islam, and those -who do receive it must have been, in the foreknowledge of God, true -believers. - -_Ghayn._ A veil on the heart which is removed by asking pardon of God. -It may be either thin or dense. The latter is for those who forget (God) -and commit great sins; the former is for all, not excepting saint or -prophet. Did not the Apostle say, “Verily, my heart is obscured -(_yughánu `alá qalbí_), and verily I ask pardon of God a hundred times -every day.” For removing the dense veil a proper repentance is -necessary, and for removing the thin veil a sincere return to God. -Repentance (_tawbat_) is a turning back from disobedience to obedience, -and return (_rujú`_) is a turning back from self to God. Repentance is -repentance from sin: the sin of common men is opposition to God’s -command, while the sin of lovers (of God) is opposition to God’s will: -therefore, the sin of common men is disobedience, and that of lovers is -consciousness of their own existence. If anyone turns back from wrong to -right, they say, “He is repentant (_tá´ib_);” but if anyone turns back -from what is right to what is more right, they say, “He is returning -(_á´ib_).“ All this I have set forth in the chapter on repentance. - -_Talbís._ They denote by _talbís_ the appearance of a thing when its -appearance is contrary to its reality, as God hath said: ”_We should -assuredly have deceived them_ (lalabasná `alayhim) _as they deceive -others_” (Kor. vi, 9). This quality of deception cannot possibly belong -to anyone except God, who shows the unbeliever in the guise of a -believer and the believer in the guise of an unbeliever, until the time -shall come for the manifestation of His decree and of the reality in -every case. When a Ṣúfí conceals good qualities under a mask of bad, -they say: “He is practising deception (_talbís_),” but they use this -term in such instances only, and do not apply it to ostentation and -hypocrisy, which are fundamentally _talbís_, because _talbís_ is not -used except in reference to an act performed by God. - -_Shurb._ The Ṣúfís call the sweetness of piety and the delight of -miraculous grace and the pleasure of intimacy _shurb_ (drinking); and -they can do nothing without the delight of _shurb_. As the body’s drink -is of water, so the heart’s drink is of (spiritual) pleasure and -sweetness. My Shaykh used to say that a novice without _shurb_ is a -stranger to (i.e. unacquainted with the duties of) the novitiate, and -that a gnostic with _shurb_ is a stranger to gnosis, because the novice -must derive some pleasure (_shurbí_) from his actions in order that he -may fulfil the obligations of a novice who is seeking God; but the -gnostic ought not to feel such pleasure, lest he should be transported -with that pleasure instead of with God: if he turn back to his lower -soul he will not rest (with God). - -_Dhawq._ _Dhawq_ resembles _shurb_, but _shurb_ is used solely in -reference to pleasures, whereas _dhawq_ is applied to pleasure and pain -alike. One says _dhuqtu ´l-ḥaláwat_, “I tasted sweetness,” and _dhuqtu -´l-balá_, “I tasted affliction;” but of _shurb_ they say, _sharibtu -bi-ka´si ´l-waṣl_, “I drank the cup of union,” and _sharibtu bi-ka´si -´l-wudd_, “I drank the cup of love,” and so forth.[180] - -Footnote 180: - - This distinction between _shurb_ and _dhawq_ is illustrated by - citations from the Koran, viz., lii, 19; xliv, 49; and liv, 48. - - - - - CHAPTER XXV. - THE UNCOVERING OF THE ELEVENTH VEIL: CONCERNING AUDITION (_samá`_). - - -The means of acquiring knowledge are five: hearing, sight, taste, smell, -and touch. God has created for the mind these five avenues, and has made -every kind of knowledge depend on one of them. Four of the five senses -are situated in a special organ, but one, namely touch, is diffused over -the whole body. It is possible, however, that this diffusion, which is -characteristic of touch, may be shared by any of the other senses. The -Mu`tazilites hold that no sense can exist but in a special organ -(_maḥall-i makhṣúṣ_), a theory which is controverted by the fact that -the sense of touch has no such organ. Since one of the five senses has -no special organ, it follows that, if the sense of touch is generally -diffused, the other senses may be capable of the same diffusion. -Although it is not my purpose to discuss this question here, I thought a -brief explanation necessary. God has sent Apostles with true evidences, -but belief in His Apostles does not become obligatory until the -obligatoriness of knowing God is ascertained by means of hearing. It is -hearing, then, that makes religion obligatory; and for this reason the -Sunnís regard hearing as superior to sight in the domain of religious -obligation (_taklíf_). If it be said that vision of God is better than -hearing His word, I reply that our knowledge of God’s visibility to the -faithful in Paradise is derived from hearing: it is a matter of -indifference whether the understanding allows that God shall be visible -or not, inasmuch as we are assured of the fact by oral tradition. Hence -hearing is superior to sight. Moreover, all religious ordinances are -based on hearing and could not be established without it; and all the -prophets on their appearance first spoke in order that those who heard -them might believe, then in the second place they showed miracles -(_mu`jiza_), which also were corroborated by hearing. What has been said -proves that anyone who denies audition denies the entire religious law. - - _Chapter on the Audition of the Koran and kindred matters._ - -The most beneficial audition to the mind and the most delightful to the -ear is that of the Word of God, which all believers and unbelievers, -human beings and perís alike, are commanded to hear. It is a miraculous -quality of the Koran that one never grows weary of reading and hearing -it, so that the Quraysh used to come secretly by night and listen to the -Apostle while he was praying and marvel at his recitation, e.g., Naḍr b. -al-Ḥárith, who was the most elegant of them in speech, and `Utba b. -Rabí`a, who was bewitchingly eloquent, and Abú Jahl b. Hishám, who was a -wondrous orator. One night `Utba swooned on hearing the Apostle recite a -chapter of the Koran, and he said to Abú Jahl: “I am sure that these are -not the words of any created being.” The perís also came and listened to -the Word of God, and said: “_Verily, we heard a marvellous recitation, -which guides to the right way; and we shall not associate anyone with -our Lord_” (Kor. lxxii, 1-2).[181] It is related that a man recited in -the presence of `Abdalláh b. Ḥanẕala: “_They shall have a couch of -Hell-fire, and above them shall be quilts thereof_” (Kor. vii, 39). -`Abdalláh began to weep so violently that, to quote the narrator’s -words, “I thought life would depart from him.” Then he rose to his feet. -They bade him sit down, but he cried: “Awe of this verse prevents me -from sitting down.” It is related that the following verse was read in -the presence of Junayd: “_O believers, why say ye that which ye do -not?_” (Kor. lxi, 2). Junayd said: “O Lord, if we say, we say because of -Thee, and if we do, we do because of Thy blessing: where, then, is our -saying and doing?” It is related that Shiblí said, on hearing the verse -“_And remember_ _thy Lord when thou forgettest_” (Kor. xviii, 23), -“Remembrance (of God) involves forgetfulness (of self), and all the -world have stopped short at the remembrance of Him;” then he shrieked -and fell senseless. When he came to himself, he said: “I wonder at the -sinner who can hear God’s Word and remain unmoved.” A certain Shaykh -says: “Once I was reading the Word of God, ‘_Beware of a day on which ye -shall be returned unto God_’ (Kor. ii, 281). A heavenly voice called to -me, ‘Do not read so loud; four perís have died from the terror inspired -in them by this verse’.” A dervish said: “For the last ten years I have -not read nor heard the Koran except that small portion thereof which is -used in prayer.” On being asked why, he answered: “For fear lest it -should be cited as an argument against me.” One day I came into the -presence of Shaykh Abu ´l-`Abbás Shaqání and found him reading: “_God -propoundeth as a parable an owned slave who hath naught in his power_” -(Kor. xvi, 77), and weeping and shrieking, so that he swooned and I -thought he was dead. “O Shaykh,” I cried, “what ails thee?” He said: -“After eleven years I have reached this point in my set portion of the -Koran and am unable to proceed farther.” Abu ´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá was asked -how much of the Koran he read daily. He answered: “Formerly I used to -read the whole Koran twice in a day and night, but now after reading for -fourteen years I have only reached the _Súrat al-Anfál_.”[182] It is -related that Abu ´l-`Abbás Qaṣṣáb said to a Koran-reader, “Recite,” -whereupon he recited: “_O noble one, famine hath befallen us and our -people, and we are come with a petty merchandise_” (Kor. xii, 88). He -said once more, “Recite,” whereupon the reader recited: “_If he stole, a -brother of his hath stolen heretofore_” (Kor. xii, 77). Abu ´l-`Abbás -bade him recite a third time, so he recited: “_No blame shall be laid -upon you this day: God forgiveth you_,” etc. (Kor. xii, 92). Abu -´l-`Abbás cried: “O Lord, I am more unjust than Joseph’s brethren, and -Thou art more kind than Joseph: deal with me as he dealt with his wicked -brethren.” - -Footnote 181: - - After a further eulogy of the inimitable style of the Koran, the - author relates the story of `Umar’s conversion. - -Footnote 182: - - The chapter of the Spoils, a title given to the eighth chapter of the - Koran. - -All Moslems, pious and disobedient alike, are commanded to listen to the -Koran, for God hath said: “_When the Koran is recited hearken thereto -and be silent that perchance ye may win mercy_” (Kor. vii, 203).[183] -And it is related that the Apostle said to Ibn Mas`úd: “Recite the Koran -to me.” Ibn Mas`úd said: “Shall I recite it to thee, to whom it was -revealed?” The Apostle answered: “I wish to hear it from another.” This -is a clear proof that the hearer is more perfect in state than the -reader, for the reader may recite with or without true feeling, whereas -the hearer feels truly, because speech is a sort of pride and hearing is -a sort of humility. The Apostle also said that the chapter of Húd had -whitened his hair. It is explained that he said this because of the -verse at the end of that chapter: “_Be thou steadfast, therefore, as -thou hast been commanded_” (Kor. xi, 114), for Man is unable to be -really steadfast in fulfilling the Divine commandments, inasmuch as he -can do nothing without God’s help.[184] - -Footnote 183: - - Here the author quotes a number of Koranic verses in which the - faithful are enjoined to listen heedfully to the recitation of the - sacred volume, or are rebuked for their want of attention. - -Footnote 184: - - I have omitted here a story related by Abú Sa`íd al-Khudrí concerning - Muḥammad’s interview with a party of destitute refugees (_muhájirún_), - to whom the Koran was being read. - - - SECTION. - -Zurára b. Abí Awfá, one of the chief Companions of the Apostle, while he -was presiding over the public worship, recited a verse of the Koran, -uttered a cry, and died. Abú Ja`far Juhaní,[185] an eminent Follower, on -hearing a verse which Ṣáliḥ Murrí[186] read to him, gave a loud moan and -departed from this world. Ibráhím Nakha`í[187] relates that while he was -passing through a village in the neighbourhood of Kúfa he saw an old -woman standing in prayer. As the marks of holiness were manifest on her -countenance, he waited until she finished praying and then saluted her -in hope of gaining a blessing thereby. She said to him, “Dost thou know -the Koran?” He said, “Yes.” She said, “Recite a verse.” He did so, -whereupon she cried aloud and sent her soul forth to meet the vision of -God. Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí relates the following tale. “I saw in the -desert a youth, clad in a coarse frock, standing at the mouth of a well. -He said to me: ‘O Aḥmad, thou art come in good time, for I must needs -hear the Koran, that I may give up my soul. Read me a verse.’ God -inspired me to read, ‘_Verily, those who say, “God is our Lord,” and -then are steadfast_’ (Kor. xli, 30). ‘O Aḥmad,’ said he, ‘by the Lord of -the Ka`ba thou hast read the same verse which an angel was reading to me -just now,’ and with these words he gave up his soul.” - -Footnote 185: - - BI. Abú Juhayn, J. Abú Juhaní. - -Footnote 186: - - Sha`rání, _Ṭabaqát al-Kubrá_, i, 60. - -Footnote 187: - - Ibn Khallikán, No. 1. - - _Chapter on the Audition of Poetry, etc._ - -It is permissible to hear poetry. The Apostle heard it, and the -Companions not only heard it but also spoke it. The Apostle said, “Some -poetry is wisdom;” and he said, “Wisdom is the believer’s lost -she-camel: wherever he finds her, he has the best right to her;” and he -said too, “The truest word ever spoken by the Arabs is the verse of -Labíd, - - ‘_Everything except God is vain, - And all fortune is inevitably fleeting._’” - -`Amr b. al-Sharíd[188] relates that his father said: “The Apostle asked -me whether I could recite any poetry of Umayya b. Abi ´l-Ṣalt, so I -recited a hundred verses, and at the end of each verse he cried, ‘Go -on!’ He said that Umayya almost became a Moslem in his poetry.” Many -such stories are told of the Apostle and the Companions. Erroneous views -are prevalent on this subject. Some declare that it is unlawful to -listen to any poetry whatever, and pass their lives in defaming their -brother Moslems. Some, on the contrary, hold that all poetry is lawful, -and spend their time in listening to love-songs and descriptions of the -face and hair and mole of the beloved. I do not intend to discuss the -arguments which both parties in this controversy bring forward against -each other. The Ṣúfí Shaykhs follow the example of the Apostle, who, on -being asked about poetry, said: “What is good thereof is good and what -is bad thereof is bad,” i.e., whatever is unlawful, like backbiting and -calumny and foul abuse and blame of any person and utterance of -infidelity, is equally unlawful whether it be expressed in prose or in -verse; and whatever is lawful in prose, like morality and exhortations -and inferences drawn from the signs of God and contemplation of the -evidences of the Truth, is no less lawful in verse. In fine, just as it -is unlawful and forbidden to look at or touch a beautiful object which -is a source of evil, so it is unlawful and forbidden to listen to that -object or, similarly, to hear the description of it. Those who regard -such hearing as absolutely lawful must also regard looking and touching -as lawful, which is infidelity and heresy. If one says, “I hear only God -and seek only God in eye and cheek and mole and curl,” it follows that -another may look at a cheek and mole and say that he sees and seeks God -alone, because both the eye and the ear are sources of admonition and -knowledge; then another may say that in touching a person, whose -description it is thought allowable to hear and whom it is thought -allowable to behold, he, too, is only seeking God, since one sense is no -better adapted than another to apprehend a reality; then the whole -religious law is made null and void, and the Apostle’s saying that the -eyes commit fornication loses all its force, and the blame of touching -persons with whom marriage may legally be contracted is removed, and the -ordinances of religion fall to the ground. Foolish aspirants to Ṣúfiism, -seeing the adepts absorbed in ecstasy during audition (_samá`_), -imagined that they were acting from a sensual impulse and said, “It is -lawful, else they would not have done so,” and imitated them, taking up -the form but neglecting the spirit, until they perished themselves and -led others into perdition. This is one of the great evils of our time. I -will set it forth completely in the proper place. - -Footnote 188: - - B. al-Rashíd. - - _Chapter on the Audition of Voices and Melodies._ - -The Apostle said, “Beautify your voices by reading the Koran aloud;” and -God hath said, “_God addeth unto His creatures what He pleaseth_” (Kor. -xxxv, 1), meaning, as the commentators think, a beautiful voice; and the -Apostle said, “Whoso wishes to hear the voice of David, let him listen -to the voice of Abú Músá al-Ash`arí.” It is stated in well-known -traditions that the inhabitants of Paradise enjoy audition, for there -comes forth from every tree a different voice and melody. When diverse -sounds are mingled together, the natural temperament experiences a great -delight. This sort of audition is common to all living creatures, -because the spirit is subtle, and there is a subtlety in sounds, so that -when they are heard the spirit inclines to that which is homogeneous -with itself. Physicians and those philosophers who claim to possess a -profound knowledge of the truth have discussed this subject at large and -have written books on musical harmony. The results of their invention -are manifest to-day in the musical instruments which have been contrived -for the sake of exciting passion and procuring amusement and pleasure, -in accord with Satan, and so skilfully that (as the story is told) one -day, when Isḥáq of Mawṣil[189] was playing in a garden, a nightingale, -enraptured with the music, broke off its song in order to listen, and -dropped dead from the bough. I have heard many tales of this kind, but -my only purpose is to mention the theory that the temperaments of all -living creatures are composed of sounds and melodies blended and -harmonized. Ibráhím Khawwáṣ says: “Once I came to an Arab tribe and -alighted at the hospitable abode of one of their chiefs. I saw a negro -lying, shackled and chained, at the tent door in the heat of the sun. I -felt pity for him and resolved to intercede with the chief on his -behalf. When food was brought for my entertainment I refused to eat, -knowing that nothing grieves an Arab more than this. The chief asked me -why I refused, and I answered that I hoped his generosity would grant me -a boon. He begged me to eat, assuring me that all he possessed was mine. -‘I do not want your wealth,' I said, ‘but pardon this slave for my -sake.’ ‘First hear what his offence was,’ the chief replied, ‘then -remove his chains. This slave is a camel-driver, and he has a sweet -voice. I sent him with a few camels to my estates, to fetch me some -corn. He put a double load on every camel and chanted so sweetly on the -way that the camels ran at full speed. They returned hither in a short -time, and as soon as he unloaded them they died one after another.’ ‘O -prince,’ I cried in astonishment, ‘a nobleman like you does not speak -falsely, but I wish for some evidence of this tale.’ While we talked a -number of camels were brought from the desert to the wells, that they -might drink. The chief inquired how long they had gone without water. -‘Three days,’ was the reply. He then commanded the slave to chant. The -camels became so occupied in listening to his song that they would not -drink a mouthful of water, and suddenly they turned and fled, one by -one, and dispersed in the desert. The chieftain released the slave and -pardoned him for my sake.” - -Footnote 189: - - _Aghání_, 5, 52-131. - -We often see, for example, how camels and asses are affected with -delight when their drivers trill an air. In Khurásán and `Iráq it is the -custom for hunters, when hunting deer (_áhú_) at night, to beat on a -basin of brass (_ṭashtí_) in order that the deer may stand still, -listening to the sound, and thus be caught. And in India, as is well -known, some people go out to the open country and sing and make a -tinkling sound, on hearing which the deer approach; then the hunters -encircle them and sing, until the deer are lulled to sleep by the -delightful melody and are easily captured. The same effect is manifest -in young children who cease crying in the cradle when a tune is sung to -them, and listen to the tune. Physicians say of such a child that he is -sensible and will be clever when he grows up. On the death of one of the -ancient kings of Persia his ministers wished to enthrone his son, who -was a child two years old. Buzurjmihr,[190] on being consulted, said: -“Very good, but we must make trial whether he is sensible,” and ordered -singers to sing to him. The child was stirred with emotion and began to -shake his arms and legs. Buzurjmihr declared that this was a hopeful -sign and consented to his succession. Anyone who says that he finds no -pleasure in sounds and melodies and music is either a liar and a -hypocrite or he is not in his right senses, and is outside of the -category of men and beasts. Those who prohibit music do so in order that -they may keep the Divine commandment, but theologians are agreed that it -is permissible to hear musical instruments if they are not used for -diversion, and if the mind is not led to wickedness through hearing -them. Many traditions are cited in support of this view. Thus, it is -related that `Á´isha said: “A slave-girl was singing in my house when -`Umar asked leave to enter. As soon as she heard his step she ran away. -He came in and the Apostle smiled. ‘O Apostle of God,’ cried `Umar, -‘what hath made thee smile?’ The Apostle answered, ‘A slave-girl was -singing here, but she ran away as soon as she heard thy step.’ ‘I will -not depart,’ said `Umar, ‘until I hear what the Apostle heard.’ So the -Apostle called the girl back and she began to sing, the Apostle -listening to her.” Many of the Companions have related similar -traditions, which Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí has collected in his -_Kitáb al-Samá`_[191]; and he has pronounced such audition to be -permissible. In practising audition, however, the Ṣúfí Shaykhs desire, -not permissibility as the vulgar do, but spiritual advantages. Licence -is proper for beasts, but men who are subject to the obligations of -religion ought to seek spiritual benefit from their actions. Once, when -I was at Merv, one of the leaders of the _Ahl-i ḥadíth_[192] and the -most celebrated of them all said to me: “I have composed a work on the -permissibility of audition.” I replied: “It is a great calamity to -religion that the Imám should have made lawful an amusement which is the -root of all immorality.” “If you do not hold it to be lawful,” said he, -“why do you practise it?” I answered: “Its lawfulness depends on -circumstances and cannot be asserted absolutely: if audition produces a -lawful effect on the mind, then it is lawful; it is unlawful if the -effect is unlawful, and permissible if the effect is permissible.” - -Footnote 190: - - The vizier of Khusraw Núshírwán, the great Sásánian king of Persia - (531-78 A.D.). - -Footnote 191: - - _The Book of Audition._ - -Footnote 192: - - “The followers of Tradition” as opposed to “the followers of Opinion” - (_ahl-i ra´y_). - - _Chapter on the Principles of Audition._ - -You must know that the principles of audition vary with the variety of -temperaments, just as there are different desires in various hearts, and -it is tyranny to lay down one law for all. Auditors (_mustami`án_) may -be divided into two classes: (1) those who hear the spiritual meaning, -(2) those who hear the material sound. There are good and evil results -in each case. Listening to sweet sounds produces an effervescence -(_ghalayán_) of the substance moulded in Man: true (_ḥaqq_) if the -substance be true, false (_báṭil_) if the substance be false. When the -stuff of a man’s temperament is evil, that which he hears will be evil -too. The whole of this topic is illustrated by the story of David, whom -God made His vicegerent and gave him a sweet voice and caused his throat -to be a melodious pipe, so that wild beasts and birds came from mountain -and plain to hear him, and the water ceased to flow and the birds fell -from the air. It is related that during a month’s space the people who -were gathered round him in the desert ate no food, and the children -neither wept nor asked for milk; and whenever the folk departed it was -found that many had died of the rapture that seized them as they -listened to his voice: one time, it is said, the tale of the dead -amounted to seven hundred maidens and twelve thousand old men. Then God, -wishing to separate those who listened to the voice and followed their -temperament from the followers of the truth (_ahl-i ḥaqq_) who listened -to the spiritual reality, permitted Iblís to work his will and display -his wiles. Iblís fashioned a mandoline and a flute and took up a station -opposite to the place where David was singing. David’s audience became -divided into two parties: the blest and the damned. Those who were -destined to damnation lent ear to the music of Iblís, while those who -were destined to felicity remained listening to the voice of David. The -spiritualists (_ahl-i ma`ní_) were conscious of nothing except David’s -voice, for they saw God alone; if they heard the Devil’s music, they -regarded it as a temptation proceeding from God, and if they heard -David’s voice, they recognized it as being a direction from God; -wherefore they abandoned all things that are merely subsidiary and saw -both right and wrong as they really are. When a man has audition of this -kind, whatever he hears is lawful to him. Some impostors, however, say -that their audition is contrary to the reality. This is absurd, for the -perfection of saintship consists in seeing everything as it really is, -that the vision may be right; if you see otherwise, the vision is wrong. -The Apostle said: “O God, let us see things as they are.” Similarly, -right audition consists in hearing everything as it is in quality and -predicament. The reason why men are seduced and their passions excited -by musical instruments is that they hear unreally: if their audition -corresponded with the reality, they would escape from all evil -consequences. The people of error heard the word of God, and their error -waxed greater than before. Some of them quoted “_The eyes attain not -unto Him_” (Kor. vi, 103) as a demonstration that there shall be no -vision of God; some cited “_Then He settled Himself on the throne”_ -(Kor. vii, 52) to prove that position and direction may be affirmed of -Him; and some argued that God actually “comes”, since He has said, “_And -thy Lord shall come and the angels rank by rank_” (Kor. lxxxix, 23). -Inasmuch as error was implanted in their minds, it profited them nothing -to hear the Word of God. The Unitarian, on the other hand, when he -peruses a poem, regards the Creator of the poet’s nature and the -Disposer of his thoughts, and drawing an admonition therefrom, sees in -the act an evidence of the Agent. Thus he finds the right way even in -falsehood, while those whom we have mentioned above lose the way in the -midst of truth. - - - SECTION. - -The Shaykhs have uttered many sayings on this subject. Dhu ´l-Nún the -Egyptian says: “Audition is a Divine influence (_wárid al-ḥaqq_) which -stirs the heart to seek God: those who listen to it spiritually -(_ba-ḥaqq_) attain unto God (_taḥaqqaqa_), and those who listen to it -sensually (_ba-nafs_) fall into heresy (_tazandaqa_).” This venerable -Ṣúfí does not mean that audition is the cause of attaining unto God, but -he means that the auditor ought to hear the spiritual reality, not the -mere sound, and that the Divine influence ought to sink into his heart -and stir it up. One who in that audition follows the truth will -experience a revelation, whereas one who follows his lower soul (_nafs_) -will be veiled and will have recourse to interpretation (_ta´wíl_). -_Zandaqa_ (heresy) is a Persian word which has been Arabicized. In the -Arabic tongue it signifies “interpretation”. Accordingly, the Persians -call the commentary on their Book _Zand ú Pázand_.[193] The -philologists, wishing to give a name to the descendants of the Magians, -called them _zindíq_ on the ground of their assertion that everything -stated by the Moslems has an esoteric interpretation, which destroys its -external sense. At the present day the Shí`ites of Egypt, who are the -remnant of these Magians, make the same assertion. Hence the word -_zindíq_ came to be applied to them as a proper name. Dhu ´l-Nún, by -using this term, intended to declare that spiritualists in audition -penetrate to the reality, while sensualists make a far-fetched -interpretation and thereby fall into wickedness. Shiblí says: “Audition -is outwardly a temptation (_fitnat_) and inwardly an admonition -(_`ibrat_): he who knows the mystic sign (_ishárat_) may lawfully hear -the admonition; otherwise, he has invited temptation and exposed himself -to calamity,” i.e. audition is calamitous and a source of evil to anyone -whose whole heart is not absorbed in the thought of God. Abú `Alí -Rúdbárí said, in answer to a man who questioned him concerning audition: -“Would that I were rid of it entirely!” because Man is unable to do -everything as it ought to be done, and when he fails to do a thing duly -he perceives that he has failed and wishes to be rid of it altogether. -One of the Shaykhs says: “Audition is that which makes the heart aware -of the things in it that produce absence” (_má fíhá mina -´l-mughayyibát_), so that the effect thereof is to make the heart -present with God. Absence (_ghaybat_) is a most blameworthy quality of -the heart. The lover, though absent from his Beloved, must be present -with him in heart; if he be absent in heart, his love is gone. My Shaykh -said: “Audition is the viaticum of the indigent: one who has reached his -journey’s end hath no need of it,” because hearing can perform no -function where union is; news is heard of the absent, but hearing is -naught when two are face to face. Ḥuṣrí says: “What avails an audition -that ceases whenever the person whom thou hearest becomes silent? It is -necessary that thy audition should be continuous and uninterrupted.” -This saying is a token of the concentration of his thoughts in the field -of love. When a man attains so high a degree as this he hears (spiritual -truths) from every object in the universe. - -Footnote 193: - - See Professor Browne’s _Literary History of Persia_, i, 81. - - _Chapter on the various opinions respecting Audition._ - -The Shaykhs and spiritualists hold different views as to audition. Some -say that it is a faculty appertaining to absence, for in contemplation -(of God) audition is impossible, inasmuch as the lover who is united -with his Beloved fixes his gaze on Him and does not need to listen to -him; therefore, audition is a faculty of beginners which they employ, -when distracted by forgetfulness, in order to obtain concentration; but -one who is already concentrated will inevitably be distracted thereby. -Others, again, say that audition is a faculty appertaining to presence -(with God), because love demands all; until the whole of the lover is -absorbed in the whole of the Beloved, he is deficient in love: -therefore, as in union the heart (_dil_) has love and the soul (_sirr_) -has contemplation and the spirit has union and the body has service, so -the ear also must have such a pleasure as the eye derives from seeing. -How excellent, though on a frivolous topic, are the words of the poet -who declared his love for wine! - - “_Give me wine to drink and tell me it is wine. - Do not give it me in secret, when it can be given openly_,”[194] - -i.e., let my eye see it and my hand touch it and my palate taste it and -my nose smell it: there yet remains one sense to be gratified, viz. my -hearing: tell me, therefore, this is wine, that my ear may feel the same -delight as my other senses. And they say that audition appertains to -presence with God, because he who is absent from God is a disbeliever -(_munkir_), and those who disbelieve are not worthy to enjoy audition. -Accordingly, there are two kinds of audition: mediate and immediate. -Audition of which a reciter (_qárí_) is the source is a faculty of -absence, but audition of which the Beloved (_yárí_) is the source is a -faculty of presence. It was on this account that a well-known spiritual -director said: “I will not put any created beings, except the chosen men -of God, in a place where I can hear their talk or converse with them.” - -Footnote 194: - - Abú Nuwás, _Die Weinlieder_, ed. by Ahlwardt, No. 29, verse 1. - -_Chapter concerning their different grades in the reality of Audition._ - -You must know that each Ṣúfí has a particular grade in audition and that -the feelings which he gains therefrom are proportionate to his grade. -Thus, whatever is heard by penitents augments their contrition and -remorse; whatever is heard by longing lovers increases their longing for -vision; whatever is heard by those who have certain faith confirms their -certainty; whatever is heard by novices verifies their elucidation (of -matters which perplex them); whatever is heard by lovers impels them to -cut off all worldly connexions; and whatever is heard by the spiritually -poor forms a foundation for hopelessness. Audition is like the sun, -which shines on all things but affects them differently according to -their degree: it burns or illumines or dissolves or nurtures. All the -classes that I have mentioned are included in the three following -grades: beginners (_mubtadiyán_), middlemen (_mutawassiṭán_), and adepts -(_kámilán_). I will now insert a section treating of the state of each -of these three grades in regard to audition, that you may understand -this matter more easily. - - - SECTION. - -Audition is an influence (_wárid_) proceeding from God, and inasmuch as -this body is moulded of folly and diversion the temperament of the -beginner is nowise capable of (enduring) the word of God, but is -overpoweringly impressed by the descent of that spiritual reality, so -that some lose their senses in audition and some die, and there is no -one whose temperament retains its equilibrium. It is well known that in -the hospitals of Rúm they have invented a wonderful thing which they -call _angalyún_;[195] the Greeks call anything that is very marvellous -by this name, e.g. the Gospel and the books (_waḍ`_) of Mání (Manes). -The word signifies “promulgation of a decree” (_iẕhár-i ḥukm_). This -_angalyún_ resembles a stringed musical instrument (_rúdí az rúdha_). -The sick are brought to it two days in the week and are forced to -listen, while it is being played on, for a length of time proportionate -to the malady from which they suffer; then they are taken away. If it is -desired to kill anyone, he is kept there for a longer period, until he -dies. Everyone’s term of life is really written (in the tablets of -destiny), but death is caused indirectly by various circumstances. -Physicians and others may listen continually to the _angalyún_ without -being affected in any way, because it is consonant with their -temperaments. I have seen in India a worm which appeared in a deadly -poison and lived by it, because that poison was its whole being. In a -town of Turkistán, on the frontiers of Islam, I saw a burning mountain, -from the rocks of which sal-ammoniac fumes (_nawshádur_) were boiling -forth;[196] and in the midst of that fire was a mouse, which died when -it came out of the glowing heat. My object in citing these examples is -to show that all the agitation of beginners, when the Divine influence -descends upon them, is due to the fact that their bodies are opposed to -it; but when it becomes continual the beginner receives it quietly. At -first the Apostle could not bear the vision of Gabriel, but in the end -he used to be distressed if Gabriel ever failed to come, even for a -brief space. Similarly, the stories which I have related above show that -beginners are agitated and that adepts are tranquil in audition. Junayd -had a disciple who was wont to be greatly agitated in audition, so that -the other dervishes were distracted. They complained to Junayd, and he -told the disciple that he would not associate with him if he displayed -such agitation in future. “I watched that dervish,” says Abú Muḥammad -Jurayrí, “during audition: he kept his lips shut and was silent until -every pore in his body opened; then he lost consciousness, and remained -in that state for a whole day. I know not whether his audition or his -reverence for his spiritual director was more perfect.” It is related -that a man cried out during audition. His spiritual director bade him be -quiet. He laid his head on his knee, and when they looked he was dead. I -heard Shaykh Abú Muslim Fáris b. Ghálib al-Fárisí say that some one laid -his hand on the head of a dervish who was agitated during audition and -told him to sit down: he sat down and died on the spot. Raqqí[197] -relates that Darráj[198] said: “While Ibn al-Qúṭí[199] and I were -walking on the bank of the Tigris between Baṣra and Ubulla, we came to a -pavilion and saw a handsome man seated on the roof, and beside him a -girl who was singing this verse:— - - ‘_My love was bestowed on thee in the way of God; - Thou changest every day: it would beseem thee better not to do this._’ - -A young man with a jug and a patched frock was standing beneath the -pavilion. He exclaimed: ‘O damsel, for God’s sake chant that verse -again, for I have only a moment to live; let me hear it and die!’ The -girl repeated her song, whereupon the youth uttered a cry and gave up -his soul. The owner of the girl said to her, ‘Thou art free,’ and came -down from the roof and busied himself with preparations for the young -man’s funeral. When he was buried all the people of Baṣra said prayers -over him. Then the girl’s master rose and said: ‘O people of Baṣra, I, -who am so-and-so, the son of so-and-so, have devoted all my wealth to -pious works and have set free my slaves.’ With these words he departed, -and no one ever learned what became of him.” The moral of this tale is -that the novice should be transported by audition to such an extent that -his audition shall deliver the wicked from their wickedness. But in the -present age some persons attend meetings where the wicked listen to -music, yet they say, “We are listening to God;” and the wicked join with -them in this audition and are encouraged in their wickedness, so that -both parties are destroyed. Junayd was asked: “May we go to a church for -the purpose of admonishing ourselves and beholding the indignity of -their unbelief and giving thanks for the gift of Islam?” He replied: “If -you can go to a church and bring some of the worshippers back with you -to the Court of God, then go, but not otherwise.” When an anchorite goes -into a tavern, the tavern becomes his cell, and when a haunter of -taverns goes into a cell, that cell becomes his tavern. An eminent -Shaykh relates that when he was walking in Baghdád with a dervish, he -heard a singer chanting— - - “_If it be true, it is the best of all objects of desire, - And if not, we have lived a pleasant life in it._” - -The dervish uttered a cry and died. Abú `Alí Rúdbárí says: “I saw a -dervish listening attentively to the voice of a singer. I too inclined -my ear, for I wished to know what he was chanting. The words, which he -sang in mournful accents, were these:— - - ‘_I humbly stretch my hand to him who gives food liberally._’ - -Then the dervish uttered a loud cry and fell. When we came near him we -found that he was dead.” A certain man says: “I was walking on a -mountain road with Ibráhím Khawwáṣ. A sudden thrill of emotion seized my -heart, and I chanted— - - ‘_All men are sure that I am in love, - But they know not whom I love. - There is in Man no beauty - That is not surpassed in beauty by a beautiful voice._’ - -Ibráhím begged me to repeat the verses, and I did so. In sympathetic -ecstasy (_tawájud_) he danced a few steps on the stony ground. I -observed that his feet sank into the rock as though it were wax. Then he -fell in a swoon. On coming to himself he said to me: ‘I have been in -Paradise, and you were unaware.’“ I once saw with my own eyes a dervish -walking in meditation among the mountains of Ádharbáyaján and rapidly -singing to himself these verses, with many tears and moans:— - - ”_By God, sun never rose or set but thou wert my heart’s desire and my - dream. - And I never sat conversing with any people but thou wert the subject of - my conversation in the midst of my comrades. - And I never mentioned thee in joy or sorrow but love for thee was - mingled with my breath. - And I never resolved to drink water, when I was athirst, but I saw an - image of thee in the cup. - And were I able to come I would have visited thee, crawling on my face - or walking on my head._” - -On hearing these verses he changed countenance and sat down for a while, -leaning his back against a crag, and gave up his soul. - -Footnote 195: - - εὐαγγέλιον. - -Footnote 196: - - The mountains referred to are the Jabal al-Buttam, to the east of - Samarcand. See G. Le Strange, _The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate_, p. - 467. - -Footnote 197: - - IJ. Duqqí. Qushayrí, who relates this story (184, 22), has “al-Raqqí”. - The _nisba_ Duqqí refers to Abú Bakr Muḥammad al-Dínawarí (_Nafaḥát_, - No. 229), while Raqqí probably denotes Ibráhím b. Dáwud al-Raqqí - (ibid., No. 194). - -Footnote 198: - - _Nafaḥát_, No. 207. - -Footnote 199: - - So Qushayrí. The Persian texts have القرطى or القرظى. In the - commentary on Qushayrí by Zakariyyá al-Anṣárí the name is written - al-Fúṭí. - - - SECTION. - -Some of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs have objected to the hearing of odes and poems -and to the recitation of the Koran in such a way that its words are -intoned with undue emphasis, and they have warned their disciples -against these practices and have themselves eschewed them and have -displayed the utmost zeal in this matter. Of such objectors there are -several classes, and each class has a different reason. Some have found -traditions declaring the practices in question to be unlawful and have -followed the pious Moslems of old in condemning them. They cite, for -example, the Apostle’s rebuke to Shírín, the handmaid of Ḥassán b. -Thábit, whom he forbade to sing; and `Umar’s flogging the Companions who -used to hear music; and `Alí’s finding fault with Mu`áwiya for keeping -singing-girls, and his not allowing Ḥasan to look at the Abyssinian -woman who used to sing and his calling her “the Devil’s mate”. They say, -moreover, that their chief argument for the objectionableness of music -is the fact that the Moslem community, both now and in past times, are -generally agreed in regarding it with disapproval. Some go so far as to -pronounce it absolutely unlawful, quoting Abu ´l-Ḥárith Bunání, who -relates as follows: “I was very assiduous in audition. One night a -certain person came to my cell and told me that a number of seekers of -God had assembled and were desirous to see me. I went out with him and -soon arrived at the place. They received me with extraordinary marks of -honour. An old man, round whom they had formed a circle, said to me: -‘With thy leave, some poetry will be recited.’ I assented, whereupon one -of them began to chant verses which the poets had composed on the -subject of separation (from the beloved). They all rose in sympathetic -ecstasy, uttering melodious cries and making exquisite gestures, while I -remained lost in amazement at their behaviour. They continued in this -enthusiasm until near daybreak, then the old man said, ‘O Shaykh, art -not thou curious to learn who am I and who are my companions?’ I -answered that the reverence which I felt towards him prevented me from -asking that question. ‘I myself,’ said he, ‘was once `Azrá`íl and am now -Iblís, and all the rest are my children. Two benefits accrue to me from -such concerts as this: firstly, I bewail my own separation (from God) -and remember the days of my prosperity, and secondly, I lead holy men -astray and cast them into error.’ From that time (said the narrator) I -have never had the least desire to practise audition.” - -I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, have heard the Shaykh and Imám Abu -´l-`Abbás al-Ashqání relate that one day, being in an assembly where -audition was going on, he saw naked demons dancing among the members of -the party and breathing upon them, so that they waxed hot. - -Others, again, refuse to practise audition on the ground that, if they -indulged in it, their disciples would conform with them and thereby run -a grave risk of falling into mischief and of returning from penitence to -sin and of having their passions violently roused and their virtue -corrupted. It is related that Junayd said to a recently converted -disciple: “If you wish to keep your religion safe and to maintain your -penitence, do not indulge, while you are young, in the audition which -the Ṣúfís practise; and when you grow old, do not let yourself be the -cause of guilt in others.” - -Others say that there are two classes of auditors: those who are -frivolous (_láhí_) and those who are divine (_iláhí_). The former are in -the very centre of mischief and do not shrink from it, while the latter -keep themselves remote from mischief by means of self-mortification and -austerities and spiritual renunciation of all created things. “Since we” -(so say the persons of whom I am now speaking) “belong to neither of -these two classes, it is better for us to abstain from audition and to -occupy ourselves with something that is suitable to our state.” - -Others say: “Inasmuch as audition is dangerous to the vulgar and their -belief is disturbed by our taking part in it, and inasmuch as they are -unable to attain to our degree therein and incur guilt through us, we -have pity on the vulgar and give sincere advice to the elect and from -altruistic motives decline to indulge in audition.” This is a laudable -course of action. - -Others say: “The Apostle has said, ‘It contributes to the excellence of -a man’s Islam if he leaves alone that which does not concern him.’ -Accordingly, we renounce audition as being unnecessary, for it is a -waste of time to busy one’s self with irrelevant things, and time is -precious between lovers and the Beloved.” - -Others of the elect argue that audition is hearsay and its pleasure -consists in gratification of a desire, and this is mere child’s play. -What value has hearsay when one is face to face? The act of real worth -is contemplation (of God). - -Such, in brief, are the principles of audition. - - _Chapter on_ Wajd _and_ Wujúd _and_ Tawájud. - -_Wajd_ and _wujúd_ are verbal nouns, the former meaning “grief” and the -latter “finding”. These terms are used by Ṣúfís to denote two states -which manifest themselves in audition: one state is connected with -grief, and the other with gaining the object of desire. The real sense -of “grief” is “loss of the Beloved and failure to gain the object of -desire”, while the real sense of “finding” is “attainment of the desired -object”. The difference between _ḥazan_ (sorrow) and _wajd_ is this, -that the term _ḥazan_ is applied to a selfish grief, whereas the term -_wajd_ is applied to grief for another in the way of love, albeit the -relation of otherness belongs only to the seeker of God, for God Himself -is never other than He is. It is impossible to explain the nature of -_wajd_, because _wajd_ is pain in actual vision, and pain (_alam_) -cannot be described by pen (_qalam_). _Wajd_ is a mystery between the -seeker and the Sought, which only a revelation can expound. Nor is it -possible to indicate the nature of _wujúd_, because _wujúd_ is a thrill -of emotion in contemplation of God, and emotion (_ṭarab_) cannot be -reached by investigation (_ṭalab_). _Wujúd_ is a grace bestowed by the -Beloved on the lover, a grace of which no symbol can suggest the real -nature. In my opinion, _wajd_ is a painful affection of the heart, -arising either from jest or earnest, either from sadness or gladness; -and _wujúd_ is the removal of a grief from the heart and the discovery -of the object that was its cause. He who feels _wajd_ is either agitated -by ardent longing in the state of occultation (_ḥijáb_), or calmed by -contemplation in the state of revelation (_kashf_). The Shaykhs hold -different views on the question whether _wajd_ or _wujúd_ is more -perfect. Some argue that, _wujúd_ being characteristic of novices -(_murídán_), and _wajd_ of gnostics (_`árifán_), and gnostics being more -exalted in degree than novices, it follows that _wajd_ is higher and -more perfect than _wujúd_; for (they say) everything that is capable of -being found is apprehensible, and apprehensibility is characteristic of -that which is homogeneous with something else: it involves finiteness, -whereas God is infinite; therefore, what a man finds is naught but a -feeling (_mashrabí_), but what he has not found, and in despair has -ceased to seek, is the Truth of which the only finder is God. Some, -again, declare that _wajd_ is the glowing passion of novices, while -_wujúd_ is a gift bestowed on lovers, and, since lovers are more exalted -than novices, quiet enjoyment of the gift must be more perfect than -passionate seeking. This problem cannot be solved without a story, which -I will now relate. One day Shiblí came in rapturous ecstasy to Junayd. -Seeing that Junayd was sorrowful, he asked what ailed him. Junayd said, -“He who seeks shall find.” Shiblí cried, “No; he who finds shall seek.” -This anecdote has been discussed by the Shaykhs, because Junayd was -referring to _wajd_ and Shibli to _wujúd_. I think Junayd’s view is -authoritative, for, when a man knows that his object of worship is not -of the same _genus_ as himself, his grief has no end. This topic has -been handled in the present work. The Shaykhs agree that the power of -knowledge should be greater than the power of _wajd_, since, if _wajd_ -be more powerful, the person affected by it is in a dangerous position, -whereas one in whom knowledge preponderates is secure. It behoves the -seeker in all circumstances to be a follower of knowledge and of the -religious law, for when he is overcome by _wajd_ he is deprived of -discrimination (_khiṭáb_), and is not liable to recompense for good -actions or punishment for evil, and is exempt from honour and disgrace -alike: therefore he is in the predicament of madmen, not in that of the -saints and favourites of God. A person in whom knowledge (_`ilm_) -preponderates over feeling (_ḥál_) remains in the bosom of the Divine -commands and prohibitions, and is always praised and rewarded in the -palace of glory; but a person in whom feeling preponderates over -knowledge is outside of the ordinances, and dwells, having lost the -faculty of discrimination, in his own imperfection. This is precisely -the meaning of Junayd’s words. There are two ways: one of knowledge and -one of action. Action without knowledge, although it may be good, is -ignorant and imperfect, but knowledge, even if it be unaccompanied by -action, is glorious and noble. Hence Abú Yazíd said, “The unbelief of -the magnanimous is nobler than the Islam of the covetous;” and Junayd -said, “Shiblí is intoxicated; if he became sober he would be an Imám -from whom people would benefit.” It is a well-known story that Junayd -and Muḥammad[200] b. Masrúq and Abu ´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá were together, and -the singer (_qawwál_) was chanting a verse. Junayd remained calm while -his two friends fell into a forced ecstasy (_tawájud_), and on their -asking him why he did not participate in the audition (_samá`_) he -recited the word of God: “_Thou shall think them_ (the mountains) -_motionless, but they shall pass like the clouds_” (Kor. xxvii, 90). -_Tawájud_ is “taking pains to produce wajd”, by representing to one’s -mind, for example, the bounties and evidences of God, and thinking of -union (_ittiṣál_) and wishing for the practices of holy men. Some do -this _tawájud_ in a formal manner, and imitate them by outward motions -and methodical dancing and grace of gesture: such _tawájud_ is -absolutely unlawful. Others do it in a spiritual manner, with the desire -of attaining to their condition and degree. The Apostle said, “He who -makes himself like unto a people is one of them,” and he said, “When ye -recite the Koran, weep, or if ye weep not, then endeavour to weep.” This -tradition proclaims that _tawájud_ is permissible. Hence that spiritual -director said: “I will go a thousand leagues in falsehood, that one step -of the journey may be true.” - -Footnote 200: - - Apparently a mistake for Aḥmad b. Muḥammad. See _Nafaḥát_, No. 83. - - _Chapter on Dancing, etc._ - -You must know that dancing (_raqṣ_) has no foundation either in the -religious law (of Islam) or in the path (of Ṣúfiism), because all -reasonable men agree that it is a diversion when it is in earnest, and -an impropriety (_laghwí_) when it is in jest. None of the Shaykhs has -commended it or exceeded due bounds therein, and all the traditions -cited in its favour by anthropomorphists (_ahl-i ḥashw_) are worthless. -But since ecstatic movements and the practices of those who endeavour to -induce ecstasy (_ahl-i tawájud_) resemble it, some frivolous imitators -have indulged in it immoderately and have made it a religion. I have met -with a number of common people who adopted Ṣúfiism in the belief that it -is this (dancing) and nothing more. Others have condemned it altogether. -In short, all foot-play (_páy-bází_) is bad in law and reason, by -whomsoever it is practised, and the best of mankind cannot possibly -practise it; but when the heart throbs with exhilaration and rapture -becomes intense and the agitation of ecstasy is manifested and -conventional forms are gone, that agitation (_iḍtiráb_) is neither -dancing nor foot-play nor bodily indulgence, but a dissolution of the -soul. Those who call it “dancing” are utterly wrong. It is a state that -cannot be explained in words: “without experience no knowledge.” - -_Looking at youths_ (aḥdáth). Looking at youths and associating with -them are forbidden practices, and anyone who declares this to be -allowable is an unbeliever. The traditions brought forward in this -matter are vain and foolish. I have seen ignorant persons who suspected -the Ṣúfís of the crime in question and regarded them with abhorrence, -and I observed that some have made it a religious rule (_madhhabí_). All -the Ṣúfí Shaykhs, however, have recognized the wickedness of such -practices, which the adherents of incarnation (_ḥulúliyán_)—may God -curse them!—have left as a stigma on the saints of God and the aspirants -to Ṣúfiism. But God knows best what is the truth. - - _Chapter on the Rending of Garments_ (fi ´l-kharq). - -It is a custom of the Ṣúfís to rend their garments, and they have -commonly done this in great assemblies where eminent Shaykhs were -present. I have met with some theologians who objected to this practice -and said that it is not right to tear an intact garment to pieces, and -that this is an evil. I reply that an evil of which the purpose is good -must itself be good. Anyone may cut an intact garment to pieces and sew -it together again, e.g. detach the sleeves and body (_tana_) and gusset -(_tiríz_) and collar from one another, and then restore the garment to -its original condition; and there is no difference between tearing a -garment into five pieces and tearing it into a hundred pieces. Besides, -every piece gladdens the heart of a believer, when he sews it on his -patched frock, and brings about the satisfaction of his desire. Although -the rending of garments has no foundation in Ṣúfiism and certainly ought -not to be practised in audition by anyone whose senses are perfectly -controlled—for, in that case, it is mere extravagance—nevertheless, if -the auditor be so overpowered that his sense of discrimination is lost -and he becomes unconscious, then he may be excused (for tearing his -garment to pieces); and it is allowable that all the persons present -should rend their garments in sympathy with him. There are three -circumstances in which Ṣúfís rend their garments: firstly, when a -dervish tears his own garment to pieces through rapture caused by -audition; secondly, when a number of his friends tear his garment to -pieces at the command of a spiritual director on the occasion of asking -God to pardon an offence; and thirdly, when they do the same in the -intoxication of ecstasy. The most difficult case is that of the garment -thrown off or torn in audition. It may be injured or intact. If it be -injured, it should either be sewed together and given back to its owner -or bestowed on another dervish or torn to pieces, for the sake of -gaining a blessing, and divided among the members of the party. If it be -intact, we have to consider what was the intention of the dervish who -cast it off. If he meant it for the singer, let the singer take it; and -if he meant it for the members of the party, let them have it; and if he -threw it off without any intention, the spiritual director must -determine whether it shall be given to those present and divided among -them, or be conferred on one of them, or handed to the singer. If the -dervish meant it for the singer, his companions need not throw off their -garments in sympathy, because the cast-off garment will not go to his -fellows and he will have given it voluntarily or involuntarily without -their participation. But if the garment was thrown off with the -intention that it should fall to the members of the party, or without -any intention, they should all throw off their garments in sympathy; and -when they have done this, the spiritual director ought not to bestow the -garment on the singer, but it is allowable that any lover of God among -them should sacrifice something that belongs to him and return the -garment to the dervishes, in order that it may be torn to pieces and -distributed. If a garment drops off while its owner is in a state of -rapture, the Shaykhs hold various opinions as to what ought to be done, -but the majority say that it should be given to the singer, in -accordance with the Apostolic tradition: “The spoils belong to the -slayer;” and that not to give it to the singer is to violate the -obligations imposed by Ṣúfiism. Others contend—and I prefer this -view—that, just as some theologians are of opinion that the dress of a -slain man should not be given to his slayer except by permission of the -Imám, so, here, this garment should not be given to the singer except by -command of the spiritual director. But if its owner should not wish the -spiritual director to bestow it, let no one be angry with him. - - _Chapter on the Rules of Audition._ - -The rules of audition prescribe that it should not be practised until it -comes (of its own accord), and that you must not make a habit of it, but -practise it seldom, in order that you may not cease to hold it in -reverence. It is necessary that a spiritual director should be present -during the performance, and that the place should be cleared of common -people, and that the singer should be a respectable person, and that the -heart should be emptied of worldly thoughts, and that the disposition -should not be inclined to amusement, and that every artificial effort -(_takalluf_) should be put aside. You must not exceed the proper bounds -until audition manifests its power, and when it has become powerful you -must not repel it but must follow it as it requires: if it agitates, you -must be agitated, and if it calms, you must be calm; and you must be -able to distinguish a strong natural impulse from the ardour of ecstasy -(_wajd_). The auditor must have enough perception to be capable of -receiving the Divine influence and of doing justice to it. When its -might is manifested on his heart he must not endeavour to repel it, and -when its force is broken he must not endeavour to attract it. While he -is in a state of emotion, he must neither expect anyone to help him nor -refuse anyone’s help if it be offered. And he must not disturb anyone -who is engaged in audition or interfere with him, or ponder what he -means by the verse (to which he is listening),[201] because such -behaviour is very distressing and disappointing to the person who is -trying (to hear). He must not say to the singer, “You chant sweetly;” -and if he chants unmelodiously or distresses his hearer by reciting -poetry unmetrically, he must not say to him, “Chant better!” or bear -malice towards him, but he must be unconscious of the singer’s presence -and commit him to God, who hears correctly. And if he have no part in -the audition which is being enjoyed by others, it is not proper that he -should look soberly on their intoxication, but he must keep quiet with -his own “time” (_waqt_) and establish its dominion, that the blessings -thereof may come to him. I, `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Jullábí, think it more -desirable that beginners should not be allowed to attend musical -concerts (_samá`há_), lest their natures become depraved. These concerts -are extremely dangerous and corrupting, because women on the roofs or -elsewhere look at the dervishes who are engaged in audition; and in -consequence of this the auditors have great obstacles to encounter. Or -it may happen that a young reprobate is one of the party, since some -ignorant Ṣúfís have made a religion (_madhhab_) of all this and have -flung truth to the winds. I ask pardon of God for my sins of this kind -in the past, and I implore His help, that He may preserve me both -outwardly and inwardly from contamination, and I enjoin the readers of -this book to hold it in due regard and to pray that the author may -believe to the end and be vouchsafed the vision of God (in Paradise). - -Footnote 201: - - The text of this clause is uncertain. I have followed B.’s reading, _ú - murád-i úrá badán bayt-i ú bi-na-sanjad_, but I am not sure that it - will bear the translation given above. L. has _badán niyyat-i ú_, and - J. _badán nisbat-i ú_. - - - - - INDEX. - - I. - NAMES OF PERSONS, PEOPLES, TRIBES, SECTS, AND PLACES. - - A. - - Aaron, 262. - `Abbás, uncle of the Prophet, 99. - `Abdalláh Anṣárí, 26. - —— b. Badr al-Juhaní, =81=. - —— b. Ḥanẕala, 394. - —— b. Ja`far, 319. - —— b. Khubayq. _See_ Abú Muḥammad `Abdalláh b. Khubayq. - —— b. Mas`úd al-Hudhalí, 81. - —— b. Mubárak, 95-7, 274, 303. - —— b. Rabáḥ, 73. - —— b. `Umar, 81, 191, 232. - —— b. Unays, 82. - `Abd al-Razzáq Ṣan`ání, 98. - Abel, 364. - Abraham, 40, 73, 74, 91, 115, 161, 232, 237, 252, 262, 317, 318, 326, - 327, 328, 342, 353, 365, 370, 371, 373. - —— the Station of, 326, 328. - Abu ´l-`Abbás, 173. - —— Aḥmad b. Masrúq, 146-7. - —— Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Ashqání, 150, =168=, 206, 395, 412. - —— Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Qaṣṣáb, 161, 325, 395. - —— Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Sahl al-Ámulí, 149-50. - —— b. `Alí, 191. - —— b. `Aṭa, 21, 23, 150, 158, 180, 249, 330, 395, 415. - —— Qásim b. al-Mahdí al-Sayyárí, =157-8=, =228=, =251-60=. - Abu ´l-`Abbás Qaṣṣáb. _See_ Abu ´l-`Abbás Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Qaṣṣab. - —— Sayyárí. _See_ Abu ´l-`Abbás Qásim b. al-Mahdí al-Sayyárí. - —— Shaqáni. _See_ Abu ´l-`Abbás Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Ashqání. - Abú `Abdalláh al-Abíwardí (Báwardí), 123, 124. - —— Aḥmad b. `Áṣim al-Anṭákí, 127. - —— Aḥmad b. Yaḥyá al-Jallá, 37, 134-5. - —— al-Ḥárith b. Asad al-Muḥásibí, 21, =108-9=, 127, 154, =176-83=, 225, - 249, 286, 307, 335. - —— Junaydí, 173. - —— Khafíf. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. Khafíf. - —— Khayyáṭí, 161. - —— Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Dástání, 164. - —— Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 46, _141-2_, 147, 200, =210-41=, 338. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Faḍl al-Balkhí, 16, 134, =140-1=, 208, 327. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Ḥakím, known as Muríd, 175. - —— Muhạmmad b. Ismá`íl al-Maghribí, 147. - —— Muḥammad b. Khafíf, 50, 51, 150, 151, =158=, 226, =247-51=, 290, - 323. - —— Rúdbárí, 318. - Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán Ḥátim b. `Ulwán al-Aṣamm, 13, =115=, 286, 300. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Sulamí, 81, 108, 401. - Abú Aḥmad al-Muẕaffar b. Aḥmad b. Ḥamdán, 170-1. - Abu ´l-`Alá `Abd al-Raḥím b. Aḥmad al-Sughdí, 175. - Abú `Alí al-Daqqáq. _See_ Abú `Alí Ḥasan b. Muḥammad al-Daqqáq. - —— al-Faḍl b. Muḥammad al-Fármadhí, 169. - —— al-Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ, 93, =97-100=, 103, 105, 109, 114, 127, 179, 286, - 328. - —— al-Ḥasan b. `Alí al-Júzajání, 147-8, 216. - —— Ḥasan b. Muḥammad al-Daqqáq, =162-3=, 272, 284, 370. - —— al-Júzajání. _See_ Abú `Alí al-Ḥasan b. `Alí al-Júzajání. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Qásim al-Rúdbárí, =157=, 237, 253, 293, 404, 409. - —— Qarmíní, 43. - —— al-Rúdbárí. _See_ Abú `Alí Muḥammad b. al-Qásim al-Rúdbárí. - —— Shaqíq b. Ibráhím al-Azdí, =111-12=, 115, 286, 358, 359. - —— Siyáh, 57, 205, 209, 323. - —— Thaqafí, 16. - —— Záhir, 165. - Abú `Amr Dimashqí, 38. - —— b. Nujayd, 298. - —— Qazwíní, 166. - Abú Bakr, the Caliph, 31, 32, 45, =70-2=, 102, 204, 229, 284, 304, 315. - —— Dulaf b. Jaḥdar al-Shiblí, 25, 27, 38, 39, 137, 144, 150, 151, - =155-6=, 158, 159, 195, 210, 227, 228, 249, 257, 275, 276, 284, 293, - 294, 305, 313, 315, 330, 331, 351, 353, 356, 359, 374, 376, 378, - 394, 404, 414, 415. - —— b. Fúrak, 214. - —— Muḥammad al-Dínawarí, 408. - —— Muḥammad b. Músá al-Wásiṭí, 8, =154-5=, 157, 158, 228, 251, 265, - 277. - —— Muḥammad b. `Umar al-Warráq, 17, =141=, =142-3=, 147, 229, 235, 338. - —— Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá al-Rází, 150. - Abú Bakr al-Warráq. _See_ Abú Bakr Muḥammad b. `Umar al-Warráq. - —— al-Wásiṭí. _See_ Abú Bakr Muḥammad b. Músá al-Wásiṭí. - Abú Dardá `Uwaym b. `Ámir, 81, 232. - Abú Dharr Jundab b. Junáda al-Ghifárí, 81, =177=, =178=, 344. - Abu ´l-Faḍl b. al-Asadí, 175. - —— b. al-Ḥasan, 165, 188, 227. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Khuttalí, 166-7. - Abu ´l-Fatḥ b. Sáliba, 173. - Abu ´l-Fawáris Sháh b. Shujá` al-Kirmání, 52, 123, 132, =133=, =138=, - 352. - Abu ´l-Fayḍ Dhu ´l-Nún b. Ibráhím al-Miṣrí, 36, =100-3=, 117, 136, 143, - 200, 208, 226, 233, 250, 275, 286, 298, 299, 303, 329, 332, 359, - 404. - Abú Ḥafṣ `Amr b. Sálim al-Níshápúrí al-Ḥaddádí, 41, 52, 120, =123-4=, - 132, 133, 134, 257, 276, 298. - —— al-Ḥaddád. _See_ Abú Ḥafṣ `Amr b. Sálim al-Níshápúrí al-Ḥaddádí. - Abú Ḥalím Ḥabíb b. Salím al-Rá`í, =90-1=, 109, 110. - Abú Ḥámid Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya al-Balkhí, 52, 115, =119-21=, 123, 140, - 142, 338. - —— Dústán, 52. - Abú Hamza al-Baghdádí, 144, =154=, 182, 183, 190, 249, 286. - —— al-Khurásání, 146. - Abú Ḥanífa, 46, 65, =92-5=, 98, 103, 109, 141, 286. - Abu ´l-Ḥárith Bunání, 411. - Abu ´l-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí, 21, 113, =118-19=, 131, 397. - —— Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Núrí, 26, 36, 37, 42, 43, =130-2=, 134, 137, - 144, 154, 176, =189-95=, 225, 269. - —— `Alí b. Abí `Alí al-Aswad, 174. - —— `Alí b. Aḥmad al-Khurqání, 163, 173. - —— `Alí b. Bakrán, 172, 247. - —— `Alí b. Ibráhím al-Ḥuṣrí, 38, 40, 122, 150, =160=, 166, 249, 257, - 281, 282, 378, 405. - Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Muḥammad al-Iṣfahání, =142-4=, 150, 351, 353. - —— Búshanjí (Fúshanja), 44, 299. - —— al-Khurqání. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Aḥmad al-Khurqání. - —— Muḥammad b. Ismá`íl Khayr al-Nassáj, =144-5=, 154, 155, 286, 387. - —— al-Núrí. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Núrí. - —— b. Sáliba, 104, 166, 172. - —— Sarí b. Mughallis al-Saqaṭí, =110-11=, 114, 117, 127, 128, 129, 131, - 143, 144, 154. - —— b. Sim`ún, 21. - —— Sumnún b. `Abdalláh al-Khawwáṣ, 59, =136-8=, 249, 286, 308, 312. - Abú Ḥázim al-Madaní, 91. - Abú Ḥulmán, 131, 260, 261. - Abú Hurayra, 82, 232. - Abú `Ísá `Uwaym b. Sá`ida, 82. - Abú Isḥáq Ibráhím b. Adham b. Manṣúr, 12, 46, 68, 93, =103-5=, 109, - 111, 217, 232, 286, 323. - —— Ibráhím b. Aḥmad al-Khawwáṣ, 147, =153-4=, 205, 207, 222, 223, 285, - 289, 292, 293, 339, 342, 362, 399, 410. - —— Isfará´iní, 214. - —— b. Shahriyár, 172, 173. - Abú Ja`far Ḥaddád, 249. - —— Juhaní, 396. - —— Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Ḥawárí, 173. - —— Muḥammad b. `Alí b. Ḥusayn al-Báqir, 77-8. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ḥaramí, 174. - —— Muḥammad b. al-Miṣbáḥ al-Ṣaydalání, 172, 260. - —— Turshízí, 173. - Abú Jahl, 204, 394. - Abú Kabsha, 81. - Abu ´l-Khayr Aqṭa`, 304. - Abú Lubába b `Abd al-Mundhir, 81. - Abu ´l-Maḥásin, 137, 233. - Abú Maḥfúẕ Ma`rúf b. Fírúz al-Karkhí, 110, =113-15=, 117. - Abú Ma`mar, of Iṣfahán, 56. - Abu ´l-Marthad Kinána b. al-Ḥusayn al-`Adawí, 81. - Abú Muḥammad `Abdalláh b. Khubayq, 128. - —— Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Jurayrí, =148-9=, 150, 158, 249, 286, 408. - —— Bángharí, 174, 323. - —— Ja`far b. Muḥammad Ṣádiq, 78-80. - —— Ja`far b. Nuṣayr al-Khuldí, 155, =156-7=, 193. - —— Murta`ish, 39, 42, 43, 53, 54, 155. - —— Ruwaym b. Aḥmad, 21, 25, 134, =135-6=, 194 - —— Sahl b. `Abdalláh al-Tustarí, 13, =139-40=, 148, 151, 189, - =195-210=, 225, 233, 249, 257, 283, 286, 296, 302, 311, 318, 322, - 330, 338, 348, 349, 363. - Abú Músá al-Ash`arí, 399. - Abú Muslim, 358. - —— Fáris b. Ghálib al-Fárisí, 165, =172=, 319, 346, 408. - Abú Naṣr al-Sarráj, 255, 323, 341. - Abú Nuwás, 8, 406. - Abu ´l-Qásim, of Merv, 233. - —— `Abd al-Karím b. Hawázin al-Qushayrí, 24, 114, 123, 150, 163, - =167-8=, 177, 227, 306, 311, 334, 408. - —— `Alí b. `Abdalláh al-Gurgání, 49, 150, =169-70=, 206, 234, 339. - —— al-Gurgání. _See_ Abu ´l-Qásim `Alí b. `Abdalláh al-Gurgání. - —— al-Ḥakím, 338. - —— Ibráhím b. Muḥammad b. Maḥmúd al-Naṣrábádí, 150, =159-60=, 162. - —— Junayd, 5, 23, 27, 39, 57, 74, 103, =106=, 110, 115, 118, 123, 124, - =128-30=, =131=, 132, 134, 135, 137, 138, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, - 149, 150, 151, 154, 156, 157, 166, 182, =185-9=, 194, 200, 206, 208, - 216, 225, 228, 249, 250, 251, 260, 281, 282, 284, 286, 293, 296, - 297, 299, 303, 307, 320, 328, 331, 338, 339, 343, 351, 352, 355, - 356, 359, 368, 387, 388, 394, 408, 409, 412, 414, 415. - Abu ´l-Qásim Naṣrábádí. _See_ Abú ´l-Qásim Ibráhím b. Muḥammad b. - Maḥmúd al-Naṣrábádí. - —— Qushayrí. _See_ Abu ´l-Qásim `Abd al-Karím b. Hawázin al-Qushayrí. - —— Suddí, 172. - Abú Qatáda, 73. - Abú Sahl Ṣu`lúkí, 272, 284, 319. - Abú Sa`íd, the Carmathian, 150. - —— b. Abi ´l-Khayr Faḍlalláh b. Muḥammad al-Mayhaní, 21, 22, 119, 150, - 163, =164-6=, 170, 218, 235, 250, 318, 346. - —— Aḥmad b. `Ísá. al-Kharráz, 138, =143=, 146, 149, 232, 233, =241-6=, - 368, 374. - —— al-Hujwírí, 6. - —— al-Kharráz. _See_ Abú Sa`íd Aḥmad b. `Ísá. al-Kharráz. - —— al-Khudrí, 396. - Abú Ṣáliḥ Ḥamdún b. Aḥmad b. `Umára al-Qaṣṣár, 66, =125-6=, =183-4=, - 195, 225, 249. - Abu ´l-Sarí Manṣúr b. `Ammár, 126-7. - Abú Sulaymán `Abd al-Raḥmán b. `Aṭiyya al-Dárání, 13, =112-13=, 114, - 118, 200, 225, 286. - —— al-Dárání. _See_ Abú Sulaymán `Abd al-Raḥmán b. `Aṭiyya al-Dárání. - —— Dáwud b. Nuṣayr al-Ṭá´í, 46, 79, 93, 95, =109-10=, 114, 286, 350. - Abú Ṭáhir Ḥaramí, 64, 292. - —— Makshúf, 173. - Abú Ṭalḥa al-Málikí, 322. - Abú Ṭálib, father of the Caliph `Alí, 269. - Abú Ṭálib, Shaykh, 173. - Abú Thawr Ibráhím b. Khálid, 125. - Abú Turáb `Askar b. al-Ḥusayn al-Nakhshabí, =121-2=, 125, 138, 143, - 146. - Abú `Ubayda b. al-Jarráḥ, 81. - Abú `Uthmán al-Ḥírí. _See_ Abú `Uthmán Sa`íd b. Ismá`íl al-Ḥírí. - Abú `Uthmán al-Maghribí. _See_ Abú `Uthmán Sa`íd b. Sallám al-Maghribí. - —— Sa`íd b. Ismá`íl al-Ḥírí, =132-4=, 138, 140, 180, 181, 298. - —— Sa`íd b. Sallám al-Maghribí, =158-9=, 186, 217. - Abú Ya`qúb Aqṭa`, 150. - —— Nahrajúrí, 150, 158, 245. - —— Yúsuf b. al-Ḥusayn al-Rází, 134, =136=. - Abu ´l-Yaqẕán `Ammár b. Yásir, 81. - Abu ´l-Yasar Ka`b b. `Amr, 82. - Abú Yazíd Ṭayfúr b. `Ísá al-Bisṭámí, 17, 52, 65, 68, =106-8=, 120, 176, - =184-8=, 200, 217, 226, 238, 250, 254, 257, 258, 275, 286, 291, 293, - 311, 327, 331, 332, 335, 347, 351, 359, 375, 388, 415. - Abú Yúsuf, the Cadi, 110, 286. - Abú Zakariyyá Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází, 17, 21, 25, 94, 120, =122-3=, - 132, 133, 187, 226, 312, 337, 360. - Adam, 63, 109, 124, 130, 144, 159, 160, 208, 239, 240, 249, 252, 262, - 297, 324, 353, 355, 357, 363, 364, 371, 383. - Ádharbáyaján, 57, 173, 410. - Adíb Kamandí (Kumandí), 173, 335. - Ahl-i ḥadíth, 401. - Ahl-i ra´y, 401. - Ahl-i Ṣuffa, 80, =81-2=, 344. - _See_ Aṣḥáb-i Ṣuffa. - Aḥmad, Khwája, 170. - —— b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. Abi ´l-Ḥawárí. - —— b. `Áṣim al-Anṭákí. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Aḥmad b. `Áṣim al-Anṭákí. - —— Bukhárí, 321. - —— b. Fátik, 66. - —— Ḥammádí, 174, 193, 364. - —— b. Ḥanbal, 116, =117-18=, 286. - —— b. Ḥarb, 365, 366. - —— Íláqí, =174=. - —— b. Khaḍrúya. _See_ Abú Ḥámid Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya al-Balkhí. - —— b. Masrúq. _See_ Abu ´l-`Abbás Aḥmad b. Masrúq. - Aḥmad Najjár Samarqandí, 174, 353. - Ahriman, 280. - `Á´isha, 42, 45, 82, 320, 331, 401. - Akhí Zanjání, 173. - `Alá b. al-Ḥaḍramí, 232. - `Alí b. Abí Ṭálib, 45, =74=, 83, 84, 152, 192, 269, 300, 315, 336, 361, - 411. - `Alí Aṣghar, 76. - —— b. Bakkár, 323. - —— b. Bundár al-Ṣayrafí, 16, 41. - —— b. Ḥusayn b. `Alí, called Zayn al-`Ábidín, 76-7. - —— b. al-Ḥusayn al-Sírgání, 173. - —— b. Isḥáq, 174. - —— b. Khashram, 105. - —— b. Músá al-Riḍá, 114. - —— Naṣrábádí, 125. - —— b. Sahl al-Iṣfahání. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Muḥammad - al-Iṣfahání. - `Amr b. al-Sharíd, 397. - —— b. `Uthmán al-Makkí, 91, =138-9=, 143, 150, 151, 189, 309. - Ámul, 162. - Anas b. Málik, 12. - Anthropomorphists, 117, 118, 131, 213, 236, 289, 316. - _See_ Ḥashwiyya. - `Arafát, 326, 328. - `Árif, Khwája, 174. - Áṣaf b. Barkhiyá, 230. - Aṣḥáb al-kahf, 230. - _See_ Cave, men of the. - Aṣḥáb-i Ṣuffa, 30. - _See_ Ahl-i Ṣuffa. - Ashlátak, 234. - `Aṭṭár, Faríd al-Dín, 51. - Awḥad Qaswarat b. Muḥammad al-Jardízí, 175. - `Azrá´íl, 412. - - B. - - Báb al-Ṭáq, 57. - —— `Umar, 234. - Badr, 45, 255. - —— al-Dín, 173. - Baghdád, 53, 57, 96, 108, 110, 117, 123, 129, 137, 150, 151, 152, 154, - 323, 356, 358, 378, 409. - Bahshamís, a sect of the Mu`tazilites, 295. - Bal`am, 273. - Balkh, 103, 112, 115, 119, 120, 123, 140, 286. - Bániyás, 167. - Banú Shayba, gate of the, 94. - —— Umayya, 78. - Báqir. _See_ Abú Ja`far Muḥammad b. `Alí b. Ḥusayn al-Báqir. - Barṣíṣá, 273. - Baṣra, 13, 84, 121, 131, 408, 409. - Báṭiniyán, 263. - Batúl, 79. - Báward, 97. - Báyazíd al-Bisṭámí. _See_ Abú Yazíd Ṭayfúr b. `Ísá al-Bisṭámí. - Bayḍá, 150. - Bayḍáwí, 273, 348. - Bayt al-Jinn, 167, 234. - —— al-sibá`, at Tustar, 233. - Bilál b. Rabáḥ, 81, 94, 301, 302. - Bilqís, 230. - Bishr b. al-Ḥárith al-Ḥáfí, 25, 93, =105-6=, 117, 127, 143, 179, 286. - Bisṭám, 106, 164, 286. - Brahmans, 236, 271. - Bukhárá, 353. - Bundár b. al-Ḥusayn, 249. - Buráq, 380. - Buzurjmihr, 401. - - C. - - Cain, 364. - Carmathians, 263, 383. - Cave, the men of the, 230, 354. - Chahár Ṭáq, 358. - China, 11. - Chinese, 263. - Christians, 244, 263. - - D. - - Dajjál, 224. - Damascus, 76, 94, 131, 167, 234, 260, 343. - Darráj, 408. - al-Dástání. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Dástání. - David, 52, 185, 197, 255, 320, 329, 352, 371, 399, 402, 403. - Dáwud of Iṣfahán, 135. - —— al-Ṭá´í. _See_ Abú Sulaymán Dáwud b. Nuṣayr al-Ṭá´í. - Dhahabí, 118. - Dhu ´l-Nún. _See_ Abu ´l-Fayḍ Dhu ´l-Nún b. Ibráhím al-Miṣrí. - Dínár, 89. - Duqqí, 408. - - E. - - Egypt, 32, 100, 101, 143, 233, 332, 404. - Euphrates, the, 84, 90, 234. - Eve, 353. - - F. - - Faḍl b. Rabí`, 98, 100. - Faraj, Shaykh, 173. - Farazdaq, 77. - Farghána, 234, 235. - Fáris, 260, 261. - Fárisís, 131, 260. - Fárs, 51, 151, 172. - Fáṭima, daughter of the Prophet, 79. - —— wife of Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya, 119, 120. - —— wife of Báb `Umar, 234, 235. - Fayd, 137. - Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ. _See_ Abú `Alí al-Fuḍayl b. `Iyáḍ. - - G. - - Gabriel, 73, 106, 237, 240, 241, 254, 304, 305, 320, 335, 380, 408. - Ghazna, 53, 91, 94, 175. - Ghulám al-Khalíl, 137, 190. - Goliath, 185, 255. - - H. - - Ḥabíb, name of Muḥammad, 317. - —— al-`Ajamí, 88-9. - —— al-Rá`í. _See_ Abú Ḥalím Ḥabíb b. Salím al-Rá`í. - Ḥafṣ Miṣṣíṣí, 323. - Ḥafṣa, 320. - Hagar, 74, 365. - Ḥajjáj, 88. - —— b. `Umar al-Aslamí, 82. - Ḥakím b. `Alí b. al-Ḥusayn al-Sírgání, 173. - Ḥakímís, 130, 141, =210-41=. - Ḥalláj. _See_ Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr al-Ḥalláj. - Ḥallájís, 131, 152, 260. - Ḥamdún Qaṣṣár. _See_ Abú Ṣáliḥ Ḥamdún b. Aḥmad b. `Umára al-Qaṣṣár. - Ḥamdúnís, 195. - _See_ Qaṣṣárís. - Harim b. Ḥayyán, 45, =84-5=. - Ḥárith al-Muḥásibí. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh al-Ḥárith b. Asad al-Muḥásibí. - Ḥáritha, 33, 227, 229. - Hárún al-Rashíd, 98, 99, 100. - Hárút, 364. - Ḥasan b. `Alí, 73, 75-6, 319, 411. - —— of Baṣra, 45, 46, 75, =86-7=, 88, 89, 232, 362. - —— Mu´addib, 163. - Ḥashwiyya, ḥashwiyán, 213, 236, 244, 289. - _See_ Anthropomorphists. - Ḥassán b. Thábit, 411. - Ḥátim al-Aṣamm. _See_ Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán Ḥátim b. `Ulwán al-Aṣamm. - —— Ṭá´í, 318. - Herát, 26. - Ḥijáz, the, 65, 96, 137, 319. - Ḥíra quarter of Níshápúr, 183. - Hishám b. `Abd al-Malik, 77. - Húd, 396. - Hudhayfa al-Yamání, 81. - Ḥulmánís, 131, 260. - Ḥulúlís, 131, 183, =260-6=, 416. - Ḥulwán, 319. - Ḥusayn b. `Alí, =76=, 177, 178. - —— b. Faḍl, 286. - —— b. Manṣúr al-Ḥalláj, 66, =150-3=, 158, 172, 189, 205, 226, 249, 259, - 260, 281, 285, 303, 311, 344. - —— Simnán, Khwája, 173. - Ḥuṣrí. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Ibráhím al-Ḥuṣrí. - - I. - - Ibáḥatís, 131. - Iblís, 63, 129, 130, 208, 239, 252, 268, 273, 351, 357, 402, 403, 412. - Ibn `Abbás, 81, 331, 351. - —— `Aṭá. _See_ Abu ´l-`Abbás b. `Aṭá. - —— al-Athír, 358. - —— al-Jallá. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Aḥmad b. Yaḥyá al-Jallá. - —— Khallikán, 92, 98, 125, 214, 358, 396. - —— Mas`úd, 396. - —— al-Mu`allá, 343, 344. - —— al-Qúṭí, 408. - —— `Umar. _See_ `Abdalláh b. `Umar. - Ibráhím b. Adham. _See_ Abú Isḥáq Ibráhím b. Adham b. Manṣúr. - —— b. Dáwud al-Raqqí, 408. - —— Khawwáṣ. _See_ Abú Isḥáq Ibráhím b. Aḥmad al-Khawwáṣ. - —— Máristání, 149. - —— Nakha`í, 396. - —— Raqqí, 233. - —— b. Sa`d `Alawí, 374. - —— Samarqandí, 147. - —— b. Shaybán, 246. - —— Shaybáni, 147. - `Imrán, 179. - India, 243, 400, 407. - Indians, 263. - Iram, 224. - `Iráq, 110, 116, 126, 140, 172, 177, 249, 260, 345, 400. - Iṣfahán, 138. - Isḥáq of Mawṣil, 399. - Ishmael, 40, 74, 252, 353. - Ismá`íl al-Sháshí, 175. - Ismá`ílís, 263. - Israelites, 192. - —— desert of the, 229. - - J. - - Jabal al-Buttam, 408. - Jabarites, 75. - Jacob, 258, 310, 370. - Ja`far al-Khuldí. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Ja`far b. Nuṣayr al-Khuldí. - —— Ṣádiq. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Ja`far b. Muḥammad Ṣádiq. - Jáḥiẕ, 8. - Jerusalem, 101, 215. - Jesus, 40, 50, 232, 244, 262, 273, 371, 375, 376. - Jews, 261. - Jidda, 233. - Job, 24, 40, 251. - John the Baptist, 40, 371, 375, 376. - _See_ Yaḥyá b. Zakariyyá. - Joseph, 32, 258, 262, 310, 335, 365, 395. - Junayd. _See_ Abu ´l-Qásim Junayd. - Junaydís, 130, =185-9=, 195. - Jurayj, 232. - Jurayrí. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Jurayrí. - Jurjání, 373. - - K. - - Ka`ba, the, 12, 121, 141, 239, 240, 258, 300, 326, 327, 329, 337, 397. - Kamand (Kumand), 335. - Karbalá, 76. - Karkh, 356, 378. - Kattání, 325. - Khabbáb b. al-Aratt, 81. - Khaḍir. _See_ Khiḍr. - Khafífís, 130, =247-51=. - Khálid b. Walíd, 232. - Khalíl, 73, 91, 317. - _See_ Abraham. - Khárijites, 286. - Kharráz. _See_ Abú Sa`íd Aḥmad b. `Ísá al-Kharráz. - Kharrázís, 130, =241-6=. - Khayr al-Nassáj. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Muḥammad b. Ismá`íl Khayr - al-Nassáj. - Khazá´iní, Imám, 227. - Khiḍr, 103, 141, 142, 153, 290, 342. - Khubayb, 221. - Khurásán, 69, 115, 121, 123, 126, 134, 140, 146, 151, 159, 173, 174, - 177, 236, 335, 400. - Khurqán, 163. - Khurqání. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan `Alí b. Aḥmad al-Khurqání. - Khusraw. _See_ Núshírwán. - al-Khuttalí. _See_ Abu ´l-Faḍl Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Khuttalí. - Khúzistán, 151. - Kirmán, 51, 123, 132, 133, 173. - Kish, 173. - Korah, 347. - Kúfa, 46, 75, 84, 98, 104, 118, 145, 205, 339, 360, 396. - Kumish, 173. - - L. - - Labíd, 397. - Laháwur, 91. - Laylá, 258, 353. - Lukám, Mount, 166. - Luqmán of Sarakhs, 188. - - M. - - Magians, 280, 404. - Maḥmúd, Khwája, 174. - Majnún, 258, 353. - Malámatís, 50, =62-9=. - Málik, the Imám, 116, 286. - Málik b. Dínár, 46, =89-90=, 337. - Mání (Manes), 407. - Manichæans, 31. - Manṣúr, the Caliph, 93. - —— b. `Ammár. _See_ Abu ´l-Sarí Manṣúr b. `Ammár. - Maqám-i Ibráhím, 326. - Maqdisí, 260. - Ma`rúf Karkhí. _See_ Abú Maḥfúẕ Ma`rúf b. Fírúz al-Karkhí. - Márút, 364. - Marv al-Rúd, 50. - Marwa, 326, 328. - Marwán b. Mu`áwiya, 118. - Mary, the Virgin, 230, 244. - Mash`ar al-Ḥarám, 326. - Mas`úd, spiritual director, 323. - —— b. Rabí` al-Fárisí, 81. - Mayhana, 164, 235. - Mecca, 77, 83, 84, 87, 91, 94, 96, 98, 107, 145, 158, 186, 192, 215, - 221, 258, 290, 292, 326, 327, 329, 339, 340, 372, 378. - Medína, 116, 221. - Merv, 52, 96, 97, 154, 158, 174, 205, 209, 251, 323, 401. - Michael, 241. - Mihna. _See_ Mayhana. - Miná, 326, 328, 329, 340. - Miqdád b. al-Aswad, 81. - Mis`ar b. Kidám, 93. - Misṭaḥ b. Uthátha b. `Abbád, 82. - Moses, 40, 41, 74, 76, 90, 101, 167, 179, 230, 262, 296, 297, 324, 332, - 371, 372, 380, 381. - Mu`ádh b. al-Ḥárith, 82. - Mu`áwiya, the Caliph, 411. - Mu´ayyad, 53. - Muḍar, 83. - Mughíra b. Shu`ba, 337. - Muhájirín, 19, 396. - Muḥammad, the Prophet, 1, 4, 8, 11, 15, 19, 31, 32, 33, 36, 40, 41, 42, - 44, 45, 46, 52, 53, 62, 70, 72, 76, 79, 80, 81,82, 83, 90, 91, 92, - 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 116, 117, 127, 129, 140, 141, 158, - 185, 186, 192, 200, 202, 209, 211, 213, 215, 221, 222, 223, 225, - 229, 230, 231, 232, 236, 238, 254, 255, 258, 259, 261, 269, 283, - 287, 312, 315, 317, 318, 319, 324, 330, 331, 332, 333, 336, 344, - 346, 348, 353, 358, 365, 371, 372, 373, 380, 381, 394, 396, 397, - 401, 408, 411. - _See_ Traditions of the Prophet. - Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Muqrí, 41. - —— b. `Alí Ḥakím. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí. - —— b. `Alí b. al-Ḥusayn b. `Alí b. Abí Ṭálib, 38. - —— b. Faḍl al-Balkhí. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. al-Faḍl - al-Balkhí. - —— Ḥakím. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí. - —— b. al-Ḥasan, 110, 116, 286. - —— b. al-Ḥusayn al-`Alawí, 205. - —— b. Ka`b al-Quraẕí, 99. - —— b. Khafíf. _See_ Abú `Abdalláh Muḥammad b. Khafíf. - —— Ma`shúq, 174. - —— b. Masrúq, 415. - —— b. Salama, 173. - —— b. Sírín, 92. - —— b. `Ulyán, 206. - —— b. Wási`, 91-2, 276, 330. - —— b. Zakariyyá, 51. - _See_ Abú Bakr Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá al-Rází. - Muḥásibís, 130, =176-83=, 371. - Mujassima, 236. - Múltán, 91. - Muqaddasí, 260. - Muríd, 175. - Murjites, 66, 67. - Murta`ish. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Murta`ish. - Mushabbiha, 236. - Muslim Maghribí, 233, 234. - Muṣṭafá, 99, 368. - _See_ Muḥammad, the Prophet. - Mutanabbí, 8. - Mu`tazilites, 6, 106, 117, 118, 213, 215, 239, 253, 268, 280, 286, 295, - 393. - Muẕaffar, Khwája. _See_ Abú Aḥmad al-Muẕaffar b. Aḥmad b. Ḥamdán. - —— Kirmánsháhí Qarmíní, 43. - Muzayyin the Elder, 257. - Muzdalifa, 326, 328. - - N. - - Naḍr b. al-Ḥárith, 261, 394. - Náfi`, 191. - Najd, 83. - Nasá, 206, 251. - Nestorians, 244. - Nibájí, 138. - Nile, the river, 101, 211, 212. - Nimrod, 73, 224, 327. - Níshápúr, 16, 41, 120, 123, 124, 125, 133, 134, 159, 165, 170, 174, - 183, 272, 318, 365. - Noah, 371. - Núḥ, a brigand, 183. - Núrí. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Núrí. - Núrís, 130, 189-95. - Núshírwán, 401. - - O. - - Oxus, the river, 142, 235. - - P. - - Pádisháh-i Tá´ib, 173. - Pharaoh, 76, 102, 223, 224, 347. - Prophet, the House of the, 75. - Purg, 51. - - Q. - - Qadarites, 6, 66, 67, 75. - Qarámiṭa, 383. _See_ Carmathians. - Qaran, 83, 84. - Qárún, 347. - Qaṣṣárís, 130, =183-4=. - _See_ Ḥamdúnís and Malámatís. - Qays of the Banú `Ámir, 353. - Quhistán, 173. - Quraysh, 261, 394. - Qushayrí. _See_ Abu ´l-Qásim `Abd al-Karím b. Hawázin al-Qushayrí. - - R. - - Rabí`a, 83. - Rábi`a `Adawiyya, 358. - Ráfiḍís, 152. - Rajá b. Ḥayát, 99. - Ramla, 343. - Raqqám, 190. - Raqqí, 408. - Rayy, 65, 120, 123, 133, 293. - Riḍwán, 232. - Rúm, 207, 222, 244, 407. - Ruṣáfa mosque, 154. - Ruwaym. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Ruwaym b. Aḥmad. - - S. - - Ṣábians, 222. - Ṣafá, 326, 328. - Ṣafwán b. Bayḍá, 81. - Sahl b. `Abdalláh al-Tustarí. _See_ Abú Muḥammad Sahl b. `Abdalláh - al-Tustarí. - Sahlagí, Shaykh, 164, 173. - Sahlís, 130, =195-210=, 296. - Sá´ib b. Khallád, 82. - Sa`íd b. Abí Sa`íd al-`Ayyár, 175. - —— b. al-Musayyib, 87. - Sálár-i Ṭabarí, 175. - Ṣáliḥ Murrí, 396. - Sálim, 81. - —— b. `Abdalláh, 99. - —— b. `Umayr b. Thábit, 82. - Sálimís, 131. - Salmán al-Fárisí, 45, 81, 90, 232, 344. - Samarcand, 140, 408. - Sámarrá, 145, 359. - Sarah, 365. - Sarakhs, 164, 165, 174, 193, 227, 364. - Sarí al-Saqaṭí. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Sarí Mughallis al-Saqaṭí. - Sayyárís, 130, =251-60=. - Shaddád, 224. - al-Sháfi`í, =116=, 125, 286, 347. - Sháh b. Shujá`. _See_ Abu ´l-Fawáris Sháh b. Shujá` al-Kirmání. - Shahristání, 131, 295. - Shaqíq of Balkh. _See_ Abú `Alí Shaqíq b. Ibráhím al-Azdí. - Sha`rání, 396. - Shiblí. _See_ Abú Bakr Dulaf b. Jaḥdar al-Shiblí. - Shí`ites, 152, 263, 383, 404. - Shíráz, 247. - Shírín, 411. - Shu`ayb, 74. - Shúníziyya mosque, 123, 323. - Shurayḥ, 93, 94. - Ṣiffín, 84. - Sinai, Mount, 230, 372, 381. - Ṣiráṭ, 18, 107, 199. - Sírawání, 166. - Solomon, 24, 230. - Sophists, 15. - Súfisṭá´iyán, 15. - Sufyán Thawrí, 46, 93, 103, 128, 293. - —— b. `Uyayna, 98, 118. - Ṣuhayb b. Sinán, 81. - Sulaymán Rá`í, 116. - Sumnún al-Muḥibb. _See_ Abu ´l-Ḥasan Sumnún b. `Abdalláh al-Khawwáṣ. - Syria, 94, 118, 172. - - T. - - Ṭábarání, 227. - Ṭabaristán, 161, 163, 173. - al-Tábi`ún, 83, 88. - Ṭayfúrís, 130, =184-8=, 189. - Thábit b. Wadí`at, 82. - Tha`laba, 348. - Thawbán, 82. - —— name of Dhu ´l-Nún, 100. - Tibetans, 263. - Tigris, 180, 408. - Tíh-i Baní Isrá´íl, 229. - Tirmidh, 17, 141, 229. - Transoxania, 50, 67, 161, 174, 288, 364. - Turkistán, 407. - Ṭús, 49, 165, 166, 234. - Tustar, 195, 225, 233. - - U. - - Ubulla, 408. - Uḥud, 192. - `Ukkásha b. Miḥṣan, 81. - `Umar b. `Abd al-`Azíz, 99. - —— b. al-Khaṭṭáb, the Caliph, 31, 45, 70, =72-3=, 76, 81, 83, 208, 211, - 212, 232, 254, 304, 361, 394, 401, 411. - Umayya b. Abi ´l-Ṣalt, 397. - Umm Kulthúm, 361. - `Utba b. Ghazwán, 81. - —— al-Ghulám, 180. - —— b. Mas`úd, 81. - —— b. Rabí`a, 394. - `Uthmán, the Caliph, 65, =73-4=. - Uways al-Qaraní, 45, =83-4=. - Uzkand, 234. - - W. - - Wahb b. Ma`qal, 82. - - Y. - - Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází. _See_ Abú Zakariyyá Yaḥyá b. Mu`ádh al-Rází. - Yaḥyá b. Zakariyyá, 122. - _See_ John the Baptist. - Yazdán, 280. - Yazíd b. Mu`áwiya, 76. - Yúsuf, 32, 136. - _See_ Joseph. - —— b. al-Ḥusayn. _See_ Abú Ya`qúb Yúsuf b. al-Ḥusayn al-Rází. - - Z. - - Zacharias, 40, 230. - Ẓáhirite school of law, 135. - Zá´ida, 232. - Zakariyyá al-Anṣárí, 408. - Zakí b. al-`Alá, 172. - Zayd b. al-Khaṭṭáb, 81. - Zayn al-`Ábidín, 76. - Zuhrí, 71. - Zulaykhá, 136, 310, 335, 365. - Zurára b. Abí Awfá, 396. - - - II. - SUBJECTS, ORIENTAL WORDS, AND TECHNICAL TERMS. - -Arabic and Persian words are printed in italics. In their arrangement no -account is taken of the definite article _al_. - - A. - - _`abá_, 48, 52, 133. - _abad_, 386. - _Abdál_, 214. - _Abrár_, 214. - Actions, the Divine, 14. - _adab_, _ádáb_, 334, 341. - _ádáb-i ẕáhir_, 292. - _`adam_, 28, 168, 253, 373. - _ádamiyyat_, 246, 254. - _`adl_, 387. - _áfát_, 281. - _aghyár_, 31. - _aḥdáth_, 416. - _ahl-i dargáh_, 169. - —— _ḥaqá´iq_, 225. - —— _ḥaqíqat_, 25. - —— _ḥaqq_, 62, 402. - —— _ḥashw_, 316, 416. - —— _himmat_, 167. - —— _`ibárat_, 59. - _ahl al-`ilm_, 253. - _ahl-i ma`ní_, 403. - —— _maqámát_, 61. - —— _minan_, 265. - —— _mu`ámalat_, 225. - —— _rusúm_, 172. - —— _wafá_, 265. - _aḥrár_, 43. - _aḥwál_, 33, 110, 157, 177. - See _ḥál_ and States of Mystics. - _á´ib_, 391. - _`ajz_, 276. - _akhláq_, 42. - _Akhyár_, 214. - _`alá´iq_, 165, 384. - _`álam_, 385, 386. - _álat-i mawsúm_, 199. - _`álim_, 382, 383. - _`álim-i rabbání_, 151. - Alms, 314-17. - _amír_, 388. - _amn_, 216. - _anfás_, 164. - _angalyún_, 407. - Angels, 239-41, 302, 303, 351. - Annihilation, 20, 23, 25, 28, 36, 37, 40, 48, =58-60=, 95, 170, 171, - 205, =241-6=. - See _faná_. - _`aql_, 309. - _`araḍ_, 261, 264, 386. - _arbáb-i aḥwál_, 302. - —— _ḥál_, 32. - —— _laṭá´if_, 353. - —— _ma`ání_, 38, 59. - _`árif_, 79, 100, 265, 267, 382-3, 414. - _`arsh_, 33. - Ascension of Báyazíd, 238. - —— of Muḥammad, 186, 215, 240, 259, 262, 277, 283, 302, 330, 331, 336, - 368. - —— of Prophets and Saints, 238. - Asceticism, 17, 37, 86. - _See_ Mortification and _zuhd_. - Asking, rules in, 357-60. - _asrár_, 255. - Association. _See_ Companionship. - —— with the wicked, 86. - Attributes, the Divine, 12, 14, 21, 36, 252, 253, 279, 288. - _awbat_, 295. - _awliyá_, 210, 211, 212, 215, 295. - _See_ Saints. - _awrád_, 303. - _Awtád_, 146, 214, 228, 234. - _awwáb_, 295. - _áyát_, 373. - _`ayyár_, 100. - _`ayn_, 149, 171, 196, 206. - _`ayn al-yaqí_n, 381-2. - _azal_, 386. - _azaliyyat_, 238. - - B. - - _Báb_, a title given to Ṣúfí Shaykhs, =234=. - _badhl-i rúḥ_, 194. - _balá_, 388, 389. - _baqá_, 23, 58, 59, 73, 143, 170, 171, 185, 205, =241-6=, 253, 266, - 373, 377, 380. - _báqí_, 26, 32, 85, 311. - _bashariyyat_, 32, 159, 217, 226, 237. - _basṭ_, 181, =374-6=. - _bayán_, 356, 373. - _bégána_, 200, 222. - _bégánagí_, 24, 333, 377. - Begging, 105. - —— rules in, 357, 360. - _birsám_, 167. - Blame, the doctrine of, 62-9, 183-4. - See _malámat_, Malámatís, Qaṣṣárís. - Blue garments, worn by Ṣúfís, 53. - - C. - - Cave, story of the, 231. - Celibacy, 360-6. - _chigúnagí_, 374. - _chilla_, 51, 324. - Companionship, 189, 190, =334-45=. - See _ṣuḥbat_. - Contemplation, 70, 91, 92, 105, 165, 171, =201-5=, 300, 327, =329-33=, - 346. - See _musháhadat_. - Covetousness, 128, 136, 217. - - D. - - _dahr_, =244=. - _dahriyán_, 281. - Daily bread, 106, 157. - Dancing, 416. - _dánishmand_, 382. - _ḍarúrí_, 261, 271. - _da`wá_, 274. - _dawá al-misk_, 8. - Dervishes, 142, 143, 146, 165. - See _faqír_ and _fuqará_. - —— resident, 340-5. - —— travelling, 340, 345-7. - _dhát_, 5, 386. - _dhawq_, 58, 392. - _dhikr_, 87, 126, 128, 154, 155, 242, 254, 300, 301, 307, 371, 376. - _dídár_, 175. - _ḍiddán_, 386. - _dil_, 33, 144, 309. - Directors, spiritual, 55-7, 128, 129, 133, 134, 166, 169, 301, 353, - 354, 357, 387, 408, 418, 419. - Divines, 116, 142, 143, 213. - See _`ulamá_. - —— disagreement of the, 106, 176. - Dreams, 88, 91, 92, 93, 94, 100, 116, 129, 138, 145, 218, 282, 321, - 358, 359. - Dualism, 259, 273, 280. - _dústán_, 265, 382. - - E. - - Eating, rules in, 347-9. - Ecstasy, 138, 152, 167. - _See_ Intoxication and _samá`_ and _wajd_. - Essence, the Divine, 14. - - F. - - _faḍl_, 201. - _fá`il_, 237. - Faith, 225, =286-90=. - _falakiyán_, 280. - _faná_, 28, 37, 58, 73, 143, 168, 170, 185, 205, =241-6=, 253, 266, - 373, 377, 380. - _See_ Annihilation. - _faná-yi `ayn_, 244. - —— _kullí_, 37. - —— _kulliyyat_, 243. - _fání_, 26, 32, 33, 311. - _fáqa_, 325. - _faqd_, 368. - _faqír_, 20, 59, 60, 165, 309. - _See_ Dervishes. - _faqr_, 36, 60, 109, 189, 309, 364. - _See_ Poverty. - _farághat_, 109. - _fardániyyat_, 281. - Fasting, 36, 52, 201, =320-5=. - _fawá´id_, 384, 385. - Fear, 112, 113, 122, 128. - _fikrat_, 239. - _fi`l_, 237, 256. - Free will, 17, 288. - _See_ Predestination. - Frocks, patched, worn by Ṣúfís, 45-57. - See _muraqqa`át_. - _fuqará_, 19, 110, 126, 142, 165. - _furqat_, 26. - _futúḥ_, 355. - - G. - - Garments, the rending of, 56, 57, =417-18=. - Generosity, 114, 123, 124, 183, 184, =317-19=. - _ghaflat_, 17, 155, 187, 242. - _ghalabat_, 184, 226. - _ghaná._ See _ghiná_. - _gharíb_, 146. - _Ghawth_, 214. - _ghaybat_, 155, 178, =248-51=, 256, 301, 370, 380, 405. - _ghayn_, 5, 391. - _ghayr_, 62, 105, 237, 274. - _ghayrán_, 386. - _ghayrat_, 156. - _ghiná_, 21, 22, 23, 74. - _ghusl_, 293. - _gilím_, 32, 45. - _girawish_, 289. - Gnosis, 16, 100, 134, 140, =267-77=, 325, 392. - See _ma`rifat_. - Grace. See _faḍl_, _`ináyat_, _karámat_. - - H. - - _ḥadath_, 293. - _hadhayán_, 167. - _ḥáḍir_, 373. - _ḥaḍrat_, 256. - _ḥajj_, 326. - _See_ Pilgrimage. - _ḥál_, 49, 50, 112, 177, =180-3=, 236, 242, 243, 258, 267, 309, - =367-70=, 371, 372, 382, 415. - _See_ States of mystics and _aḥwál_. - _ḥálí_, 267. - _ḥáll_, 244, 254, 279. - _ḥaqá´iq_, 117. - _ḥaqíqat_, 14, 51, 149, =383-4=. - _See_ Truth, the. - _ḥaqq_, 384, 404. - _See_ Truth, the. - _ḥaqq al-yaqín_, 381, 382. - _ḥashw_, 167. - _hastí_, 374. - _hawá_, 196, 207, 208. - _haybat_, 376, 377. - _ḥayrat_, 275. - _ḥazan_, 413. - Hell, the result of God’s anger, 199. - _hidáyat_, 95, 203, 204. - _ḥijáb_, 22, 149, 236, 325, 374, 414. - _See_ Veils, spiritual. - _ḥijáb-i ghayní_, 5. - _ḥijáb-i rayní_, 4, 5. - _himmat_, 155, 235. - Hope, 112, 113, 122, 133. - _ḥubb_, 305, 306. - _ḥuḍúr_, 33, 129, 144, 155, 178, =248-51=, 301, 373, 380. - _ḥudúth_, 280. - _ḥulúl_, 131, 260. - Hunger, 324, 325. - _ḥurmat_, 334. - _ḥurqat_, 47. - _ḥusn_, 386. - _huwiyyat_, 238. - _ḥuzn_, 371. - Hypocrisy, 87, 89, 291, 292, 304. - - I. - - _ibáḥí_, 131. - _`ibádat_, 79. - _`ibárat_, 203, 276, 385. - _ibtidá_, 119, 169. - _`idda_, 11. - _i`jáz_, 219, 221, 223, 255. - _ijmá_`, 14, 225. - _ikhláṣ_, 103, 117, 246. - _ikhtiyár_, 171, 297, 316, =388=. - _iláhiyyat_, 245. - _ilhám_, 166, 271. - _ilhámiyán_, 271. - _`ilm_, 103, 267, 381, =382-3=, 415. - _See_ Knowledge. - _`ilm-i ma`rifat_, 16. - —— _mu`ámalat_, 86, 115. - —— _sharí`at_, 16. - —— _waqt_, 13, 112. - _`ilm al-yaqín_, 381, 382. - _`ilmí_, 267. - _ímá_, 385. - _ímán_, 225, =286-90=. - _imtiḥán_, 388, 389, 390. - _imtizáj_, 131, 152, 254, 260. - _inábat_, 181, 295, 371. - _`ináyat_, 203, 268. - _inbisáṭ_, 380. - Incarnation, 92, 236, =260-6=. - See _ḥulúl_. - Indulgences, 116. - _insán_, 197. - _insániyyat_, 197. - Inspiration, 271. - Intention, the power of, 4. - _intibáh_, 385. - _intiqál_, 236. - Intoxication, spiritual, =226-9=, 248, 352. - See _sukr_. - _inzi`áj_, 385. - _irádat_, 199, 307. - _ishárat_, 56, 129, 155, 385, 404. - _`ishq_, 310. - _ishtibáh_, 385. - _ism_, 386. - _istidlál_, 268. - _istidlálí_, 330. - _istidráj_, 221, 224. - _iṣṭifá_, 265, 390. - _istighráq_, 381, 385. - _istikhárat,_ 3. - _iṣṭilám_, 390. - _iṣṭiná`_, 390. - _istiqámat_, 104, 177, 301, 377. - _istiṭá`at_, 75. - _istiwá_, 307. - _íthár_, 189-95. - _ithbát_, 379, 380, 386. - _ittiḥád_, 152, 198, 254. - _ittiṣál_, 415. - _`iyán_, 356, 370, 373. - - J. - - _jabr_, 17, 272, 288, 324. - _See_ Predestination. - _jadhb_, 195. - _jadhbat_, 248. - _jadhbí_, 330. - _jalál_, 177, 288, 376. - _jam`_, 237, 238, =251-60=, 266, 285, 380. - _See_ Union with God. - _jam`-i himmat_ (_himam_), 258, 282. - _jam` al-jam`_, 39, 259. - _jam`-i salámat_, 257. - _jam`-i taksír_, 257, 258. - _jamál_, 177, 288, 376. - _ján_, 197, 199, 309. - _janábat_, 293. - _jawáb_, 386. - _jawhar_, 386. - _jihád_, 364. - _al-jihád al-akbar_, 200. - _jism_, 386. - _jubba_, 50, 102. - _júd_, 317. - - K. - - _kabíra_, 225, 295. - _kabúdí_, 17. - _kadar_, 30, 32. - _kafsh_, 345. - _kalám_, 17, 307. - _kamál_, 288. - _kámil_, 85, 407. - _karámat_, _karámát_, 109, 177, 213, 214, =218-35=, 255, 282, 291, 323, - 324, 377, 379. - _See_ Miracles. - _kasb_, 28, 195, 225, 254. - _kashf_, 4, 47, 59, 111, 226, 265, 374, 380, 414. - _khánaqáh_, 69. - _kharq_, 57, 417. - _khashíshí_, 94. - _kháṣṣ al-kháṣṣ_, 382. - _khaṭar_, 5, 149. - _khaṭarát_, 144, 384. - _kháṭir_, 387, 388. - _khatm_, 5. - _khawáṭir_, 149. - _khawf_, 371. - _khidmat_, 191, 218, 271. - _khirqat_, 47. - _khiṭáb_, 415. - _khullat_, 73, 326. - _khuṣúṣiyyat_, 257. - _kibrít-i aḥmar_, 7. - _kitmán-i sirr_, 380. - Knowledge, 11-18, 108. - See _`ilm_. - —— of God. _See_ Gnosis and _ma`rifat_. - _kulliyyat_, 26, 379, 385. - - L. - - _laḥq_, 373. - _laṭá´if_, 385. - Law, the, 14, 15, 139, 140. - See _sharí`at_. - _lawá´iḥ_, 385. - _lawámi`_, 385. - Liberality, 317-19. - _lisán al-ḥál_, 356. - Love, Divine, 23, 24, 32, 33, 34, 38, 67, 102, 103, 107, 136, 137, 138, - 156, 157, 180, 187, 211, 258, 288, 297, =304-13=, 330, 331, 376, - 377, 390, 405. - See _maḥabbat_. - Lust, 115, 128, 208, 209, 240. - _luṭf_, 377-9. - - M. - - _madhhab-i Thawrí_, 125. - _mafqúd_, 164. - _maghlúb_, 246, 312. - —— _al-qulúb_, 85. - Magic, 151, 152. - _maḥabbat_, 26, 117, 157, 178, 187, 211, 297, 305, 306, 310. - _maḥall_, 244. - _maḥfúz_, 225, 239, 241. - _maḥq_, 373. - _maḥram_, 349. - _maḥw_, 59, 373, 379. - _makásib_, 254. - _malámat_, =62-9=, 94, 100, 119, 175, =183-4=. - _malik_, 387. - _malja´_, 384. - Man, the constitution of, 198, 199. - _maní_, 238. - _ma`ní_, 35. - _manjá_, 385. - _maqám_, _maqámát_, 7, 33, 58, 110, 157, 177, =180-3=, 236, 258, 265, - 291, 301, =370-3=. - _See_ Stations of the Mystic Path. - _maqhúr_, 368. - _mardán_, 327. - _ma`rifat_, 16, 79, 152, 178, 194, 225, =267-77=, 326, =382-3=, 390. - _See_ Gnosis. - Marriage, 360-6. - _mashárib_, 301. - _mashrab_, 414. - _maskanat_, 60. - _ma`ṣúm_, 225, 241, 298. - _ma`túh_, 312. - _mawaddat_, 187. - _mawáhib_, 254. - _mawjúd_, 164. - _miḥnat_, 26. - Miracles, 152, 168, 213, 214, 215, =218-35=, 323, 324. - See _karámat_. - _mi`ráj_, 238. - _miskín_, 60. - _mizaj_, 281. - Mortification, =195-210=, 256, 257, 346. - See _mujáhadat_. - _mu`ámalát_, 30, 38, 41. - _mu´ánasat_, 382. - _mu`áyanat_, 331. - _mubtadí_, 167, 407. - _muḍtarr_, 316. - _mufarrid_, 362. - _muftariq_, 255. - _muḥáḍarat_, 373, 374. - _muḥádathat_, 380, 381. - _muḥawwil-i aḥwál_, 41. - _muḥdath_, 92, 263, 270, 293, 386. - _muḥibb_, 26. - _mujáhadat_, 35, 36, 47, 50, 70, 85, 95, 113, 127, 170, 176, 182, 184, - =195-210=, 292, 296, 325, 329, 382. - _See_ Mortification. - _mujálasat_, 159. - _mujarrad_, 61. - _mu`jizat_, =219-26=, 230, 324, 394. - _mujtami`_, 255, 367. - _mukáshafat_, 4, 22, =373-4=. - _mukhlaṣ_, 85. - _mukhliṣ_, 85, 265. - _mukḥula_, 345. - _munáját_, 344, 380. - _muníb_, 295. - _muntahí_, 168. - _muqarrabán_, 4, 295. - _múqin_, 144. - _muraqqa`át_, =45-57=, 69, 73, 94. - _muríd_, 85, 107, 157, 211, 265, 370, 414. - _murshid_, 172. - _muruwwat_, 328, 334. - _musabbib_, 327. - _musáfirán_, 340. - _musámarat_, 380, 381. - _musháhadat_, 37, 50, 70, 85, 95, 113, 127, 129, 155, 165, 170, 176, - 184, 201, 237, 275, 280, 296, 325, 329, 373, 382. - _See_ Contemplation. - _mushtáq_, 265. - Music, 399-413. - _mustaghriq_, 373. - _mustahlik_, 308. - _mustami`_, 174, 402. - _mustaqím_, 184, 369. - _mustaṣwif_, 35. - _muta´ahhil_, 349. - _mutakallim_, 131, 154. - _mutakawwin_, 369. - _mutamakkin_, 119, 152, 168, 369, 372. - _mutaraddid_, 372. - _mutaṣawwif_, 34, 35, 172. - _mutaṣawwifa_, 16. - _mutawassiṭ_, 407. - _muwaḥḥid_, 270, 278. - - N. - - _nabí_, 129. - _nadam_, 294. - _nadámat_, 295, 296, 297. - _nafs_, 149, 154, 182, =196-210=, 240, 277, 303, 404. - _See_ Soul, the lower. - _nafs-i lawwáma_, 62. - _nafy_, 379, 380, 386. - _najwá_, 352, 385. - _nakirat_, 79, 178. - _na`layn_, 345. - _namáz_, 300. - Name, the great, of God, 105. - Names of God, 317, 382. - _naskh-i arwáḥ_, 260. - _nifáq_, 89, 291. - Novices, discipline of, 54, 195, 301, 302, 338, 354. - _numúd_, 167. - _Nuqabá_, 214. - - O. - - Obedience, 85, 90, 287, 288, 311, 312. - - P. - - _palás_, 51. - Pantheism, 243, 246. - See _ḥulúl_, _ittiḥád_, _imtizáj_, _faná_, _tawḥíd_, Union with God. - Paradise, of no account, 107, 111; - the effect of God’s satisfaction, 199. - _pársá-mardán_, 265. - Passion, 207-10. - See _hawá_. - Patience, 86. - Persecution of Ṣúfís, 137, 140, 154, 190, 191. - Pilgrimage, the, 107, =326-9=. - _pindásht_, 150, 155. - _pír_, 17, 55. - Poetry, the hearing of, 397, 398. - Poets, the pre-Islamic, 372. - Polytheism, 38, 113, 132. - See _shirk_. - Poverty, practical, 60; - spiritual, =19-29=, 49, =58-61=, 121, 127, 349; - voluntary and compulsory, 71, 316. - See _faqr_. - Praise of God. See _dhikr_. - Prayer, 11, =300-4=. - Predestination, 17, 104, 203, 209, 210, 273. - See _jabr_. - Prophets, miracles of the, 219-26. - See _mu`jizat_. - —— the, superior to the Saints, 129, 219, =235-9=. - —— and Saints, the, superior to the Angels, 239-41. - Purgation, 70. - _See_ Mortification. - Purification, 291-4. - Purity, spiritual, 58-61. - See _safá_ and _ṣafwat_. - - Q. - - _qabá_, 48, 52, 133, 183. - _qabḍ_, 181, =374-6=. - _qadar_, 75. - _qadím_, 92, 262, 386. - _qahr_, 369, =377-9=. - _qarár_, 385. - _qawwál_, 139, 171, 415. - _qayd_, 387. - _qibla_, 12, 300, 301, 354. - _qidam_, 263. - _qubḥ_, 387. - _qudrat_, 300. - Quietism. See _riḍá_ and _tawakkul_. - Quietists, four classes of, 178. - _qurb_, 85, 226, 238, 309. - _qurbat_, 26, 191, 249, 300. - _quṣúd_, 390. - _Quṭb_, 147, 206, 214, 228, 229. - _quwwat_, 280. - - R. - - _rabbání_, 21, 33. - _ráhib_, 96. - _rajá_, 133, 371. - _rakwa_, 69. - _rams_, 384. - _raqṣ_, 416. - _rasídagán_, 228, 233. - _rasm_, 35, 36. - Rationalism, 75. - _See_ Mu`tazilites, Qadarites. - _rayn_, 5, 391. - Renunciation, 70, 71, 104. - _See_ Asceticism and _íthár_ and _zuhd_. - Repentance, 294-9. - See _tawbat_. - Resignation, 73. - See _taslím_ and _riḍá_. - _ribát_, 96. - _riḍá_, 7, 20, 26, 89, 91, 99, 117, 126, 157, =177-80=, =182=, 217, - 246. - _riddat_, 225. - _riyá_, 304. - _riyáḍat_, 196, 202. - _rubúbiyyat_, 141, 157, 210. - _rúḥ_, 196, 197, 261. - _rúḥání_, 20. - _rúḥiyán_, 266. - _rujú`_, 391. - _rukhaṣ_, 116. - _rusúm_, 42. - _ru´yat_, 389. - _See_ Vision. - _ru´yat-i áfát_, 159. - _rúza-i wiṣál_, 322. - - S. - - _ṣa`álík_, 97, 173. - _ṣabr_, 86. - Sacrifice, spiritual, 194. - See _íthár_. - _ṣádiq_, 325. - _ṣafá_, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 48, 52, 58, 328. - _See_ Purity. - _safah_, 387. - _ṣafwat_, 58, 109, 167, 309, 310. - _See_ Purity. - _ṣáḥi ´l-qulúb_, 85. - _ṣáḥib jam`_, 258. - —— _shar`_, 226. - —— _sirr_, 226. - —— _ṭab`_, 158. - _saḥw_, 58, 85, =184-8=, 228, 373, 380. - _See_ Sobriety. - Saints, the, 63, 116, 129, 130, 138, =210-41=, 295. - Saintship, definitions of, 216-18. - _sakhá_, 317. - _ṣalát_, 300. - _samá`_, 50, 57, 171, =393-420=. - _satr_, 380. - _ṣawm_, 36, 320. - _sayyáḥ_, 118, 173. - Self-conceit, 62, 63, 148, 155, 156, 214, 346. - Self-knowledge, 197. - Selfishness, 3. - See _nafs_. - Senses, the five, 209, 321, 322, 393. - _shafaqat_, 134. - _shahádat_, 333. - _sháhid_, 265, 373. - _shahwat_, 208. - _See_ Lust. - _shalíthá_, 8. - _shaqáwat_, 389. - _sharí`at_, 14, 16, =383-4=. - _See_ Law, the. - _shaṭḥ_, 168. - _shawáhid_, 40. - _shawq_, 92, 128. - Shaykhs, the Ṣúfí, character of the, 55-7. - _shirk_, 113, 273. - _See_ Polytheism. - _shurb_, 58, 392. - _shurúd_, 389, 390. - _ṣiddíq_, 31, 45, 115, 129, 136. - _ṣidq_, 101. - _ṣifat_, 5, 181, 264, 386. - Silence, rules in, 355. - Sin, 196, 225, 286, 294-9. - Sincerity, 89, 101, 103, 291. - _sirr_, 309, 333, 373, 385. - _siyáḥat_, 53, 192. - _siyyán_, 386. - Sleep, 109. - Sleeping, rules in, 351-4. - Sobriety, spiritual, 226-9, 248, 352. - See _ṣaḥw_. - Solitude, 103, 188, 338. - See _`uzlat_ and _waḥdat_. - Soul, the lower or animal, 9, =196-210=, 325. - See _nafs_. - Speech, rules in, 355. - Spirit, the, 196-200, 261-6. - See _rúḥ_. - States of mystics, 13, 32, 33, 41, 47, 55, =180-3=, 249, 308, =367-70=. - See _aḥwál_ and _ḥál_. - Stations of the mystic Path, 26, 33, 58, 133, 168, =180-3=, 249, 302, - 308, =370-1=. - See _maqám_. - _su´ál_, 386. - Ṣúfí and Ṣúfiism, definitions of, 34-44, 165. - —— origin of the name, 30. - —— sects, the twelve, 130, 176-266. - _ṣuḥbat_, 157, 159, 175, 189. - _See_ Companionship. - _sukr_, 85, 118, =184-8=, 380. - _See_ Intoxication. - Sunna, the, 6, 14, 23, 46, 334, 345, 361. - _ṣúrat-i ma`húd_, 199. - - T. - - _ṭá`at_, 203, 225, 287. - _ṭab`_, 5. - _ṭábá´i`iyán_, 280. - _ṭabáyi`_, 197. - _tadbír_, 140. - _tafríd_, 281. - _tafriqat_ (_tafriqa_), 194, 237, =251-60=, 266, 285, 380. - _ṭághút_, 78. - _taḥallí_, 389. - _ṭahárat_, 291-4. - _tá´ib_, 295, 391. - _tajallí_, 276, 389, 390. - _tajríd_, 45, 60, 121, 135, 158, 165, 176, 222. - _tajziya_, 236. - _takalluf_, 51, 318, 334, 364, 419. - _takawwun_, 369. - _takbír_, 109, 303. - _takhallí_, 389. - _takhlíl-i maḥásin_, 293. - _taklíf_, 184, 204, 272, 393. - _ṭalab_, 97, 201. - _talbís_, 175, 391-92. - _ṭálib_, 34, 39, 169. - _talwín_, 372. - _tamkín_, 71, 72, 147, 158, 226, 228, =370-3=. - _ṭams_, 384. - _tanásukhiyán_, 264. - _tanzíh_, 238, 326, 374, 384. - _taqwá_, 334. - _ṭarab_, 97. - _ṭaríq_, 90. - _taríqat_, 51, 54, 321. - _ṭaṣarruf_, 282. - _taṣawwuf_, 35, 189. - _taṣdíq_, 286. - _tashbíh_, 270, 271, 280, 332. - _taslím_, 140, 209, 268, 371. - _tasmiyat_, 386. - _ta`ṭíl_, 104, 202, 256, 257, 270, 271. - _tawájud_, 410, 413-16. - _tawakkul_, 19, 117, 126, 146, 153, 177, 181, 205, 290. - _ṭawáli`_, 385. - _ṭawáriq_, 385. - _tawbat_, 79, 88, 181, =294-9=, 371, 391. - _tawfíq_, 6, 203, 288. - _tawḥíd_, 9, 17, 36, 104, 107, 113, 158, 172, 202, 205, 236, 253, - =278-85=, 335, 374, 381, 385. - _ta´wíl_, 404. - _ta´yíd_, 379. - Technical terms of the Ṣúfís, =367-92=. - _thaná-yi jamíl_, 306, 307. - _thawáb_, 4, 146. - Time, mystical meaning of, 13. - See _waqt_. - Traditions of the Prophet, 4, 19, 20, 30, 46, 52, 55, 60, 61, 63, 70, - 72, 80, 90, 99, 108, 116, 122, 143, 148, 161, 168, 179, 184, 186, - 192, 197, 200, 202, 208, 211, 212, 230, 231, 232, 254, 261, 262, - 263, 267, 275, 277, 278, 283, 287, 291, 294, 296, 300, 301, 302, - 304, 305, 312, 314, 320, 321, 322, 324, 329, 333, 334, 335, 336, - 337, 338, 344, 351, 352, 355, 358, 361, 362, 363, 364, 368, 381, - 388, 389, 391, 396, 397, 398, 399, 401, 403, 413, 415, 418. - Transmigration of spirits, 260, 262-4. - Travel, 345-7. - Trinity, the Christian, 285. - Trust in God, 115, 157, 163, 359. - See _tawakkul_. - Truth, the, 139, 140. - See _ḥaqq_ and _ḥaqíqat_. - - U. - - _`ubúdiyyat_, 79, 141, 157, 159, 237, 245, 257. - _`ukkáza_, 102. - _`ulamá_, 7, 11, 31, 213, 382. - _See_ Divines. - _ulfat_, 158, 326. - Unification, 106, 158, 164, 176, =278-85=, 289, 291. - See _tawḥíd_. - Union with God, 118, 119, 131, 163, 201, =202-5=, 208, 302. - See _faná_, _jam`_, _ḥuḍúr_. - Unity of God, the. _See_ Unification. - _uns_, 301, 309, =376-7=. - _uṣúl_, 74. - _`uzlat_, 72, 190. - - V. - - Veils, spiritual, 4, 5, 8, 9, 111, 168, 200, 249, 331, 332. - See _ḥijáb_. - Vigils, 138. - Vision, spiritual, 38, 111, 185, 186, 332, 381, 382, 389, 393, 403. - Visions, 151, 167. - - W. - - _waḥdániyyat_, 281. - _waḥdat_, 84. - _wáḥidiyyat_, 246. - _waḥshat_, 147. - _wajd_, 167, 368, 385, =413-16=, 419. - _waláyat_, 210. - _walí_, 129, 211, 212, 215. - Walking, rules in, 349-51. - _wáqi`a_, 387, 388. - _waqt_, 13, 27, 329, =367-70=, 380, 419. - _wara`_, 17. - _wárid_, 385, 404, 407. - _wasá´iṭ_, 384. - _waṣl_, 309. - _waswás_, 166, 208, 293. - _waṭan_, 5. - _waṭanát_, 144, 384. - Way to God, the, 121, 233, 269, 270, 274, 371. - Wealth, spiritual, =21-3=, 58, 123, 127. - _wiláyat_, 210, 211, 225. - Wool, garments of, 30, 32, 40, 45, 46, 51. - _wujúd_, 253, 373, 413-16. - _wuṣúl_, 118, 119. - - Y. - - _yad-i suflá_, 316. - _yad-i `ulyá_, 316. - _yáft_, 201. - _yagánagí_, 24, 333, 377. - _yaqín_, 130, 144, 248, 272, 330, 381. - - Z. - - _zaddíq_, =31=. - _ẕáhiriyán_, 154, 241. - _zakát_, 314-17. - _zand ú pázand_, 404. - _zandaqa_, 8, 152, 404. - _zawá´id_, 384. - _zindíq_, 17, 404. - _zuhd_, 17, 179, 181, 371. - _ẕuhúr_, 369. - _ẕulm_, 387. - _zunnár_, 259, 273. - - - III. - BOOKS. - - A. - - _Ádáb al-murídín_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 338. - _Asrár al-khiraq wa ´l-ma´únát_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 56. - - B. - - _Baḥr al-qulúb_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 259. - - G. - - _Ghalaṭ al-wájidín_, by Ruwaym, 135. - Gospel, the, 407. - - K. - - _Khatm al-wiláyat_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - _Kitáb `adháb al-qabr_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - _Kitáb al-bayán li-ahl al-`iyán_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 259. - _Kitáb-i faná ú baqá_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 60. - _Kitáb al-luma`_, by Abú Naṣr al-Sarráj, 255, 323, 341. - _Kitáb-i maḥabbat_, by `Amr b. `Uthmán al-Makkí, 309. - _Kitáb al-nahj_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - _Kitáb al-samá`_, by Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí, 401. - _Kitáb al-tawḥíd_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - Koran, the, 6, 14, 19, 23, 70, 77, 88, 96, 97, 98, 117, 124, 135, 149, - 230, 300, 301, 304, 307, 317, 323, =394-7=, 411, 415. - Koran, citations from the, 3, 5, 9, 11, 19, 22, 24, 30, 32, 40, 41, 42, - 45, 47, 57, 62, 63, 74, 78, 79, 81, 85, 90, 91, 97, 102, 103, 109, - 122, 156, 159, 160, 167, 185, 186, 190, 193, 194, 197, 198, 200, - 201, 202, 204, 208, 210, 211, 212, 215, 230, 237, 238, 239, 241, - 246, 249, 251, 252, 255, 261, 267, 268, 269, 273, 278, 283, 289, - 291, 294, 295, 296, 297, 304, 311, 312, 316, 320, 324, 330, 336, - 338, 348, 349, 350, 354, 355, 357, 360, 368, 370, 371, 372, 373, - 374, 375, 377, 380, 381, 384, 388, 390, 391, 392, 394-7, 399, 403, - 415. - Koran, commentary on the, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - - L. - - _Luma`._ See _Kitáb al-luma`_. - - M. - - _Minháj al-dín_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 2, 80, 153. - _Mir´át al-ḥukamá_, by Sháh b. Shujá` al-Kirmání, 138. - - N. - - _Nafaḥát al-uns_, by Jámí, 16, 21, 41, 43, 44, 169, 172, 173, 234, 249, - 257, 260, 298, 304, 323, 325, 335, 338, 358, 374, 408, 415. - _Nawádir al-uṣúl_, by Muḥammad b. `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 141. - _Nuzhat al-qulúb_, by Ḥamdalláh Mustawfí, 51. - - R. - - _Ri`áyat_, by Ḥárith al-Muḥásibí, 108. - _al-Ri`áyat bi-ḥuqúq Allah_, by Aḥmad b. Khaḍrúya, 338. - _al-Ri`áyat li-ḥuqúq Allah_, by `Alí b. `Uthmán al-Hujwírí, 280. - - T. - - _Ṭabaqát al-ḥuffáẕ_, by Dhahabí, 118. - _Ṭabaqát al-Ṣúfiyya_, by Abú `Abd al-Raḥmán al-Sulamí, 108, 114. - _Tadhkirat al-awliyá_, by `Aṭṭár, 51, 137, 238. - _Ta`rífát_, by Jurjání, 373. - _Ta´ríkh-i masháyikh_ (History of the Ṣúfí Shaykhs), by Muḥammad b. - `Alí al-Tirmidhí, 46. - _Taṣḥíḥ al-irádat_, by Junayd, 338. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note - -Occasional lapses of punctuation in the various indexes have been -silently corrected. - -Other errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, -and are noted here. The references are either to the page and line, or, -where three numbers are employed, to the line within a footnote in the -original. - - 2.28 The truth is best known to God God[.] Added. - 39.33 _fa-li-Yaḥyá wa-amm[á/a] labs_ Replaced. - 82.21 Abu ´l-Marthad Kinána b. al-Ḥu[ṣ/s]ayn Replaced. - 91.10 [`Amr b.] `Uthmán al-Makkí Restored. - 96.36 yet I feel fear within myself[’./.’] Transposed. - 108.1.1 _Ri`áyat li-ḥuqúq All[á/a]h_ Replaced. - 141.5.1 “The Book [of] Unification.” Missing. - 193.17 [“/‘]_They> prefer them to themselves,_ ... Replaced. - 200.27 (_al-jihád al-akbar_)[”]. Added. - 193.18 ... _although they are indigent_[”/’] Replaced. - 229.23 Afterwards Muḥammad b. [`]Alí asked a question Inserted. - 436.29 _khuṣú[s/ṣ]iyyat_, 257. Replaced. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE KASHF AL-MAHJÚB *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |