This
letter, written for Mirzâ Husâm-ad-dîn Ahmad, expatiates about some of the subtle
pieces of information provided in the eighty-seventh letter of the third volume
of Maktűbât:
Hamd (praise and gratitude) be to
Allâhu ta’âlâ, and salâm (salutations, greetings, and salvation in both worlds) to His quls (born slaves, human
creatures) whom He has chosen! I have been
honoured by reading the valuable letter
which you mercifully and compasionately sent to this faqîr, [i.e. Imâm Rabbânî
‘qaddas-Allâhu ta’âlâ sirrah-ul-’azîz’.] You say, “One of our superiors being
here objects to some of the passages contained in the letter which you wrote as
you were in Ajmer. Please explain them!” The passages that appear to be
doubtful have been mentioned also by a few other people beloved to us. With the
help of
Allâhu ta’âlâ I am writing a few preambles for the solution of those doubts. May Allâhu ta’âlâ show us all the right
way!
My dear sir! The treks
of Tasawwuf termed seyr-i-murâdî and seyr-i-murîdî are treks which the wayfarers sense with their consciences and
hearts. They are not among things about which others are to be informed and
convinced. Nor is it necessary to adduce evidence to prove the statements (made
to claim them). Nevertheless, if a congenitally keen-sighted and discerning
person studies another person who claims (to have progressed in) such treks,
and observes his barakats, learnings, and ma’rifats, he will immediately
understand that he has progressed and attained high grades through one of the
paths that he calls the seyr-i-murâdî. He will not expect him to prove his claim or to adduce
evidence. It is like that a discerning person who observes the moon’s rising
and setting places on the horison and the phases it undergoes will conclude
that the light it reflects is from the sun. For those who are not keen-sighted
and discerning, observing and studying this much will not be prima facie
evidence. I was in the initial stages yet when my master Hadrat Khwâja Bâqî
Billah stated that the progress this faqîr was making was seyr-i-murâdî. Some of our brothers
being there (now) heard this good news. My blessed master said also that the
state I was in would fit in with the following two couplets from Mesnevî
(or Mathnavî) translated into English:
Secret is the love felt by the beloved ones;
Yet the lover’s love’s loud; like a drum it sounds.
Whereas love saddens lovers, and it melts them,
With the beloved: it feeds and pleases them.
Those who attain
through the seyr-i-murâdî attain by way of the râh-i-ijtibâ, [i.e. path for the
chosen.] This path is the one through which Prophets progressed ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. The blesed
author of the book entitled ’Awârif-ul-ma’ârif, [Shihâb-ud-dîn Suhrawardî, 539 [1145 A.D.] - 632 [1234],
Baghdâd,)] ‘quddisa sirruh’, explicates this as he deals with the Majzűb-i-sâlik and the Salik-i-majzűb. He calls the second
path
the râh-i-murîdân and the seyr-i-murâdî the râh-i-ijtibâ. An âyat-i-kerîma in
the Shűra
Sűra purports:
“Allâhu
ta’âlâ choses anyone He likes for Himself, and for those who wish to attain
Him, He shows the way that will make them attain Him.” Yes. The path termed
râh-i-ijtibâ is, in essence, a path reserved for Prophets ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. As the excellent
followers among their Ummats are blessed with shares from the kamâlât
(perfections) reserved for them, likewise they are blessed with a share from
this, too. As a matter of fact, the path called ‘ijtibâ’ is not a blessing that
has been ‘reserved only for Prophets ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’ and not to be given to
anyone of their Ummats’. Nothing to that effect has been heard of.
My dear sir! The
sâlik’s receiving fayz through Rasűlullah ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ
Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ continues until the haqîqat of that sâlik, who is Muhammadî-meshreb, unites with the Haqîqat-i-Muhammadî. When this haqîqat unites with that haqîqat as a fruit of a perfect obedience to Rasűlullah or as a
special kindness and favour from Allâhu ta’âlâ, which may be attained at the grades of ’uruj (ascent), Rasűlullah will no longer serve as a medium.
For, something will serve as a medium or a means for something else as long as the two things are different from each other. When the two things unite, such
things as serving as a means for each other and screening or being screened by each other will no longer be thinkable. When the two things unite with each
other, all their doings will be common. As long as the sâlik remains dependent and imitating, their doings will differ, like the transactions between a servant
and his master.
Now let us explain the
expression, “... the haqîqat of the sâlik unites with the Haqîqat-i-Muhammadî
‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ ”: The Haqîqat-i-Muhammadî ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ
âlihi-s-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ is an accumulation of all haqîqats. Therefore, this
haqîqat is also called the Haqîqat-ul-haqâiq. Others’ haqîqats are, as if, parts of this haqîqat. The
haqîqat of a sâlik who is Muhammad-il-meshreb is a part from that haqîqat and
is of its nature. The haqîqat of a sâlik who is not Muhammad-il-meshreb is a
part from that haqîqat, too; yet it is of a different nature. As a sâlik of
this nature makes ’uruj, i.e. ascends, if his haqîqat should unite with the
Haqîqat-i-Muhammadî, first it unites with the haqîqat of another Prophet, who has the same
traits as his in his nature (meshreb). He becomes a share holder in the kamâlât
possessed by that Prophet. Let us repeat at this point that this partnership is
analogical to the transactional partnership between
-321-
a servant and his master. If that sâlik has perfectly adapted himself to Rasűlullah, (i.e. if he imitates that Messenger of Allah perfectly in
performing Islam’s commandments, in avoiding its prohibitions, and in all the other acts of worship and good behaviour observed by the Best of Creation,) maybe,
as a very special kindness from Allâhu ta’âlâ, there will arise in the haqîqat of that salîk an affection towards the haqîqat of Rasűlullah. That affection will develop into a yearning to
unite with that haqîqat, and the two haqîqats unite with each other. This faqîr -Hadrat Imâm Rabbânî means himself- experienced this affection between the two
haqîqats, which was a kindest blessing of Allâhu ta’âlâ. So overwhelmingly suffused was I with
that affection that I remember saying, “I love Allâhu ta’âlâ because He is the Rabb
(Allah, Creator) of Muhammad ’alaihis-salâm.” Meyân Shaikh Tâj and others were
surprised. I expect that you will remember it. The two haqîqats cannot unite
unless such excessive affection is experienced. It is such a great blessing of Allâhu ta’âlâ that He will bestow it
upon anyone He chooses. Allâhu ta’âlâ is the owner of many a blessing.
Now I am
explaining Rasűlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ serving as a
medium for sâliks’ receiving fayz. Listen well! During the progress along the
path called jadhba a medium, a means is unnecessary because Allâhu ta’âlâ pulls along and is
ravishingly kind to the devotee (tâlib). Along the path called sulűk, however, a medium is
needed, since the devotee is endeavouring to progress. Although a medium is not
needed along the path called jadhba, completing the jadhba requires undergoing
a process of sulűk. Sulűk means performances such as tawba and zuhd and other
certain things. In other words, it means to adapt oneself to Islam. Jadhba
without sulűk is incomplete and unfinished. I
saw quite
a number of people with jadhba among Hindus, mulhids, and other disbelievers
and heretics. Yet, since those people have not adapted themselves to the owner
of Islam, their jadhba is flawed and corrupt. Their jadhba has been a mere
appearance.
Question: Attaining jadhba
requires having been chosen and liked; to a slight degree, at least. How on earth
could disbelievers attain jadhba, enemies of Allâhu ta’âlâ as they are?
Answer: The haqîqats of some
disbelievers may be possessed of a certain amount of affection, as a result of
which they may have attained some jadhba. However, because they have not
adapted themselves to the owner of Islam ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa
-322-
sallam’, that jadhba of theirs is doomed to perish. It is their
chance that they miss. That jadhba of theirs will be evidence against them, for
they will be cross-examined on account of it, too. They will be accused of
having missed it because of nescience and obstinacy. Allâhu ta’âlâ is never cruel to any
of His slaves. They are being cruel to themselves. Those who pratise sulűk
along the path of jadhba, i.e. who attain by striving to imitate the owner of
Islam, attain without any means or curtains in between. To this effect is the
statement, “You would attain Allâhu ta’âlâ if you extended a rope down to the bottom of the sea!”, which
means, “If you are pulled to Allâhu ta’âlâ and attain the most unknown grades there will be no means or curtains between you and
Allâhu ta’âlâ.” Perhaps you will remember our master Hadrat Bâqî Billah ‘quddisa sirruh’ saying, “If it falls to a person’s lot to attain by way of ma’iyyat,
i.e. by being with Allâhu ta’âlâ, he will attain without a means or a medium in between. Attaining by way of training and education, i.e. by sulűk, requires a medium, a means.”
The way of ma’iyyat is one of the paths of jadhba. The hadîth-i-sherîf that reads, “A person will be with
the one he loves,” supports our argument. As a matter of fact, when a person is
with someone he loves, there will no longer be any means between them. Please
pay attention to this point! Every fancy or appearance is somehow related to
its original. There is never a curtain between them. If Allâhu ta’âlâ blesses, so that the fancy is pulled towards its original and attains also the blessing of imitating
the owner of Islam, the fancy will attain its original. This attainment will take place without a means or a curtain in between. Since that original is one of
the Names of Allâhu ta’âlâ, there is, for the same matter, not a means or a curtain between the Name and the Owner of the Name.
Thereby, the fancy will attain the origin of its origin, i.e. the Owner of the Name. That means to say that there is not a means or a curtain for people who
attain the Dhât-i-ilâhî, i.e. Allâhu
ta’âlâ Himself,
in a way called bîchűn, that is, in an unknown and incomprehensible manner.
Since the Attributes of Allâhu ta’âlâ are not means or curtains for those who attain in that manner,
could other things ever be curtains?
Question: The Attributes of Allâhu ta’âlâ are separate from Him. Then, how could it be the case that the Attributes could not be means or
curtains for those who attain Allâhu ta’âlâ?
Answer: The sâlik’s origin is one of the Names of
Allâhu ta’âlâ. The sâlik is the dhil (fancy), appearance of that Name. When the sâlik attains
Allâhu ta’âlâ, there is not a means or a curtain
-323-
between him and the Dhât-i-ilâhî, (i.e. Allâhu ta’âlâ Himself.) For, there
is not a curtain between a name and the owner of that name. Hence, the
Attributes do not necessarily have to leave their medial position. I already
explained this above, as I was describing how the haqîqat of the sâlik unites with the
Haqîqat-i-Muhammadî. As well, I touched upon it as I was explaining how the
fancy attained its origin.
An important note: The statement,
“There is not a means or a media along the path of jadhba,” should not be
construed as, “It is not necessary for Rasűlullah ‘‘alaihi wa ’alâ
Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ to serve as a medium for some people.” Nor should it
be supposed that those people will no longer have to adapt themselves to the
Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’! An understanding of
that sort would mean kufr and ilhâd and zindiqness and denial of his religion.
Jadhba that exists without sulűk, i.e. without following Islam, will be
defective and corrupt, and it will incur torture in disguise of a blessing. It
will cause being called to account and being tormented in the Hereafter.
Correct kashfs and open ilhâms (inspirations) have clearly shown that none of
the ma’rifats of the paths of Tasawwuf is attainable without Rasűlullah
‘sall-Allâhu’ being a medium in between and without following him. For the
beginners as well as for those who have attained the final grade, the fayz and
barakat will not be obtained a whit unless that highest Prophet is obeyed and the
remnants of the blessings that fell to his lot are gleaned. A Persian couplet
in English:
Oh Sâdî! Progress along the way to felicity
Is attainable by
Following Mustafâ only!
When the idiot named
Plato saw the safâ (peace, enjoyment, ease) that his nafs attained after the
austerities and mortifications he had been practising, he conjectured that it
would be unnecessary to follow Prophets ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. He said, “We are
cleansed people. We no longer need others to cleanse us.” He was unable to
realize that a state of safâ attained only by subjecting oneself to austerities
was like copper gildid with gold or like poison covered with sugar. To purify
gold alloyed with copper and to improve the nafs from the state of ammâra to
the state of itmî’nân, it is necessary to follow Prophets ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. Allâhu ta’âlâ, the real physician and the true doctor, sent Prophets and their religions ‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’ for
the mission of
-324-
demolishing the nafs-i-ammâra and delivering
it from its excessive state. He stated that for demolishing it, and perhaps for
disciplining it, there was no other way than following those great people
‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’. Unless those great people
‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-teslîmât’ are obeyed, the number of austerities and
mortifications multiplied by thousands will be a mere nothing in mitigating its
state of ammâra as much as a hair’s breadth. On the contrary, they will cause
its excessiveness to take a turn for the worse. The only medicine to cure its
illness is Prophets’ religions
‘’alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-tehiyyât’. Nothing else will save the nafs from
ruination!
Jadhba needs sulűk.
Jadhba without sulűk, whether before or after it, is useless and valueless. It
is more valuable for the jadhba to precede the sulűk. In that case the sulűk
will help the jadhba. The jadhba after the sulűk, on the other hand, will be a
servant for the sulűk. The blessing of sulűk will make him attain the jadhba.
Not so is the case with the jadhba’s being before. He is being pulled
beforehand; he is being invited; he is a murâd. A sâlik whose sulűk takes place
beforehand is a tâlib. Muhammad ‘’alaihis-salâm’ is the head of murâds and the leader
of beloved ones. The invitation was extended to him first, and he was called
before all others ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’. Others are being
called along with him, as his dependants. Whether murâds or tâlibs, they are
behind him. It was declared in a hadîth-i-qudsî: “Had it not been for him, Allâhu ta’âlâ definitely would not have
created the creatures or made His rubűbiyyat known.” Because others are
behind him and the invitation was extended to him alone, everybody needs him.
It is through him that they attain fayz and barakats. Therefore, it would be
correct to call all people his Âl (family) ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ
Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’. All people are behind him, and they cannot attain
kamâl (perfection) without him in between. Since the existence of all is
dependent on his existence, how can perfections that are the fruits of
existence ever be attained without him being in between as the medium? Such
should be the Darling of the Rabb of the entire creation ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ
Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’!
Please listen well! It
has been understood by way of kashf that his being the Darling of Allâhu ta’âlâ ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ is on account of his affection towards the Dhât-i-ilâhî
(Person of Allâhu ta’âlâ). There is nothing, no attributes and no qualities and no honours mixed in between. It is the same
kind of affection with which
Allâhu ta’âlâ loves him. Not so is the case
-325-
with His loving His other born slaves (quls). He loves them on
account of honours, attributes and qualities, or by way of Names and Attributes
or, even, by way of the fancies of His Names and Attributes.
Let us make it
clearer. Rasűlullah is a medium in either one of two manners: In the first
manner, he is a curtain between the sâlik and the matlűb (desired, demanded,
wished for). In the second manner the sâlik attaches himself to him, benefits
from him as a means for himself, adapts himself to him, and thereby attains the
matlűb. Both these manners of intermediation exist in the path of sulűk and
before the haqîqat-i-Muhammadiyya is attained. The scholar who serves as a
means in this path is a medium and a curtain for the sâlik’s shuhűd. If, at the
end of the path, the jadhba does not come for the rescue (of the sâlik) and the
curtain does not disappear from between, a regrettable situation will arise.
For, only the second manner of intermadiation exists in the path of jadhba and
after the haqîqat-ul-haqâiq is attained. That is, the sâlik attaches himself
and follows. Curtaining is not the case. In other words, the manner of being a
curtain fulfills no function in attainments such as shuhűd and mushâhada and
others.
Question: Would it not be an
imperfection, a defect for Rasűlullah’s ‘’alaihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ not being
a medium, although in one sense only ‘’alaihi wa ’alâ Âlihis-salât-u-wa-s-salâm-u-wa-t-tehiyya’?
Answer: Rasűlullah’s
‘’alaihis salât-u-wa-s-salâm’ not being a medium in between is an indication of
his perfection and superiority. It is not a sign of imperfection on his part.
On the contrary, it would be a symptom of imperfection for him to be a medium
in between. For, what is symptomatic of his kamâl (perfection) is (others’)
attaining the highest grades by adapting themselves to him, following him, and
obeying him. And that, in turn, is when the one being followed is not in between.
Not so is the case when he is in between. The shuhűd takes place without a
curtain when the one being followed is not a medium. This is the highest one of
the grades of kamâl. The shuhűd that takes place when he is a medium is with a
curtain in between. As is seen, it is kamâl, superiority not to be a medium.
And it is a defect, imperfection to be a medium. The serving person is
following Him at every grade. By following Him he is getting a share from His
blessings, which in turn shows the greatness of the one being served and the
abudance of his honour. It is to that effect that Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu
’alaihi wa sallam’ stated: “The scholars of
-326-
my Ummat are like the Israelite Prophets!” In the Hereafter as
well, Allâhu
ta’âlâ will
be seen without a curtain in between. It was stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “When a person starts
performing a namâz the curtain between him and Allâhu ta’âlâ will go up”
Therefore, the namâz is the Mi’râj of a Believer. The namâz’s being the Mi’râj culminates with those who have attained the highest grade in one
of the paths of Tasawwuf. For, the curtain’s going up is exclusive to those who are at the highest grade. As is seen, the medium and the curtains disappear from
between. This ma’rifat, a special kindness and favour from Allâhu ta’âlâ, is among the subtlest of the pieces of information imparted to this faqîr, [i.e. Imâm Rabbânî. A Persian couplet in English:
I am the soil whereon clouds in Spring
Are pure water in pellets
sprinkling.
And how beautifully
the following couplet has been expressed:
If the Shâh comes to the poor one’s door;
No surprise, oh, master;
don’t you deplore!
Many of the superiors
of Tasawwuf said that Rasűlullah would be in between, while quite a number of
them said that he would not be. None of them explained why he said so. They did
not enlarge on which one of the two cases must be taken as perfection and which
one must be construed as imperfection. Scholars of the zâhir said that the case
of the medium’s not being in between would be a state of disbelief, while it
is, in actual fact, an immaculate state of îmân (correct belief). According to
them, a person who said that Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ would
not be a medium, would become a heretic, a miscreant. They supposed that the case
of there being a medium in between was the culmination of îmân and looked on
people who said so as kâmil (mature, perfect) people. The fact, however, is
that Rasűlullah’s not being a medium indicates a perfect obedience to him. In
contrast, his being a medium signifies a shortcoming in following him. We
explained earlier in the text that it is the case. Those people failed to
penetrate the essence of the matter. An âyat-i-kerîma in the Yűnus Sűra
purports: “They
deny because perhaps they do not understand.
They have failed to penetrate the essence of what he said. Their
predecessors denied in the same wise.”
My dear sir! The word ‘uwaysî ’, which is used by
experts of Tasawwuf, does not mean ‘(person) who does not have a master
-327-
(educator)’. For, ‘uwaysî’ means that the
souls of the Awliyâ have contributed to his education. Khwâja (’Ubeydullah)
‘quddisa sirruh’, (806, Tashkend - 895 [1490 A.D.], Samarkand,) although he
already had a master, [for he had been educated in the service and under the supervision
of Mawlânâ Ya’qűb Charkhî ‘quddisa sirruh’, (d. 851 [1447 A.D.]),] was called
‘uwaysî’ because he received help also from the blessed soul of Bahâ-ud-dîn
Bukhârî ‘quddisa sirruh’, (718 [1318 A.D.], Qasr-i-’ârifân, Bukhâra - 781
[1389], the same place.) Likewise, Sayyid Emir Ghilâl ‘quddisa sirruh’, (d. 772
[1370 A.D.], Bukhâra,) was the master (educator) of Muhammad Bahâ-ud-dîn
(Bukhârî). However, because the latter reaped benefits also from the blessed
soul of Khwâja ’Abd-ul-Khâliq Ghonjduwânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’, (d. 575
[1180 A.D.], Gonjduwân, Bukhâra,) he was called ‘uwaysî’. When a person says
that he has had a master and that he is ‘uwaysî’ at the same time, it would be
an appalling act of injustice to accuse him for having ‘denied his master’.
[Hadrat ’Abdullah
Dahlawî, (1158 [1744 A.D.], Punjab - 1240 [1824], Delhî,) states as follows in
the eighty-seventh page of his book entitled Durr-ul-me’ârif: To be an ‘uwaysî’ to
(the blessed soul of) Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ‘alaihi wa sallam’ or to any one
of the Awliyâ, (and thereby to receive fayz from them,) all you have to do is
perform two rak’ats of namâz once daily at a secluded place, say the Fâtiha
Sűra once, send the thawâb (that you will be given for these acts of worship)
as a gift to his soul, and thereafter sit for a while, meditating on his
blessed soul. In a few days’ time you will be his ‘uwaysî’. The booklet
entitled Huwalghanî
was
printed and appended to the book Maqâmât-i-Mazhariyya in India. In that booklet Hadrat Abdullah Dahlawî is quoted to
have said: “A person who wants to be an ‘uwaysî’ to Rasűlullah ‘sall-Allâhu
’alaihi wa sallam’ should, after performing the night prayer, imagine himself
holding both the blessed hands of the Messenger of Allah and say to him: Yâ Rasűlullah
(Oh, the Messenger of Allah)! I pay homage to thee in five things. They are: Saying
Kalima-i-shehâdat, performing namâz, paying zakât, fasting in the month of
Ramadân, and, for a person who can (both physically and financially) afford the
journey, going on hajj. (These five acts of worship are explained in full
detail throughout the fascicles of Endless Bliss.) He will attain this wish of his after doing so for a few days
running. To be an ‘uwaysî’ to a Walî, one should perform two rak’ats of namâz
at a secluded place, send the thawâb as a gift to that Walî’s blessed soul, and
wait, meditating on that Walî’s
-328-
blessed soul.” He will definitely become an ‘uwaysî’ to that
Walî as long as he is a Believer adhering to the credal tenets of Ahl as-sunnat
and a Muslim obedient to (Islamic rules and principles called) the
Ahkâm-i-islâmiyya. It is stated as follows in the thirty-eighth letter of the
second volume of the book entitled Maktűbât-i-Ma’thűmiyya, (written by Muhammad Ma’thűm Fârűqî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ
’alaih’:) “The most formidable obstacle to prevent man from attaining the grace
of Allâhu
ta’âlâ is
his own nafs. That (obstacle called) ‘nafs’ is not surmountable by reading
books or listening (to books being read). Sohbat with an insân-i-kâmil is
required. If that sohbat does not fall to one’s lot, then what one should do is
to attach one’s heart to that blessed person from afar, and love him very much;
in that case the fayz and barakats in that blessed person’s heart will flow
into one’s heart, varying directly as the depth of the affection in one’s
heart, and thereby one will attain kamâl. A hadîth-i-sherîf reads: “One will be with the
person one loves.”]
My dear sir; Abd-ul-Bâqî means a qul, a born slave of
Allâhu ta’âlâ, Who is Bâqî. (In that context) it has not been uttered as a man’s name. Although the word in question
has been being used as a name for men, and my Murshid, (namely Muhammad Bâqî-billâh ‘quddisa sirruh,) is a qul, a born slave of
Allâhu ta’âlâ, what has been meant is, “It is
Allâhu ta’âlâ, who is Bâqî, who disciplined and educated me.” How on earth could changing the name and thereby
behaving in violation of adab ever occur to one’s mind?
My dear sir;
Bâyezîd-i-Bistâmî ‘quddisa sirruh’ said, “Subhânî,” as he was in a state of sekr (ecstacy,
spiritual intoxication). Supposing we should blame him for that utterance, then
he would not have to carry the blame forever. Nor would it be a ground for
holding someone else superior to him. For, depending on situations and times,
some ma’rifats issue from the Awliyâ; but in other situations and at other
times they realize that those ma’rifats are an outcome of deficiency and desist
from them. They become promoted to higher ma’rifats and ranks. You say in your
letter, “Those Awliyâ who are mostly in a state of sekr may not be blamed for
such unbecoming utterances of theirs. Yet those whose are in a state of sahw
(sobriety), i.e. those who are always conscious, should not make such
statements.” My dear sir; the ones who say or write such things should be
judged to be in a state of sekr! Such things cannot be written in states not
mixed with sekr. It should be known, however, that there are various grades and
different levels of sekr. The more inordinate the sekr, the
-329-
more unbecoming will be the ecstatic’s utterances.
Bâyezîd-i-Bistâmî, a Walî who underwent very powerful states of sekr, once
said, “My flag rises higher than the flag of Muhammad ‘’alaihis-salâm’.” It
should not be supposed that the ones who are in the state of sahw (sobriety)
never undergo a state of sekr. A (continuous) state of sahw without any states
of sekr is deficiency. Pure, unmixed state of sahw goes with the ’awâm (common
people, lay Muslims). Those (scholars) who have attached value to the sahw have
meant a state with more sahw (than sekr). They have not meant a state of sahw
without any sekr in it. And the ones who have held the sekr valuable have meant
a state with more sekr in it. For, a state of sekr without a sahw in it is a
disaster, a catastrophe. Juneyd-i-Baghdâdî ‘quddisa sirruh’ was the chief of
the people of sahw, and he said that the sahw was more valuable than the sekr;
however, the states mixed with sekr and which he underwent were so numerous
that it would be a challenge only to tally them. His makings are the
statements: “It is Him who knows, and it is Him, again, who is known.” “The
colour of water is the colour of its container.” “When the hâdith (not eternal)
approaches the qadîm (eternal), no trace of it will be left.” The blessed
author of the book entitled ’Awârif-ul-ma’ârif [Shihâbuddîn Suhrawardî] was one of the superior people of sahw;
yet so many were ma’rifats mixed with states of sekr does his book contain that
an attempt to count them would never come to an end. This faqîr, [i.e. Hadrat
Imâm Rabbânî,] compiled a few of his ma’rifats mixed with sekr. It has always
been during states mixed with sekr that the Awliyâ have revealed their secret
ma’rifats. Their acts of boasting and self-praise have all ensued from states
of sekr. Their saying that they are superior to others have always been
overflowingnesses of states of sekr. It is deemed as an act of kufr (denial,
disbelief) in this way to reveal the secrets during pure states of sahw. And it
is shirk (polytheism) to look on oneself as superior to others. A state of sahw
mixed with a certain amount of sekr is like food salted for flavour. Saltless
food will be insipid. No one will like it. A Persian couplet in English:
Were it not for love, and
cares caused by the dear,
Who would say all these sweet
words, and who’d them hear!
That Hadrat ’Abd-qâdir
Geilânî ‘quddisa sirruh’ was in a state of sekr when he said, “My both feet are
above the necks of all the (other) Awliyâ,” is informed by the blessed author
of the book ’Awârif-ul-ma’ârif ‘qaddas-Allâhu ta’âlâ sirrah-ul-’azîz’. His
-330-
quotation of the great Walî’s statement is not intended to blame
the great Walî for having made that statement. On the contrary, it is intended
to praise him. For, it is the statement of a fact that he knows. Such boastful
statements can be made only in states mixed with sekr. Those great people never
talk like that during states of sahw not mixed with any sekr. I, the
faqîr, [Imâm Rabbânî ‘qaddas-Allâhu ta’âlâ sirrah-ul ’azîz’ means himself,]
have been explaining the pieces of information and (spiritual) secrets
belonging to those tâifa-i-’aliyya (exalted people) in all my writings. I would
be honoured to request that you should not suppose that all these things have
been said in a state of pure sahw! It is never the case, ever. For, it is
harâm, and a distasteful loquacity, too, to reveal such secret states,
especially in the path we have been following. There is many a person who talks
much in a state of sahw that does not contain even a whit of sekr. Why don’t those
people reveal such secrets? Why don’t they bewilder people? A Persian couplet
in English:
The hâfiz wails not for
nothing;
His words say many things
surprising!
My dear sir; such
words as being expressed so as to reveal secrets have not been used in meanings
within everyone’s comprehensive capacity. The superior leaders of this path
‘qaddas-Allâhu ta’âlâ sirrah-ul ’azîz’ have always said such things. Doing so
is not a new passing fad invented by this faqîr, (i.e. Imâm Rabbânî.) It would
be apropos at this point to recall the saying that goes, “This is not the first
bottle broken in Islam.” Then, what is all that clamour and aggression for? If
there has been a statement deemed to be disagreeable with Islam, an optimistic
hand might as well be lent by giving the statement a meaning agreeable with
Islam. This would be a safer preference against the hazard of entertaining a
bad opinion about a Muslim. It is harâm and an ugly sin to publicize bad deeds
and to reveal the shameful acts of sinners. Is it something justifiable to
stigmatize a Muslim as a wicked one upon a mere supposition or suspicion? Would
it become a man of religion to go from one place to another and try to peddle
the gossip that that Muslim is a heretic? When a person who is a Muslim and who
loves Muslims hears a person say something that does not seem to be agreeable
with Islam, he must first observe that person. If the person who has made the
so-called unsuitable statement is a heretic or a zindiq, he must refute it by
telling the truth; he must not try to find an optimistic meaning for
-331-
his statement. If the person who has made that statement is a
Muslim who has belief in Allah and His Messenger, then he must try to correct
his statement, to give it a good meaning. If he fails to find a good meaning
for the statement, he must ask the owner of the statement to explain his
statement. If that person also fails to do so, then he is a person who needs
advice, which is what the former person must do. Emr (or amr)-i-ma’rűf (To try to counsel
other Muslims to obey the Ahkâm-i-islâmiyya) and Nahy-i-munker (to try to dissuade
Muslims from acts of disobedience to Islam) are two commandments of Islam. [Ahkâm-i-islâmiyya means comandments and
prohibitions of Islam.] This, however, should be done softly and with a sweet
language so that it will be useful. If it is intended not for being useful but
for vilifying a Muslim, then I have nothing to say. May Allâhu ta’âlâ keep us all in the right way! What appals me even more is this:
As far as I understand from your honourable letter, when your disciples saw
the person spreading gossip about me the faqîr by showing my letter to people
around, [i.e. the eighty-seventh letter of the third volume (of Maktűbât-i-Imâm-i-Rabbânî),] they, too, began
to feel cold doubts about this faqîr. How I
wish to
know that the doubtful mood appearing on them is not a reflection from their
Murshid (Master, Guide). You should have solved and elucidated the apparently
doubtful points, instead of letting the problem reach us. You should have
extinguished the fitna. I am at a loss as to what to say to my beloved friends living
there for keeping silent while they had the power to eliminate the doubts and
withholding their help. Yâ Rabbî! Please do pity us, and bless us with the lot
of following the right way!