This letter, written to
his blessed sons Muhammad Sa’îd and Muhammad
Ma’thûm ‘rahmatullâhi ’alaihimâ’, each of whom a treasure of secret knowledge,
explains how Allâhu ta’âlâ is
close to creatures, and provides information about the difference between
the vices of adam (man) and those of the devil:
I offer my hamd to
Allâhu ta’âlâ. I send my salâm to His slaves whom He has chosen!
Question: Allâhu ta’âlâ is not within this
’âlam. He is not outside of it. He is not adjacent to the ’âlam. He is not
separate (from it, either). How should that be explained?
Answer: Being within and being without and being adjacent and being separate and the like are situations that
can be considered between two existing things. How can these situations be considered between the two things mentioned in our question in the face of the fact
that they do not both exist. For, Allâhu ta’âlâ
exists, whereas the ’âlam, i.e. everything other than Him, is imaginary, illusory. The apparent existence of the ’âlam is
perpetual and does not cease to exist with the cessation of fancy and imagination, owing to the Power of
Allâhu ta’âlâ. and it is these illusory and imaginary creatures that will be either enjoying the endless blessings or suffering the
endless torment in the Hereafter. However, existence of the ’âlam is in fancy and imagination. [That is, they do not exist in the outside; it appears to
imagination and fancy as if they existed.] They are not beings outside of imagination and fancy. The Power of Allâhu ta’âlâ makes these imaginary and illusory beings
maintain their existence, [thus protecting them from ceasing to exist, as if
they were existent in the outside.] He makes it appear as if they actually
existed. Their perpetuated existence tricks the superficial onlooker into
imagining them to exist, and thus saying that there are two existences. Other
letters contain comprehensive explanations on this subject.
Something that exists
in imagination cannot be said to be adjacent to or inside of something that
exists in the outside. Yet it can be said that something that exists is not
within or without or separate from or adjacent to that which is in imagination.
For, that which is in imagination does not exist at the place where the
existent one does, which makes it unworkable to state their places with respect
to each other. The following example will clarify our point: Supposing we tie a
small piece of stone or iron to one end of a piece of string and make it
revolve around our hand [like turning a length of chain around our finger]. The
small object spinning round a circle is called a revolving dot. The high speed of
the revolving dot causes it to appear like a circle. However, what exists in
the outside is the dot. There is not a circle in the outside. The circle exists
in the imagination. The circle does not possess an existence like the existence
of the dot. The dot cannot be said to be inside or outside of the circle. Nor
are they adjacent to or separate from each other. Since there is not a circle
sharing the same place with the dot, it is out of the question to state their
positions with respect to each other.
Question: Allâhu ta’âlâ declares that He is
close to the ’âlam and encompasses it. How can that be explained?
Answer: The words
‘closeness’ and ‘encompassion’ used in that sense have nothing to do with a
physical situation in which an object is close to or encompasses another. What
is meant is a closeness or encompassion that
cannot be known
or
comprehended (mentally or by way of imagination). We believe the
fact that
Allâhu ta’âlâ is close to us and encompasses us. But we cannot know (or
imagine) how it is so. We cannot say that He is inside of the ’âlam or or
outside of it or adjacent to or separate from it. For, Islam has not stated any
of these four situations. We may say that the revolving dot in our example is
close to the imaginary circle or that it encompasses it or that it is together
with it. But we cannot know its nature. For, it is only the dot that actually
exists. We may say that it is adjacent to or separate from or inside or outside
of the latter, but acknowledge at the same time that those situations are
beyond the scope of (the human) knowledge. For, when the positions of two units
with respect to each other are known, both of the units must necessarily exist
in the outside. When it is not known how the two units are situated with
respect to each other, both of the units do not necessarily have to exist. It
is something wrong to make an analogy between things that are known and those
which are not known. In other words, “It is bâtil (wrong, vain, null and void)
to compare the ghâib (unknown) to the shâhid (known).”
An important note: We have said that
the ’âlam is imaginary, and that it is a being in imagination. What is meant by
that is that the ’âlam has been created at the level of fancy and imagination.
It is a being that is perceived and realized but which does not exist in the
outside. If, for instance, the aforesaid circle, which does not exist in the
outside and which exists only in imagination, could be made to stay in that
state perpetually, so that it would retain its status quo when fancies and
imaginations were suspended, it would be as if it existed in the outside,
although it still would not be the case. However, the circle would not exist
were it not for the dot in the outside. A Persian couplet in English:
How nice is the way that beauty asserts itself;
In the talks of the
distinguished to find oneself.
It would make sense to
say that the circle conceals the dot from sight. It would be all right as well
to say that the circle is like a mirror showing the existence of the dot. It
would also be apropos to say that it is symptomatic of the existence of the
dot. To say that it conceals the dot would go with unlearned laymen. To say
that it is a mirror would suit the ways and states of Awliyâ, and it would be
called îmân-i-shuhûdî. And to say that it
is an indication, a symptom, would be an example of îmân-i-ghaybî. The îmân-i-ghaybî is
more powerful and more valuable than the îmân-i-
-275-
shuhûdî. For, a dhil [a fancy] is seen in the îmânî shuhûdî, whereas the îmân-i-ghaybî does not entertain delusions of that sort. Nothing is
obtained in the îmân-i-ghaybî; yet an attainment has taken place. In the îmân-i-shuhûdî something has been obtained, yet nothing has been attained, since what
is being enjoyed is a series of shades and visions. In brief, whereas the îmân-i-shuhûdî is an imperfection, attainment is a perfection. Not everyone passing as
a man of Tasawwuf will understand what we are saying. Shuhûd is superior to wusûl (atainment) in their view. The (ancient) Greek group of philosophers called
Sôfistâiyya [Sophists] said that the ’âlam was only a fancy, a vision in man’s imagination, and that it would change with the changing of the fancy and vision.
According to them, for instance, when imagination fancied something as sweet it would be sweet now, while the same thing would be bitter at some other time if
imagination said that it was bitter. So ignorant and senseless they must have been to overlook the creativeness of
Allâhu ta’âlâ. In fact, they denied the obvious fact. They failed to penetrate the proximity [of the existence of the ’âlam] to the existence in the outside.
Thus they refused to believe that this ’âlam entertained deeds worthy of existence in the outside and which would deserve everlasting torment or eternal
blessings. These facts, however, have been stated by the Mukhbir-i-sâqiq [he who always tells the truth, (i.e. our blessed
Prophet,)] ‘sall-Allâhu
ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’. They will definitely take place. Those philosophers
were the devil’s soldiers. The nineteenth âyat-i-kerîma of Mujâdala Sûra
purports: “...
Truly, it is the party of the evil one that will lose and perish!”
Question: Why isn’t the ’âlam
said to be existent or known to be existent in the face of the fact that its
existence is perpetual, though at the level of fancy and imagination, and the
beings in it will either enjoy eternal blessings or suffer eternal torment?
Answer: According to men of Tasawwuf, wujûd is the most honourable and the most valuable thing. Wujûd
[existence] is the beginning of all sorts of khayr and superiority. They cannot imagine ‘wujûd’, which is more valuable than anything else, with anyone but
Allâhu ta’âlâ. For, everything other than Him is imperfect and bad. Can the most valuable thing be given to a bad
one? These words of the men of Tasawwuf are based on kashf and firâsat (intuition). According to their kashf, wujûd is appropriate only with
Allâhu ta’âlâ. He, alone, is mawjûd [existent]. Their calling things other than Him ‘mawjûd’ is because those things
are
-276-
inexplicably related to That Existence. As a shadow stays in
existence owing to its origin, likewise it is with That Existence that
everything exists. The imaginary thubût [appearance] is a shade of one of the
shades of That Existence. [We Turkish people use the word ‘wujûd’ to mean
‘body’. However, ‘wujûd’ does not mean substance or object or body. ‘Wujûd’
means ‘existence’. It is an adjectival noun.] Since That Existence exists in
the outside,
Allâhu ta’âlâ exists in the outside. If we should, likewise, call the perpetuated
level of fancy and imagination a ‘shade of one of the shades of the level of
existing outside’, both of them will be shades; hence, it might be all right to
call the thubût (appearance) in imagination wujûd-i-khârijî (existence in the
outside). Accordingly, the ’âlam as well may be said to exist in the outside.
As is seen, whatsoever the mumkin, (i.e. the creature,) possesses, it possesses
it via the level of wujûd, (i.e. existence.) It would not be correct to say,
without considering that it is a shade, that it exists in the outside.
Otherwise it would be made a partner of Allâhu ta’âlâ in His Attribute ‘Wujûd’. I
the faqîr, [i.e. Imâm Rabbânî ‘qaddas-Allâhu ta’âlâ sirrah-ul’azîz,] have said that the
’âlam exists in the outside; yet it should be construed in the meaning currently being elucidated. Scholars of (the Islamic Science called) Kalâm say that
‘wujûd’ and ‘thubût’ are identical words; they mean that lexically (only) they are synonymous. However, ‘wujûd’ is more than different from ‘thubût’. Most of
the people with kashf and shuhûd and most scholars have said, “Allâhu ta’âlâ
Himself is Wujûd.” Thubût, on the other hand, is theoretical, something mentally imagined.
A useful note: Whereas ‘wujûd’ is
the source of all sorts of khayr and perfection and the beginning of all sorts
of beauty, ‘adam’ is definitely the source of all sorts of evil and
imperfection and the beginning of all sorts of ugliness and flaw. It is the
latter that produces all sorts of wrongdoing and causes aberrations. Nevertheless,
it is possessed of skills and beauties as well. It is its greatest merit to
completely annihilate itself before the ‘Wujûd’. Its skill is to present a
contrast with the ‘Wujûd’ by being an accumulation of all vices and defects.
And its beautiful faculty is to serve as a mirror for the Wujûd, to reflect all
the Wujûd’s perfections, to variegate those perfections beyond knowledge, and
to diversify them so as to convert them from compendis into minutiae. In short,
it serves the Wujûd, and the beauty of the Wujûd becomes manifest in its mirror
made up of vices, uglinesses, and imperfections. It is by their contrasting
attributes, such as the
-277-
Wujûd’s needlessness versus the adam’s
neediness, the former’s grandeur versus the latter’s humbleness, the former’s
highness versus the latter’s baseness, the former’s mastery versus the latter’s
slavery, that the Wujûd is known. A Persian couplet in English:
It is me who has made a master of my teacher;
I am the slave who has manumitted my master.
Worse than the adam is
the accursed devil, the cause of all sorts of vice and aberration. He has none
of the skills possessed by the adam. His answer, “I
am
better than he,” as is quoted in the twelfth âyat-i-kerîma of A’râf Sûra, evicted all the faculties of goodness from his nature, making him worse than anything
else. The adam, being good for nothing and non-existent, has served as a sign for the Wujûd and a mirror reflecting beautiful things. The accursed one, on the
other hand, put up a resistance with a pretence to existence and goodness, which in turn cost him his expulsion. From the adam should one learn how to
accommodate one’s manner of meeting things, as he meets existence with non-existence and encounters perfection with imperfection. When ’izzat (glory, greatness,
might) and jelâl (majesty, wrath of Allâhu ta’âlâ) appear, he presents his humbleness and inkisâr (brokenness, defeatedness, contrition). The accursed devil, succumbing to his obduracy and
rancour, has absorbed, so to speak, all the vices inherent in the adam, so that it is as if the adam has nothing but goodness left to him. Naturally, being a
mirror for reflecting goodness requires being good. As the saying goes, “It devolves only on the Sultân’s own animals to carry his belongings.” The devil had
had a valuable task. He had been purifying the creatures from vices. Yet his conceit and arrogance deprived him of reaping the fruits of his services. He
suffered a loss both in this world and in the Hereafter. The adam, on the other hand, with all his imperfection and vileness, escaped deprivation owing to his
non-existence. He was honoured with being a mirror reflecting the Wujûd. A Persian couplet in English:
The cane said, “I’m hollow.” So, for sweet it was made a gown;
The
tree grew up high and tall, only to be levelled down.
Question: Whence did that
wickedness come to the devil? Anything other than the adam is wujûd, which in
turn does not harbour any wickedness. Then, whence did the wickedness come?
Answer: As the adam is a
mirror reflecting the khayr (goodness) and perfection inherent in the wujûd,
likewise the
-278-
wujûd is a mirror reflecting the vices and defects of the adam.
[The devil, like all other creatures, was made up of adam and wujûd.] The devil
adopted not only the vices in his own adam, but also the vices being reflected
on his own wujûd from the adam, thus becoming laden with all the vices, the
inherent ones and those coming from the outside alike. The phatasms of his
vice-reflecting wujûd concealed from his sight his own non-existence, which is
one of the good attributes of the adam. When there appeared also the vices seen
on the mirror of wujûd, he ventured into endless loss. Yâ Rabbî (O our Rabb,
Allah)! After Thou hast blessed us with hidâyat (guidance, salvation), please
do not let our hearts lapse into siding with Thine enemies! Please lavish
plenty of Thine Mercy and Compassion on us! Thou, alone, art the owner of
favour and kindness!