The Stations of the Mystics

Ayatollah Nekounam's books

The Stations of the Mystics

Detailed and Extensive Commentary on the Ninth and Tenth Sections of Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat

By Ayatollah Muhammadreza Nekounam

Main Title:
The Stations of the Mystics: A Detailed and Extensive Commentary on the Ninth and Tenth Sections of Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat / Muhammadreza Nekounam.

Contract Title:
Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat: A Selection and Commentary.

Publication Information:
Islamsahr: Sobhe Farda Publications, 2nd edition, 2014 (1393 in the Iranian calendar).

Physical Details:
448 pages.
ISBN of the second edition: 978-600-6435-52-7.

Classification:
Library of Congress: 7 M 8 N / 415 BBR
Dewey Decimal: 1/189

National Bibliography Number: 2846742

Publisher: Sobhe Farda
Edition: 2nd
Print Date: 2014
Copies printed: 3000
Price: 280,000 IRR

Preface

Praise be to God, the Lord of the worlds, and blessings and peace upon Muhammad and his pure family, and eternal curses upon their enemies.

A mystic seeks the Truth, finds the Truth, and does not choose anything before it. He transcends blessings, wealth, and the afterlife, and even passes beyond the pursuit of mysticism itself, seeing only the Truth. He even loses his vision, and the Divine Presence becomes both the observer and the observed.

A mystic seeks both theoretical and experiential knowledge of the Truth. He longs for the essence of the Truth, a Presence where silence must be maintained, where humility must be expressed, and where the highest aspiration—the flight of the sharpest mind—cannot reach. This truth, however, can only be attained by the beloved ones, through the guidance and support of the family of purity.

A mystic, who understands the vastness of existence and the nature of the Divine, cannot desire anything other than the Divine. He sees the Truth in every face and is free from all constraints, finding freedom in his sight. This is the essence of mysticism: the journey towards the Divine.

Mysticism is the path to reach the Truth. The mystic’s will is directed solely towards the Divine, and through mysticism, he seeks to reach his goal, the Divine Presence. The Divine Light shines within him, leaving no room for anything else.

Mysticism is the hidden truth within each person, and those with devotion can uncover it. At the beginning of their journey, mystics may not yet fully understand, feeling like strangers, but this is necessary to protect their secret from the deceitful forces of the world. As the famous tale goes:

The raven wanted to cry out,
To reveal its secret,
But when it opened its mouth,
The fox snatched its prey.

Introduction to Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat

Among the Islamic philosophers, one of the few who stands out is Sheikh Abu Ali Sina, who, through his writing of the Ninth and Tenth sections of Al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat, has surpassed his contemporaries and created a unique work.

This book holds special significance among Sheikh’s works, especially since it is his final one and surpasses earlier works like Shifa and Najat in terms of its value and depth. The book is structured with discipline and logical coherence, exploring topics in a clear and methodical manner.

The first volume discusses logic and its foundations, whereas the second and third volumes deal with philosophy and nature, examining both theoretical and practical aspects. The Tenth section, which completes the Ninth, delves into the secrets of mysticism and the nature of the mystics themselves.

The Ninth section, Maqamat al-Arifin (The Stations of the Mystics), is a discussion on human beings and their spiritual states, particularly those on the path of mysticism. Here, Sheikh addresses the journey of the mystic and their experiences.

The Tenth section, titled Asrar al-Ayat (The Secrets of the Signs), builds on the Ninth and focuses on the mystics as the “signs” of the Divine, discussing their secrets and characteristics.

Thus, the core theme of this work is Irfan (mysticism) and the spiritual stages and states of mystics. This commentary seeks to illuminate the inner qualities of the mystics and uncover their secrets.

The mystic is a keeper of secrets, with an inner essence that differentiates him from others. While others might possess the same secrets, they are unaware of them. The mystic, however, is aware of the hidden truth within himself. This makes the Ninth section titled Asrar al-Ayat (The Secrets of the Signs).

Ibn Sina’s Mysticism

A brief look at Al-Isharat shows that in his later years, Ibn Sina became increasingly inclined towards mysticism, presenting the stages and spiritual states of mysticism in the Ninth section. But did Ibn Sina fully embrace theoretical mysticism, or did he experience it in his final years of life, marked by longing, separation, and yearning?

Although Ibn Sina did not spend his entire life in mysticism, his late writings indicate a shift towards this path. He remains grounded in philosophical reasoning but begins to touch on the deep truths of mysticism.

Ibn Sina’s writing on mysticism, though philosophical in nature, touches on the core of the mystical experience, offering a unique philosophical-mystical perspective. His language is clear, precise, and highly structured, drawing on his deep understanding of both philosophy and mysticism.

In his commentary on the Ninth section, Ibn Sina elaborates on the differences between ascetics, worshippers, and mystics, emphasizing their distinctive qualities.

This unique blend of philosophy and mysticism is what makes Ibn Sina’s work invaluable to both fields. His approach provides a philosophical framework for understanding the mystical experience, bridging two seemingly separate domains into a coherent whole.

In the Tenth Discourse, where the Sheikh speaks of the possibility of knowledge of the unseen, he employs the terms: “irtisam”, “intiqash”, and “hā’il”, none of which align with the mystical observations or the language of Sufism, which speaks in terms of “wusul” (arrival) and “māni‘” (barrier). Rather, such terms are more suited to the theologians and classical peripatetic philosophy.

In the final parts of the Tenth Discourse, Ibn Sina explicitly states: “Then, if I were to recount the particulars of this subject based on what we have witnessed and what has been narrated by those whom we believe, the discussion would become lengthy, and those who do not believe the general statement would find it easy not to believe the details either.” This passage implies that he has observed the experiences of mystics but has not reached mysticism himself. He says that he has witnessed others exhibiting these states and that those who were truthful narrated them to him, but he does not claim to have directly perceived anything of the unseen. This is because he did not have the necessary disposition, opportunity, or the grace to reach a teacher who could guide him in such matters.

The Sheikh has, in a sense, had a distant relationship with the fire, and his writings are far removed from the insights of a true mystic, who, after having dedicated his heart and soul to God, is truly engaged in mystical practices. Although Ibn Sina explored mysticism with a distinct and refined approach, all that he presents is merely a theoretical understanding, indicating that he has tasted a faint essence of mysticism but nothing more. In the Tenth Discourse, while discussing the proof of individual and universal knowledge for the celestial spheres, he draws his conclusions from transcendent wisdom, contrasting it with the strictly theoretical discussions of peripatetic philosophy. He wishes to convey that to prove the rational soul for the celestial spheres, one must go beyond pure theoretical discourse and delve into direct mystical experience and insight, making this experience a complement to the discourse. Hence, it can be said that Ibn Sina considers for himself a form of insight and understanding, describing a wisdom that incorporates investigation and intuitive knowledge, which he contrasts with the peripatetic wisdom that is purely discursive.

Transcendent wisdom, in Ibn Sina’s view, regards discourse as the foundation and intuition as its complement, unlike Illuminative philosophy, which holds that intuition is foundational and discourse is secondary. Peripatetic philosophy, on the other hand, considers only discourse as the measure of understanding existence and its levels. However, beyond all of these scholastic philosophies, the domain of mysticism is one of presence.

Nevertheless, it must be stated that some of the Sheikh’s statements remain within the scope of scholastic thought and do not surpass the boundaries of flawed and narrow theological views. The mysticism presented in this book is that of beginners in spiritual practice or, at best, that of intermediate mystics. In this discourse, the Sheikh leaves out many important aspects of mysticism, and much of what he presents is not free from deficiencies.

Ibn Sina presents his final thoughts in the “Kitab al-Isharat” (The Book of the Beacons), contrasting it with peripatetic philosophy, which was the dominant philosophy of his time. He refers to his thoughts as “transcendent wisdom.” His philosophical ideas are so profound that it can be said that the philosophy of transcendent wisdom as expounded by Mulla Sadra originates from this source, with Mulla Sadra being a capable interpreter of the Sheikh’s wisdom. Even Al-Ghazali, in his Tahāfut al-Falāsifa (The Incoherence of the Philosophers), critiques the Sheikh, seeing him as the representative of philosophy, though his criticism is somewhat unjust in attacking all philosophers who do not agree with Ibn Sina’s position.

Detailed Explanation of the Mystic’s States

However, the present commentary aims to critically reassess the propositions in these discourses, unraveling the complexities, subtle insights, and the truth-value of the mystical claims found in these two discourses. These two discourses should be considered as part of the Sheikh’s mystical legacy, which beautifully outlines the path of mysticism. Though the Sheikh does not move beyond words, the journey of love and the lover’s path cannot be undertaken without difficulty and pain.

This commentary first explains and elaborates the Sheikh’s text, followed by an interpretation of it by Khwaja, and offers a fresh explanation, free from repetition. Finally, it briefly points out the clear shortcomings in both the text and the commentary, critically addressing significant flaws in them.

The author adopts a philosophical approach in this writing, merely focusing on expressing the subtlety of spiritual practice and mysticism through the language of wisdom, and does not engage in expressing the realities of those who have reached the true and profound mystical state. The texts present a distant reflection of true mysticism and are far removed from the actual experiences and insights of the true mystics. Therefore, it is hoped that this writing clarifies the right path and truth, so that in the midst of the contemporary world, where materialism has overtaken many people, the way may not be lost, and the seekers of truth will not become trapped in the treacherous paths.

The term “station” refers to the establishment of a permanent uprising in the heart of the seeker, in contrast to the term “state,” which is a passing experience. A state is like a fleeting wine or breeze; for example, when a person prays, recites a supplication, visits Mecca or the Kaaba, performs a revival prayer, recites the Ziyarat Ashura, or observes an Ashura, a spiritual joy and pleasure arise in their heart. This is the manifestation of “state.”

However, a station is one in which the heart of the individual is perpetually adorned with divine grace, allowing them to see continually what they have seen before. It is not a condition that appears only during a special moment, like the state experienced during prayer. This station is not confined to a particular time or place, but the heart remains illuminated at all times. Such a person experiences purity and serenity consistently, whether with friends or enemies, with family members or strangers. This is because they abide in a constant state, and an uprising of the soul has been established within them.

The esteemed Sheikh, in this warning, discusses the stages of the mystics and does not speak of “states,” because states are transient, arising at a moment and fading at another, never remaining constant. For instance, a person who goes to the mosque, weeping in prayer, feels a great distaste for all evils and a natural inclination towards goodness. However, as soon as they wipe away their tears, go to the market, and sit behind the counter, they do not refrain from overcharging. In this scenario, they were in a state during the prayer, but this state does not represent a permanent station for them.

One who attains a “station” may, at times, hold a prayer bead in hand, and that bead serves as a sword to ward off Satan. Yet, when they wield a sword, it becomes like a prayer bead, serving as a remembrance of the Almighty. For someone who has reached a station, both the sword and the prayer bead are one truth, just as the Commander of the Faithful (Imam Ali) wielded his sword, Zulfiqar, in the name of divine remembrance, and when he recited the remembrance of God, Zulfiqar was also an embodiment of divine truth.

The noble Khawaja notes that in the eighth section of the work, the Sheikh discussed the joy, love, and admiration that beings feel towards their unique perfections, pointing out that not everyone finds delight in the same things. Just as a dog enjoys a bone, an ant a grain, and a mosquito something unclean, human beings derive their joy from their unique perfection. Every being has its own particular pleasure, and in this section, the Sheikh aims to first describe the state of the perfected individuals, not absolutely, as even angels are included, but specifically the human species’ perfection, which is to attain the beauty of the Divine. True joy and happiness in humans are seen in their union with the divine.

Secondly, the Sheikh aims to explain how the stages of human happiness, progress, and perfection can be traversed, so that each person may come to recognize their own unique excellence. Furthermore, the Sheikh wishes to enumerate the experiences that arise for mystics at these stations and stages.

The Honour and Humility in the Presence of “The Stations of the Mystics”

The eminent Fakhru (the critic) who is accustomed to criticizing the Sheikh’s ideas, lowers his stance before the ninth section, remarking: “This section represents the highest rank of the Book of Illuminations, for in this regard, the Sheikh has presented the science of Sufism and mystic knowledge with an organization that no one before him has surpassed, nor have those after him been able to offer anything superior to this book or its beautiful arrangement.”

Khawaja’s Explanation

“Jalabib” (meaning cloak or robe) refers to the covering or garment that one wears. “Nudhoo al-thawb” refers to taking it off; in this context, the statement “they had cast off their robes and stripped themselves of the material body to enter the realm of holiness” means that while their souls were originally enveloped in material bodies, it is as though they have shed those garments and purified themselves of worldly impurities, thus connecting to the realm of purity, and aligning with those divine beings who are free of imperfection and evil. They experience profound, hidden revelations, which transcend the capacity of human imagination, cannot be expressed by words, and provide joys that the eye has not seen and the ear has not heard. This is reflected in the Qur’anic verse: “No soul knows what is hidden for them of joy, as a reward for what they used to do” (Qur’an, 32:17).

Divine Power

The term “Jalabib” is used here to refer to the garment or cloak, often signifying a covering that one wears, and “Nudhoo” refers to the removal of that garment. It implies that, although the mystics are still present in this world, they are not bound by it; their nourishment and sustenance are no longer from worldly sources. Just as Imam Ali remarked that his strength to lift the gate of Khaybar came not from physical power, but from divine spiritual might, the mystics are sustained and empowered by a force beyond the physical. Their detachment from the material world is thus reflected in their ability to transcend worldly desires and to remain wholly in connection with the Divine.

The Sheikh’s statement “it is as though they have cast off their earthly robes” suggests that while the mystics are still physically present in this world, their souls are detached from the material realm, existing with a consciousness rooted in the sacred and divine. Through their spiritual elevation, they no longer derive nourishment from worldly sources.

The Inner Mystery of the Mystic

The Sheikh points out that while the mystics’ souls may seem enshrouded by the physical body, they have transcended its constraints, shedding material attachments and thus connecting deeply with the Divine. This is exemplified in the actions of mystics who, although living in the world, are not of it. They engage in the world without being attached to it, experiencing a profound inner purity and connection to the sacred realm. Through their spiritual practice, they find joy in the unseen and the unspoken, experiencing truths that are beyond ordinary comprehension.

Their experiences manifest as miraculous signs and actions that are often beyond the understanding of those who are not spiritually awakened, but to those who are attuned to the Divine, these actions are a clear reflection of their inner state of perfection.

Reflection on the Sheikh’s Words

The Sheikh’s statement “the mystics have stations and degrees” raises the question of whether “station” and “degree” are synonymous or if the latter refers to something beyond the former. The Sheikh discusses both the stages (or degrees) and states of mystics, and it becomes clear that he distinguishes between the two. The stages refer to the mystical paths that one follows, while the stations represent the ultimate spiritual attainments.

Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī’s View:

Fakhr al-Rāzī states: The best interpretation one can offer of this story is that Salāmān symbolises Prophet Adam (peace be upon him), and Absāl represents Paradise. It appears that Ibn Sīnā refers to Adam’s rational soul, and by Paradise, he means human felicity and the degrees of virtue and perfection. The expulsion of Adam from Paradise due to the sin of eating wheat signifies the descent of the soul from its exalted ranks when it inclines toward sensual desires, and wheat is an allegory for such desire.

Khwāja Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī’s Response to Fakhr:

He says: The words of the Shaykh (Ibn Sīnā) suggest the existence of a narrative in which these two names (Salāmān and Absāl) appear. Its structure involves a seeker and a sought—where the seeker only gradually attains the object of desire, and each stage of attainment brings greater perfection. Thus, Salāmān represents the seeker, Absāl the sought, and the events that transpire between them are allegories whose meanings the Shaykh has invited us to decipher. This story seems to be one of the Arab tales, as these two names are frequently found in their sayings and narratives.

Khwāja opposes Fakhr’s view on the nature of the story of Salāmān and Absāl. He asserts that the Shaykh refers to it as a “story,” which indicates it is a factual narrative, not a fictitious invention. The structure suggests a seeker gradually approaching their goal, advancing from one level of perfection to another in a systematic order.

In mysticism and spiritual wayfaring, one cannot act upon any teaching arbitrarily; one must follow a structured programme that aligns with one’s capacities. Truth cannot be accessed without foundation. Similarly, this tale belongs to the genre of Arab proverbs and their folklore.

A Report from Khurāsān:

Khwāja narrates that he heard from one of the learned men of Khurāsān—Niẓām al-Dīn Jājarmī—that Ibn al-Aʿrābī recorded in his book al-Nawādir a tale involving two men taken captive. One was known for his goodness and named Salāmān; the other, a man from the tribe of Jurhum, was known for his wickedness. Because of his good reputation, Salāmān was ransomed and rescued, whereas the Jurhumī was abandoned and perished in captivity. This event became a proverb among the Arabs.

Khwāja admits he neither remembers such a proverb nor has he read the referenced book, but—unlike Fakhr—he does not dismiss the tale’s authenticity due to his ignorance of it. Fakhr, having not seen it, simply deems it fabricated. This indicates a flawed reasoning, for lack of knowledge does not constitute evidence of nonexistence.

Hence, the story is not a creation of the Shaykh, and one may pursue the decoding of its symbols.

Ibn Sīnā posits that if one hears the story, one should understand Salāmān and Absāl as referring to oneself and one’s level of spiritual attainment. Therefore, decipher the allegory, for it reflects the inner states of the mystics. The Shaykh’s instruction to interpret the allegory is not a demand to grasp the unseen; it is a call to self-knowledge—perhaps this story belongs to the class of rational intuitions accessible to the intellect alone.

In this passage, Khwāja refutes Fakhr’s objection, though his version of the tale differs from the Shaykh’s. Nevertheless, he establishes that the tale is not invented by the Shaykh and has external attestations.

The First Narrative of the Tale:

Khwāja then adds that twenty years after writing his initial commentary, two versions of the story came into his possession. The first tells of a king who ruled over Greece, Rome, and Egypt. With the help of a sage, who acted as his separate intellect, he conquered all regions. The king desired a son without consorting with a woman. Through the sage’s design, a child was produced from his semen without a womb. The boy was named Salāmān, and a woman named Absāl nursed and raised him. As he matured, Salāmān fell in love with Absāl. Despite the father’s prohibition, they eloped to a distant land.

Using a magical device, the king tracked them and provided them with sustenance, but later punished them by ensuring they longed for each other while being kept apart. Salāmān eventually repented, returned to his father, and was told he could not ascend to kingship while in love with a licentious woman. The two threw themselves into the sea; Salāmān was rescued, Absāl drowned.

The sage consoled Salāmān by showing him an image of Absāl and, over time, led him to behold the form of Venus—symbol of true beauty and love. Salāmān fell for this divine beauty, moved past his sorrow, and became ready for kingship. The sage and the king built two pyramids where their remains and the tale were stored. Aristotle later uncovered it on Plato’s advice, and Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq translated it from Greek into Arabic.

Khwāja’s Reflections:

Khwāja remarks: This tale was fabricated by a common philosopher to forcefully align it with the Shaykh’s teaching, but it fails in essence. The narrative implies that the king is the Active Intellect, the sage is the intermediary of divine overflow, and Salāmān represents the rational soul—emanated without bodily entanglement. Absāl symbolises the animalistic faculty that helps complete the soul. Salāmān’s love for Absāl is the soul’s inclination toward bodily pleasures. Her immoral nature represents the soul’s attachment to material desires post-detachment.

Their flight across the Western Sea signifies immersion in ephemeral concerns. The period of neglect represents their time in heedlessness. Their torment—yearning without fulfilment—reflects the soul’s longing when its faculties wane. Salāmān’s return marks his awareness and repentance. Their plunge into the sea symbolises existential annihilation; the body dissolves, and the soul, spared, endures.

His vision of Venus represents delight in intellectual perfections. Sitting on the throne symbolises attainment of ultimate truth. The two pyramids—one for the king and one for the sage—stand for the form and matter that remain through time.

This is the allegorical interpretation of the story. Salāmān aligns with the Shaykh’s view, but Absāl does not, for she was meant to represent a spiritual degree, not a hindrance. Therefore, the tale is misaligned with the Shaykh’s intent, indicating the storyteller’s limited grasp of its philosophical depth.

Author’s Observations and Critiques

This tale reflects numerous patriarchal beliefs. For instance, it was believed that a true king never bowed to anyone, not even his wife. The notion prevailed that a man who kneels before anyone, especially a woman, lacks masculinity. Consequently, the king desires to have a child without engaging with a woman.

According to their patriarchal mindset, it was considered manly if a child did not suckle from a woman. For example, if a tiger, leopard, or lion were found nursing a child, it was evident that the king was superior in masculinity. However, it seems they were unaware of such possibilities.

The concept of a child being born without physical union with a woman appears in this fable, suggesting that even in that era, genetic studies might have been a topic of interest.
The narrative structure of the tale aligns somewhat with the melancholic themes found in “Maqamat al-‘Arifin.” However, beyond that, it does not relate to this work. The author undertakes this effort primarily to counter the accusations of Fakhr al-Razi against the esteemed Sheikh and to prove that this tale is not a fabrication of the Sheikh, nor did the Sheikh command the impossible. The author has diligently pursued this matter for nearly twenty years, as it resonates with the theme of love and, thus, approaches mysticism. Otherwise, “Maqamat al-‘Arifin” is not a place for discussing such stories.
In this story, the sage is neither a jester, a peddler, nor a courtier who sits cross-legged in the king’s court and recites phrases like “Subhakam Allah.” Rather, he is a strategist, akin to the esteemed Khwaja, who restrained Hulagu Khan. As stated, “The king was alarmed and turned to the sage,” and further, “He summoned him.” This indicates that the sage did not visit the king; instead, the king called upon him. It is evident that this sage possessed inner authority and was not among those who served as jesters in the king’s court to receive sustenance.
The term “أرسل” (sent) is incorrect; the proper term is “أوصل” (guided). This implies, “Obey me, and I will guide you to union.” “Sending” is used when there is a specific object and path.
An individual from the upper echelons of society, despite numerous misdeeds, remains capable of redemption. However, a poor person, with the slightest mistake, loses all potential and reputation. This illustrates the disparity between the rich and the poor.
Not only does the character of Absāl not align with the Sheikh’s perspective, but the character of Salāmān also faces challenges in this tale. Salāmān possesses a turbulent heart, unfit for kingship. Kingship is a position of governance, not suitable for everyone. Sometimes, as with Prophet Yusuf, the Qur’an beautifully states: “He would have inclined towards her had he not seen the evidence of his Lord.” Prophet Yusuf remains untainted; it is Zulaikha who becomes tainted. In this fable, both flee together and drown together, as if they are both fleeing from their true selves and are deeply terrified. How then can such a person attain the position of kingship? In this story, Salāmān is as tainted as Absāl. The difference lies in the fact that Salāmān’s father possessed power and always considered his well-being, thus he did not perish, whereas Absāl had no one and was solely cared for by a nurse.
The interpretation of the sage is flawed; he cannot be equated with the active intellect. The active intellect is not ignorant to seek advice from the sage. One might interpret the sage as the active intellect, and if the active intellect is indeed the king, then the interpretation of the sage should be the Divine Truth or the First Intellect, not something lesser. If the king is the active intellect, the sage’s character in this tale becomes redundant and should have been omitted.
The esteemed Khwaja interprets Salāmān as the rational soul. However, the correct interpretation is that Salāmān represents the commanding soul. Since his father held a suitable position, he rose with his assistance. The rational soul does not act under the influence of desire; it is not subject to passion. Even though it possesses desire, it subdues and controls it. If it does engage with desire, at least it does not associate with someone forbidden. In this story, Salāmān’s corruption parallels Absāl’s. Moreover, Salāmān is described as having “loves and necessities,” and Absāl later says, “She invited him to herself.” Based on this, Salāmān cannot be the rational soul. Since the commanding soul is attached to the corporeal, one cannot claim, “He imparted it to him without attachment to the corporeal,” meaning the sage imparted the image of Zahra to Salāmān without attachment to the corporeal. Salāmān was ensnared by bodily desires and could not free himself from matter and materialism. His refuge with the king was forced, and subsequently, he was healed with the image of Zahra. Moreover, to reach Zahra, the sage forcibly placed Absāl’s image before him and led him to Zahra through love for Absāl’s image, which was forbidden to him. Such attributes cannot represent the rational soul.
The sage is interpreted as the source of grace, bestowing grace upon the king. However, if the sage is the source of grace, he cannot be the essence, as grace is an attribute. Even if the sage is the essence, the active intellect (king) should not possess ignorance and deficiency. Yet, in this story, the king is depicted as ignorant and deficient, unable to find a solution to save his son. The active intellect does not become helpless in such matters.
Salāmān’s awareness contradicts his drowning and suicide. Awareness does not align with such actions.
The story mentions that Salāmān’s body drowned upon his demise. When the body submerges in water, all faculties are suffocated, and his soul is severed. However, the soul, which is Salāmān, accompanies the body to its destruction. Additionally, with Absāl’s corruption, Salāmān perishes. Therefore, the question arises: how does Salāmān’s father save him, unless it is said that since Salāmān was a prince, his salvation is a royal prerogative.
One cannot interpret the image of Zahra as intellectual perfections. Intellectual perfections

Narrative Summary of the Second Tale

When the woman realised she could not seduce Absāl, she devised another plan. She suggested to Salāmān that he marry off her sister to his brother, so as to strengthen familial ties. Salāmān consented and arranged the marriage between his wife’s sister and Absāl. The woman told her sister, “I shall secure Absāl for you, but first I must unite with him and satisfy my longing; only then may you lie with him.” Her sister, being obedient, agreed.

The woman told Absāl that her sister was a virgin, modest and chaste, and that he should not enter the bridal chamber or speak with her on the first night so that she might gradually become accustomed to him and feel at ease. On the wedding night, the woman took the place of her sister in the bridal chamber. When Absāl entered, he sensed that the woman was not modest and demure, but rather sought to embrace him passionately, attempting to quench her overwhelming desire. Absāl, suspicious of her behaviour, recognised it as unfitting for a chaste virgin. At that very moment, a flash of lightning lit up the sky, and in its illumination, he saw her face and realised she was his brother’s wife. He pushed her away.

Desiring to preserve his brother’s honour, Absāl told Salāmān that he wished to embark on conquests for the sake of the kingdom. Citing his outward bravery, he assembled an army and departed for war, seeking no favour or reward. He became the first conqueror like Dhū al-Qarnayn, subduing lands across the earth.

After a long period of military success, Absāl returned, hoping the king’s wife had forgotten him. Yet her love had not abated; she still desired intimacy with him. Again, he rejected her. When enemies attacked Salāmān, Absāl was dispatched to lead the army. However, the woman bribed the soldiers, scattering them and leading to Absāl’s defeat. Severely wounded and abandoned by his troops, he was left for dead. A wild animal showed him mercy, suckling him with its milk and nursing him back to health.

Absāl returned and found Salāmān under siege. Taking command of the army, he destroyed the enemy and captured their leader, restoring peace to the kingdom. The woman, seeing this plan had also failed, conspired again. She bribed the royal chef and a servant to poison Absāl. They succeeded, and he died. Salāmān was devastated, relinquished the throne, and retreated into supplication.

In his state of prayer, the truth was revealed to him: who had truly caused all this misery. In response, he poisoned those responsible for his brother’s death.

Mystical Interpretation by Khwaja

Khwaja’s allegorical reading:

Salāmān represents the rational soul (nafs nāṭiqah).
Absāl symbolises the theoretical intellect (ʿaql naẓarī), which becomes the acquired intellect (ʿaql mustafād)—the final stage of gnosis if it ascends to perfection.
Salāmān’s wife embodies the bodily faculty, the commanding self (nafs ammārah), driven by lust and anger—merged with the soul and personified as a human.
Her love for Absāl reflects the soul’s desire to subjugate the intellect, just as it has conquered the other faculties, aiming to make the intellect serve its transient desires.
Absāl’s resistance signifies the intellect’s inclination towards the higher realm.
The wife’s sister, whom she marries to Absāl, represents the practical intellect (ʿaql ʿamalī), obedient to the theoretical intellect—termed the tranquil soul (nafs muṭmaʾinnah).
The wife replacing her sister in the bridal chamber signifies the deceptive manipulation of the commanding soul, presenting base desires as genuine interests.
The flash of lightning from dark clouds is a divine illumination (jadhbah) occurring amidst worldly distractions.
Absāl’s rejection of the woman represents the intellect turning away from desire.
His conquest for his brother symbolises the soul’s ascent through theoretical knowledge to the divine realms, using practical reason to organise bodily affairs and governance—thus earning him the title “first Dhū al-Qarnayn.”
The soldiers’ abandonment signifies the detachment of sensory, imaginative, and estimative faculties during the soul’s ascent.
His nursing by a wild beast symbolises spiritual sustenance bestowed by transcendent realities.
Salāmān’s despair upon Absāl’s absence shows the soul’s confusion when its rational management is neglected.
Absāl’s return represents the intellect resuming control of bodily affairs.
The cook symbolises the angry faculty, ignited in revenge; the servant who fed Absāl, the appetitive faculty, which draws nourishment.
Their conspiracy and Absāl’s death represent the dissolution of the intellect in old age, as the commanding self increasingly employs the bodily faculties due to rising dependency.
Salāmān’s execution of these individuals symbolises the soul’s renunciation of bodily faculties in the twilight of life—the waning of lust and rage.
His abdication represents the soul’s withdrawal from governing the body, now subject to external forces.

Khwaja concludes that this interpretation aligns with Ibn Sīnā’s original intent. The story of Salāmān and Absāl appears in his treatise on Divine Decree and Destiny, referencing the moment the lightning revealed the woman’s face to Absāl. Thus, this confirms the authenticity of the tale as originating from Ibn Sīnā.

Author’s Observations and Critiques on the Second Tale

If Jūzjānī’s account is correct and the tale originated with Ibn Sīnā, Fakhr al-Rāzī’s objection is misplaced. Ibn Sīnā framed the tale as a riddle, not as a historical event. Thus, the expectation to decipher it as if it were real is a demand for the impossible. However, one could argue that Ibn Sīnā was merely recording received knowledge, not fabricating a tale.
The tale attempts to allegorise human perfection, and Khwaja partially supports this. Yet, despite the effort, the story is ultimately unsuitable due to its numerous narrative flaws.
Ibn Sīnā’s instruction—“Know that Salāmān is a parable for you and Absāl is the symbol of your degree in gnosis if you are among its people; then solve the riddle if you can”—does not mean the riddle pertains to the story’s plot. Rather, it refers to a spiritual journey: one must discover their own truth and existential degree. The tale is a mirror to one’s inner path, not an external narrative to decode.
In the first version of the story, Absāl was depicted as sinful. In this second account, he is entirely exonerated, and Salāmān is portrayed as weak-willed, entirely submissive to his wife.
The allegory is flawed. Salāmān should embody a powerful, true human being—not someone so easily manipulated and incapable of leadership without his brother. His character is poorly developed, making Absāl the true protagonist.
If the sister symbolises practical reason, why does she obey the lustful woman instead of the theoretical intellect?
Divine illumination does not occur amid worldly indulgence, lust, or sin. Rather, it emerges in acts of worship, spiritual struggle, and righteous deeds.
Salāmān was not ascending to divine realms; he simply failed to govern and was overcome by enemies in his brother’s absence—indicating weakness, not transcendence.
The intellect does not perish with age. It merely withdraws from sensory engagement. Even in old age, the intellect retains its capacity, though its link with the material body may be impaired.
The physical faculties of Salāmān extend beyond the three mentioned (anger, lust, and practical reason). His entire kingdom and nation should be seen as extensions of his being.
According to Ibn Sīnā’s own words—“Absāl is your degree in gnosis”—Absāl should be a modal attribute of Salāmān, not an independent entity. Yet in this tale, both are treated as distinct agents.
Ibn Sīnā intended this tale to symbolise humanity’s journey toward gnosis. Thus, Salāmān should encounter all challenges directly, with Absāl aiding him. Yet, in the story, Absāl experiences the trials, making him the true protagonist. This mismatch supports Fakhr al-Rāzī’s view that the tale is fabricated.
Nonetheless, the second tale is slightly better than the first: it absolves Salāmān from wrongdoing and places the blame entirely on the woman.
ʿAṭṭār’s Conference of the Birds presents a similar mystical journey, with far greater poetic and philosophical depth. Compared to that, this tale is inadequate and out of place in a serious philosophical work.
Ibn Sīnā’s aim is to show that man (Salāmān) can only attain the highest degree of gnosis (Absāl) through enduring life’s trials. But many fall short. Only a few reach the final stage—”then he drew near and descended”—and even fewer achieve al-ghāyah al-quṣwá (the ultimate end).

The Mystic and Perfection

Ninth Discourse – Chapter Two: The Mystic and Perfection

Note: The Ascetic, the Worshipper, and the Mystic
One who turns away from worldly possessions and pleasures is designated as a zāhid (ascetic). One who is diligent in performing supererogatory acts of worship such as night vigils and fasting is called an ʿābid (worshipper). The one whose thought is directed entirely toward the Divine Majesty, continually seeking the illumination of Divine Light within his innermost being, is termed a ʿārif (mystic). These states may sometimes coexist within a single individual.

A person who abstains from worldly goods and pleasures qualifies as an ascetic. However, one who does not possess anything from which to turn away cannot truly be considered an ascetic. Zuhd (asceticism) is a dispositional attribute, dependent on capacity and potential. In the path of spiritual wayfaring (sulūk), renunciation must concern something that one actually possesses. Thus, iʿrāḍ (turning away) implies that one owns something and deliberately withdraws from it. For the one who owns nothing, renunciation is meaningless.

Another defining aspect of asceticism is that it involves renunciation not of sins or evils, but of the ṭayyibāt—permissible and wholesome pleasures of the world. In this context, the ascetic turns away from things that are lawful and beneficial, making the title zāhid rightly applicable.

However, renouncing the world does not imply abandonment or seclusion; rather, it means detachment from worldly enjoyments and selfish desires while maintaining an integrated spiritual orientation. Not everyone can lay claim to such a state, even if they assert it.

It is worth noting that the Shaykh interprets zuhd as turning away from wholesome pleasures, a perspective specific to Islamic mysticism. Otherwise, zuhd in its general meaning entails abstaining from all that is desired by the ego—be it lawful or forbidden.

The Distinction Between Worshipper, Ascetic, and Mystic

This note serves as an introduction to mysticism and encapsulates profound and refined spiritual insights.
According to the Shaykh, seekers are divided into three types: the ascetic, the worshipper, and the mystic.

The ascetic is one who distances themselves from the worldly and its pleasures; the worshipper is one who immerses in acts of devotion and supererogatory prayers; the mystic is the one who perceives nothing but the Divine and attaches their heart solely to God.

It is noted that the worshipper and the ascetic resemble, respectively, a labourer and a merchant. The ascetic seeks profit through spiritual trade, while the worshipper is akin to a hired worker expecting a wage. He performs prayer and says qurbatan ilā Llāh (“for the sake of closeness to God”), but his true objective is Paradise. His deity is Paradise, and closeness to God is merely a means to that end. The mystic, however, is not like this.

Becoming a true worshipper or ascetic is not an easy task—but it is not the final goal either.

Only the mystic (ʿārif) is truly one who has “reached” (wāṣil). Others are spiritual aspirants, but they are seekers of other than God. None but the mystic is free from hidden polytheism (shirk). The common ascetic or worshipper is not free from this subtle shirk. If one seeks the Divine, one cannot attain it solely through outward asceticism or ritual worship. The ascetic and worshipper, despite their efforts, ultimately act out of fear of Hell or desire for Paradise. Even when they mention God or divine proximity, it is instrumental, a pathway to their true aim—which is reward or deliverance.

The mystic, however, proclaims: “I worship You out of love for You,” or “I found You worthy of worship.” The motive for the mystic’s worship is the Divine reality itself. The initiative for this worship is not from the servant, but from the Divine. In contrast, the acts of the ascetic and worshipper originate from the self.

Of course, it must be recognised that worship and asceticism are important and demanding undertakings. Not everyone can truly become ascetic. However, neither of these represents the ultimate stage of spiritual perfection. Attaining closeness to God (qurb ilā Llāh) is not achievable through ritual devotion or mere renunciation of this world or the next.

Mystical wayfaring is distinct from formal religious observance or worldly detachment. Hence, not every worshipper or ascetic is a mystic—though every true mystic embodies both worship and asceticism at a higher level.

Importantly, these virtues must become second nature, otherwise they are burdensome. This writing aims to inspire inner movement, even if such speech is easy and actualisation difficult. At the very least, one must be careful not to overreach and instead aim to internalise what can be practically absorbed. There is no merit in acquiring knowledge that one neither acts upon nor intends to embody. Why burden oneself with what is of no spiritual benefit?

One should rather cultivate solitude, consistently engage with the Qur’ān and supererogatory prayers. It may be that through such practice, the soul becomes illuminated, and one experiences a sense of shame and helplessness before God.

Ramadan is the month of prostration. Prostration (sujūd) is forbidden to any but God. In the prostration of the angels before Adam, he functioned as the qiblah, enabling the angels to perform an act of divine worship. In true prostration, the self is annihilated. One who has not been annihilated has not entered into true mysticism. The realm of mystical worship is one of spiritual dissolution—not of disgrace, but of divine absorption.

The Shaykh’s Definition of the Ascetic and its Critique

The Shaykh’s definition of zuhd corresponds to its lexical meaning, which may apply to both believers and disbelievers. However, in the path of sulūk, the agent’s goal must be God. The ascetic, like the worshipper, must be defined in relation to the Divine. Thus, true zuhd is turning away from the world for the sake of God. Such turning away (iʿrāḍ) is a volitional act with a theocentric aim. The foundation of ascetic wayfaring is faith; a disbeliever cannot be a sālik, even if they renounce the world. Therefore, while the ascetic exhibits renunciation, not all who renounce the world are ascetics.

Worship (ʿibādah) is defined as devotion to supererogatory acts. Obligatory worship, being compulsory, does not in itself qualify one as a worshipper. The Shaykh uses the term nawāfil, referring to optional prayers and fasts—practices which, pursued voluntarily and consistently, confer the designation ʿābid.

The Mystic: A Definition

The mystic is one whose intellect is turned wholly toward the realm of Divine Majesty (quds al-jabarūt), not momentarily, but continually. The mystic is not someone who is merely stirred for a night or moved by a fleeting passion. He is perpetually engaged in worship. His inner being is illuminated; a light within him never extinguishes. This is the light of worship that has refined his heart.

He has departed from all that is other than God. The light of truth and the flame of reason burn continuously within him. He is no longer interested in abstract concepts or universal principles. He is like “a niche within which is a lamp”, “as if it were a brilliant star.”

Asceticism and Worship in the Eyes of the Mystic

The Asceticism of the Jurist versus the Asceticism of the Mystic

The asceticism of the jurist is akin to trade and transactional exchange—it is a form of bargaining. In contrast, the mystic’s asceticism is a manifestation of sanctity and majesty (takabbur in its divine sense).

Worship According to the Mystic

For the non-mystic, worship is transactional: it is undertaken with the hope of reward, aspiring for Paradise with its pleasures and delights. Yet the mystic is different; though he performs prayer, he does so not in pursuit of reward. He merely proclaims, “I love You”—that is all I know, that I love You. I am indifferent to Paradise, and I do not fear Hell, for the flames of Your love extinguish all other fires. Or he may declare: “I found You worthy of worship.” In other words, You have become my object of worship. How stark is the difference between this kind of worship and that which seeks reward.

Spiritual Discipline and the Harmonisation of Faculties

The mystic engages in worship to purify the heart of its stains. He seeks to test and train himself—wrestling with the self through spiritual discipline, to transcend both self and other in pursuit of the Absolute. His aim is not even a trace of the divine (haqq) in desire, but rather that the Real alone subsist within him.

When the mystic attains this station, he is no longer alone; within his being, there is a tumultuous unity. His commanding soul (nafs al-ammārah), reproaching soul (nafs al-lawwāmah), the inspiring and embellishing faculties, as well as his senses and imagination, all align with him in worship. His striving aims to subjugate all faculties—imaginative, conjectural, and perceptive—so they may be tamed and domesticated.

Unlike a rebellious child dragged reluctantly to school, these faculties, through intimate familiarity, become like an infant nursing at its mother’s breast—inseparable. The mystic refines his faculties until they become native to the sacred and drawn from the mirage of egotism toward the presence of the Divine.

Underestimating the World: A Sign of Ignorance

Ibn Sīnā does not disparage the world, but speaks of it with honour, naming it “His Excellency the Deceiver”—just as Satan is also accorded a noble epithet. For Satan stood consciously before the Divine and opposed Him, and hence, we rightly say: “God’s curse be upon him.” One must not curse Satan casually but acknowledge his weight.

Those who belittle the world, desire, sin, or Satan, do so out of ignorance. He who underestimates the enemy is destined for defeat. As Ibn Sīnā eloquently states: “From His Excellency the Deceiver to the Majesty of the Real.” Thus, the taming of the faculties is no simple task. It is not easily accomplished, though in the eyes of the saints, all earthly things are mere illusions, unworthy even of the title “His Excellency.”

Unity of Faculties with the Mystic’s Inner Secret

Once the mystic has subdued all faculties and entered the realm of the Divine, his outward form aligns with his inner essence. When he utters “You alone we worship,” his heart, his desires, his hearing and sight—all proclaim in unison: “You alone we worship.” His mind does not wander.

The Commander of the Faithful, the perfect gnostic, when saying “Allāhu Akbar”, becomes unaware even of a thorn being extracted from his foot—for all his faculties are elsewhere. As the Shaykh says, when the mystic is in the presence of the Divine, no inner conflict remains; his secret and essence become radiant in their singularity. His faculties no longer compete with the intellect or obscure the mystic’s inner light—they instead follow it. His entire being becomes harmonised, with every power transformed into secret (sirr), not the other way around. He resembles a sovereign whose command none may transgress.

Illumined Disposition: A Prerequisite for Divine Authority

Once the mystic attains such a state, his heart is no longer like a small vessel easily defiled. He gains “authority of the hand” (ṣāḥib al-yad). In accordance with divine law, even what is ritually impure may become pure through his touch. Such power, however, belongs only to the one who reaches this station—not to one who merely utters the terminology of mysticism or jurisprudence.

This yad is inward—it means surpassing the limited self. Whoever becomes the ḥujjah (divine proof)—whether in the law (sharī‘ah), the path (ṭarīqah), or the reality (ḥaqīqah)—must surpass limited being so that when he touches impurity, it is sanctified.

Thus, a stable, illumined disposition signifies that the mystic has become the bearer of the Divine secret. His will, imagination, faculties—none impede him. All now serve him. His desires, senses, thoughts—all are transformed into secret. He enters the realm of sanctity in totality.

The Proof of the Reward and Punishment in the Afterlife
The Sheikh previously stated that in order to prove the reward and punishment in the afterlife, the necessity of the Prophet and the Shari’ah must first be established. Hence, he proved the prophethood, the Shari’ah, and all that pertains to it using the methods of the philosophers. This is because the proof of reward and punishment in the afterlife is dependent on the proof of prophethood and Shari’ah. Without establishing the prophethood and Shari’ah, no reward or punishment can be confirmed for the afterlife. Moreover, the proof of Shari’ah is based on certain principles, and the Shari’ah cannot be established for an individual alone. The Shari’ah, prophethood, and the Prophet exist in a context where there is a community; therefore, the existence of the community must first be proven. The proof of a community necessitates the proof of society, which is always characterised by cooperation and difference.
The Weapon of Tawhid
An individual cannot meet all their needs—such as food, clothing, and shelter—alone. These are industrial necessities, and a single person cannot provide them independently. Even if it were possible, they would need to live without their basic necessities while engaged in such tasks. However, with the formation of a population and society, these needs are met through cooperation, where each person relies on the work of others. In this way, opposition and exchange arise, and each person acts according to the value of their contribution. Thus, the subject of society is the ordinary human being.
Human beings must be social; they should not isolate themselves or remain idle. According to wisdom, an idle person is a burden to society, especially if they are knowledgeable or capable. The greatest sin for such a person is idleness. If a person of knowledge does not study, teach, or engage in research, guidance, or prayer, they are unjust, and no one should follow them in prayer because they are exploiting others’ efforts. A person must have a sense of responsibility towards their society to be able to say, “We too have done our part.” Not all work needs to be noble; it can range from sweeping streets to baking bread or performing heart surgery. Everyone should contribute what they can. However, some may try to hold on to past glory, claiming, for example, that they were once the champion of the capital city, so their life is entitled to be sustained in the same way. Such claims are not rational, and one’s expectations should be proportional to the value of their work, as the Qur’an says: “Eat and drink in satisfaction for what you have done.” Therefore, anyone who does not contribute positively to society cannot enjoy a good and prosperous life, according to the Qur’anic teaching.
Transaction and Justice
“Then we say: The social cooperation of people cannot be organised unless there is transaction and justice between them; for each person desires what they need and becomes angry when someone competes with them for it. Their passions and anger urge them to injustice towards others, leading to disputes and chaos in society. However, if there is agreement on the principles of transaction and justice, such problems do not arise. Transaction and justice address the broader, unmeasurable particulars only if there are general laws, which is the Shari’ah.”
Among people, there must be proper transaction and justice, for the passions, desires, and selfishness of individuals make them want everything for themselves. When someone stands in their way, they become angry, which leads to conflict and, consequently, oppression. With the rise of oppression and injustice, chaos ensues, and the order of society is disrupted. However, if transaction and justice prevail and there is agreement on these principles, such problems will not occur. Transaction and justice that address the particulars are unmeasurable unless they are governed by general laws, and this is where the necessity of the Shari’ah becomes clear. The Shari’ah in language refers to a waterhole, a place where everyone can draw from it equally.
The one who establishes the Shari’ah seeks no personal gain; as the Qur’an says: “My reward is only with Allah.” This is the second principle.
The Third Principle
“Then we say: The Shari’ah must have a legislator who establishes its laws in the proper way, and that legislator must be the lawgiver. If people were to dispute the formulation of the Shari’ah, disorder would arise. Therefore, the legislator must be distinguished by deserving obedience, so others can accept the Shari’ah from him.”
The Shari’ah must have a lawgiver who formulates these laws in the manner they should be. The lawgiver must be an infallible individual, as it is only through infallibility that they can avoid personal desires. If everyone or the majority of society were to formulate laws, disorder would result. Therefore, the lawgiver must be distinguished from the ordinary people, but they must also come from among the people to be accepted by them. The right to be obeyed is determined through signs showing that the Shari’ah comes from God. These signs are the miracles of the Prophet, either in speech or action. Those who are more intellectual tend to be more obedient to the prophetic speech, while ordinary people respond more readily to the prophetic deeds. However, prophetic deeds alone are not sufficient without prophetic speech. Prophethood and miracles do not exist without an invitation to the good, thus, a legislator must be a Prophet with a miracle, and this is the third principle.
The Nature of Miracles
A miracle can either be verbal or practical. Practical miracles, such as raising the dead, have a greater impact on the general population, while intellectual individuals tend to find verbal miracles more convincing. The reason is that the latter pertains to thought and meaning. Furthermore, practical miracles can be replicated, as magicians might perform similar feats, but divine speech is unique and cannot be mimicked. Whenever someone speaks on behalf of God, we accept their truthfulness. In the contemporary era, the verbal miracle is represented by the Qur’an, which remains unparalleled, unlike other sacred texts such as the Torah, Psalms, and the Gospel, which have lost their miraculous qualities over time. The Qur’an, however, continues to challenge others to produce something like it (“Bring forth a surah like it.”) and remains an active miracle even today.
Because the Qur’an is a miracle in itself, it is not only a spoken miracle but also an eternal one, unlike the miracles of the past which were bound to particular historical contexts. Therefore, the Qur’an, as a living miracle, is the enduring proof of the prophethood of Prophet Muhammad. Those who claim to follow any other religion must present a comparable miracle for their beliefs, but they cannot do so, since their beliefs, scriptures, and practices do not provide such evidence.
The Fourth Principle
“Then we say: The Shari’ah must be established and maintained by a prophet who calls people to the belief in a Creator and to follow the laws sent by the lawgiver. This includes the call to establish worship, reminding humanity of the Creator’s attributes, and encouraging adherence to laws that maintain justice and societal order. Only when these principles are followed does the community function correctly, and only then can reward and punishment be properly established.”
In summary, the fourth principle is that a prophet must call people to belief in the Creator, and must adhere to the Shari’ah themselves. This is essential for establishing justice and order in human society.

A) The meaning of “the world is a place for action, not for reward” is that actions only end with the termination of worldly life. Therefore, a portion of human life cannot be allocated to the reward for one’s deeds, because as long as a person remains in the world, they have obligations and responsibilities. There is no space for the full realization of the reward for their deeds.

Furthermore, the accounting in the world only includes the actions that individuals have performed up until the time of accounting and judgment. However, at the time of judgment, which, by assumption, is a part of their lifetime, they still have duties. The actualization of these duties occurs simultaneously with the time of accounting, but the duty that coincides with the account is not reviewed because the duty has not yet been completed. Even after the assumed end of their worldly life, some of their obligations must be accounted for outside this world in order to determine the reward.

B) Suppose that the reward for human actions is dealt with in the world; this accounting would be formal and without the revelation of the true nature of the actions. One cannot present convincing reasons and evidence to individuals such that, upon seeing it, they would recognize themselves as guilty or obedient, and thus be content with the judgment. Moreover, there would be no room left for denying the facts, which is something that cannot occur in the world unless all aspects of the matter are considered appropriately.

C) By “action,” we mean something that forms the very structure of human existence. It is not merely the occurrence of an act, but rather an action that persists and endures, shaping the true structure of a person. Similarly, it is not the type of act that is intended, but the result of all a person’s actions, beliefs, conduct, and behaviors. While even a single act does not escape accounting, it alone cannot determine the overall nature of one’s actions. It is part of the cause, but not the complete cause. Only after the conditions for action have ceased can it be said that a person’s continuous actions, from start to finish, have ended and can be fully and completely accounted for.

Critiques by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi on the mentioned argument:

First Critique:

“Then the esteemed commentator objected, saying: ‘If by “necessity” in your statement “when people need a legislator, the existence of one is necessary,” you mean essential necessity, this is impossible. If you mean that it is necessary for God, as the Mu’tazilah say, this is not your view. If you mean that it is necessary as a cause for the system, which is the best, and God is the origin of all good, then it is also false because the best is not necessary to exist. Otherwise, all people would be inherently good, and that would be the best.'”

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi objects, stating that if “necessity” refers to essential necessity, the idea that a legislator must exist would mean that two necessary beings would exist, which contradicts your belief. If “necessity” refers to God’s obligation, as the Mu’tazilah claim, this implies that if God does not perform an action, He would be criticized, but this is not part of your belief, as you do not consider God to be deserving of criticism. If the argument is based on God’s existence as a cause for the system of good, this is also incorrect. The best (good) is not necessary to exist; if the best were necessary, no one would sin, and God would make everyone virtuous, which would lead to a flaw in the system.

Second Critique:

“Moreover, your statement that miracles are proof that the legislator is from God is not suitable for your view. You do not say that God sent the Prophet with a miracle that proves he is from God, but instead claim that the miracle is the result of the prophet’s own spiritual power, and in this case, it could be considered the same as magic. Both the miracle and magic are caused by spiritual power, and thus, one cannot use miracles to prove the existence of God.”

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi argues that miracles cannot prove the prophet’s legitimacy because, according to your view, they are simply the result of the prophet’s own spiritual power. Therefore, they are no different from magic, which is also caused by spiritual power. Miracles, in this context, cannot serve as evidence of divine truth.

Third Critique:

“Also, your claim that a miracle proves the truth of the prophet is based on the assumption of an omnipotent and all-knowing agent, which you do not accept.”

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi further critiques the claim that miracles prove the prophet’s truth, stating that this argument assumes an all-powerful and all-knowing creator, a belief that you do not accept.

Fourth Critique:

“Additionally, the idea of punishment for sins does not align with your principles. For you, the punishment of the sinner is the burning desire for worldly pleasures that is unfulfilled. Thus, you imply that forgetting one’s sins would result in the removal of punishment.”

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi argues that your concept of punishment contradicts your principles. According to your belief, forgetting one’s sins would remove the punishment, but this creates a contradiction because forgetting should not negate the consequences of sin.

Responses of Hakim Tusi:

Response to the First Critique:

“In response to their first criticism, we argue that the connection of natural acts to their necessary ends, when viewed through divine providence, is sufficient to prove the reality of those acts. This is why we justify actions by their ends, such as the alignment of certain teeth for effective chewing, which is its ultimate purpose. Without the necessary end, the action would not make sense.”

Hakim Tusi responds to Fakhr al-Din al-Razi’s first critique by affirming that the necessary connection between acts and their goals, under divine providence, proves their reality. For instance, the design of teeth for chewing is justified by its purpose. Without such an end, the action would be unjustifiable.

Response to the Second Critique:

“In response to the second objection, we assert that the best for the whole system is necessary, unlike the best for a part. The creation of the world is not about making everyone inherently good, but about creating the most beneficial system as a whole.”

Hakim Tusi clarifies that the “best” in terms of the whole system is necessary, unlike the best for a part. The system is designed to be optimal, even if individuals within it may not always act in the best way.

Response to the Second Critique on Miracles:

“Concerning your objection on miracles, we clarify that miracles, both verbal and physical, are not purely material. They are unique to the prophets and serve as evidence of their truth.”

Hakim Tusi refutes the claim that miracles are purely material and equate to magic. He asserts that miracles are specifically associated with prophets and serve as evidence of their divine mission.

Response to the Third Critique on Omnipotence:

“In response to the third critique, we emphasize that miracles demonstrate the perfection of the prophet’s soul and lead to the confirmation of their teachings.”

Hakim Tusi affirms that miracles are signs of the perfection of the prophet’s soul, and thus, they substantiate the truth of their message.

Response to the Fourth Critique on Punishment:

“In response to your critique on punishment, we argue that committing sins leads to the establishment of a permanent quality in the soul that results in suffering. Forgetting one’s sin does not erase this quality, and thus, the punishment remains.”

Hakim Tusi explains that the punishment for sin is tied to a permanent disposition in the soul, and forgetting a sin does not remove the associated punishment.

Critique by Khwajah:

Khwajah critiques Sheikh’s view on the necessity of the divine law for the ideal society, stating that it is not absolutely necessary for human life to be governed by divine laws. Many societies manage without religious laws, relying on necessary policies that maintain social order.

Khwajah argues that the divine law, while beneficial for guiding a society to its ideal state, is not a fundamental necessity for human life, as various societies have managed without it.

Analysis of the Text
The phrase from Sheikh is as follows: “Since man cannot independently manage his own affairs … it is necessary that there should be transactions and justice between people, preserved by a law imposed by a legislator … and it is necessary that there should be a reward for the good and a punishment for the wrong … thus, the one who rewards and the legislator must be known.”
Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī explains this phrase as follows: “Since the people of the world are in need of a legislator, his existence is necessary. If by this you mean that his existence is necessary in and of itself, then this is evidently corrupt. However, if you mean that it is necessary for God to create and establish him, as the Mu’tazilites say that compensation is necessary upon God—that is, if He does not do so, He would deserve blame—this is not a view held by the philosophers at all.”
What Khwājah Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī has quoted from Fakhr does not concern the Sheikh’s original discussion. While, in terms of meaning, it is aligned with Fakhr’s statement here, in another part, the meaning has not been quoted with sufficient precision. Fakhr says: “If you mean that his existence is necessary in and of itself, this is evidently corrupt,” but Khwājah Nāṣir translates this as: “Necessary in itself is impossible.” He changes “evidently corrupt” to “impossible,” which requires clarification. The phrase “evidently corrupt” does not need further explanation, while to prove something as impossible, an explanation is required.
The Sheikh’s intention is not to discuss the most excellent system, or the necessity of the existence of God or the afterlife, but rather he argues that society cannot function without religion, and religion must come from God. Only in this case can order and justice prevail, accompanied by a reward in the afterlife.
As previously stated, the intended system is not the system of the world as Fakhr mistakenly interprets in his explanation, but the system of religious law within society, which the Sheikh rightly discusses. Khwājah Nāṣir shifts the discussion from the system of religious law to the system of the most excellent, which is a deviation from the Sheikh’s argument.
In conclusion, it would have been better if the Sheikh had used terms like “necessary” or “entailed” instead of “obligatory” to avoid such a misinterpretation.
7. Fakhr’s Third Meaning of Obligation
Fakhr presents a third meaning of obligation, stating: “If by obligation, you mean logical necessity, then the most excellent system is necessary.” However, existence of the most excellent system is not necessarily required. Khwājah Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī explains the cause of logical necessity and reveals that Fakhr’s objection is not directed toward this, but rather at the necessary relationship between action and the most excellent system, attempting to refute this. In terms of explaining the consequence, which is the definition of obligation, there is no problem, but Khwājah focuses on the consequence. Moreover, Fakhr’s objection regarding the cause of necessity, which is the final cause, does not apply here.
Khwājah Nāṣir says: “The attribution of actions to their ultimate causes… is enough to establish the necessary existence of those actions.” He interprets obligation as what is entailed by the final cause for the occurrence of an action. However, this statement by Khwājah Nāṣir, apart from deviating from the discussion, faces a difficulty: although the final cause is involved in the realization of the action and is a necessary condition, it is not sufficient. Simply attributing an action to the final cause does not suffice for its realization.
Khwājah also posits that the final cause is the form of a thing in God’s cognitive knowledge. It should be clarified that the truths existing in God’s cognitive knowledge are the formal causes, not the final causes. Moreover, the concept of formal cause in this context does not mean that a form is created first as a mold for the external world, as in logic, where the formal cause refers to a mental construct intended to inform the material existence. In this case, “form” refers to the scientific reality that is the cause of both form and material of external reality.
8. Distinction Between “Entailing” and “Necessitating”
There is a need to distinguish between what is entailed and what is necessitated. Committing a sin entails the disposition for punishment, but does not necessitate the disposition. That is, committing a sin does not require the existence of the disposition of disobedience, but merely the initial tendency (as expressed in the Qur’anic verse: “Indeed, the soul is prone to evil”). Repeating the sin establishes a firm disposition within the soul, which then entails the punishment.
Khwājah Nāṣir’s statement on this matter is precise: “Committing sins entails the existence of a firm disposition within the soul, which necessitates punishment.” In the case of “entailing,” the entailment must precede the consequence, whereas in “necessitating,” the sequence of the necessary and the necessary result is not bound to a specific order.
9. Forgetfulness and Oversight
Forgetfulness and neglect are of two types: one is mental forgetfulness, and the other is spiritual forgetfulness. Although both are attributes of the soul, spiritual forgetfulness cannot occur if the soul already holds a disposition that entails punishment. Since the mind is a level of the soul, it is the soul itself that undergoes punishment. Therefore, mental forgetfulness cannot prevent punishment. Additionally, when divine punishment is involved, mental forgetfulness becomes irrelevant.
10. Conclusion on Sheikh’s Argument
As discussed earlier, both the Sheikh’s argument and the criticisms from Fakhr, as well as Khwājah’s responses, remain superficial and rhetorical.
It is important to note that when a proof involves more premises and assumptions, the refutation becomes easier for the skeptic. This argument involves many premises and is therefore subject to a greater number of criticisms.
11. The Sheikh’s Denial of God’s Volitional Action
It has been stated that the Sheikh denies God’s voluntariness in actions. This statement is correct: God’s actions are beyond mere choice. Choice is contingent upon conception and conviction, while God’s actions are without deliberation (“action and creation without prior thought”). Thus, when we say that God is not a volitional agent, this is not to imply that He is compelled. Rather, God’s actions transcend mere volitional agency.
12. Knowledge of the Details of Time and Particulars
The Sheikh’s assertion that God is not knowledgeable of the particular details of time is incorrect. Khwājah Nāṣir critiques this and asserts that God is knowledgeable of the particulars. The verse “Not a leaf falls except that He knows it” implies that God is aware of all individual details. The Sheikh’s claim, without proper reasoning, that “Not a leaf falls except that He knows it, but in a universal sense” does not hold up, and a detailed critique of this viewpoint is found in advanced philosophical discussions.
13. The Necessity of the Most Excellent System
It could be argued that the most excellent system is not obligatory, and that the existence of a good and acceptable system suffices, even if it is not the most excellent, as achieving a most excellent system in the earthly realm is not feasible. However, the response to this is that if the most excellent system is absent, the agent itself cannot be considered the most excellent. The Qur’an says: “If you do well, you do well for yourselves.” If someone is excellent, their actions must also be excellent. Thus, a mismatch between the most excellent action and agent indicates that the agent is not truly the most excellent.
14. The “Most Excellent” in the Creation
One critique of Khwājah Nāṣir’s view is that when the overall system is excellent, the components must also be excellent. It is not the case that only the whole is described as excellent. Every part of creation, even that which is considered harmful, is also excellent. The Qur’an says, “You will not find any imperfection in the creation of the Most Merciful. Look again, do you see any flaw?” Every particle of the world reflects excellence in its own way. Even things that may seem harmful to us, such as the excrement of animals, hold excellence in the system they are part of.
15. The Role of Divine Reward
The Sheikh’s statement that without reward, society cannot be organized, and that without the legislator and the law, there is no just reward or punishment, is to highlight the need for divine law. Through the establishment of this knowledge of the legislator and His law, society is maintained. The social order, then, requires knowledge of the legislator and obedience to His law, and it is through this process that society reaches its proper order.
16. The True Knowledge of God
Not everyone who speaks of God’s names and attributes is a true mystic. One may merely be an academic in theology, familiar with the names of God at a surface level. Similarly, not every scholar of theology who understands the meanings is necessarily a virtuous person. Knowledge can be a basis for the claim of virtue but may also serve as an argument against someone. True knowledge, however, is not just intellectual understanding—it must be accompanied by action and sincerity.
17. Miracles of Speech and Action
Khwājah Nāṣir distinguishes between miraculous actions and miraculous speech, noting that miraculous speech lacks a direct counterpart. A miracle is a personal and unique act, and its miraculousness lies in its lack of a counterpart in the act, quality, and subject of the act. However, for miraculous speech, the criterion for determining which speech is miraculous is more complex. Simply lacking a counterpart in speech does not establish its miraculous nature, for many individuals have recited similar things, leading others astr
The Sheikh interprets the first state — the mental state — as will, and in this state, the mystic wills the Divine, and from the second, he refers to obedience; that is, a submission of the soul through asceticism, so that all of its faculties submit.
The will and obedience of the mystic are directed towards the Divine, which is an expression and description, and the mystic’s will or obedience is never directed towards anything other than the Divine; if the will and obedience are directed towards something other than the Divine, it is still for the sake of the Divine. For example, if the mystic helps a poor person, it is true that the help is directed towards someone other than the Divine, but it is done for the sake of the Divine, and this aligns with the statement: “I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me” [Quran, 51:56]. Everything for the mystic, except the Divine, is external, and the ultimate goal is the Divine. The mystic eats, works, and lives in order to prepare for worship and to attain knowledge, and all these actions are “caused by something other than the worship,” as worship is the effect directed towards the Divine. However, if life is considered worship for its own sake, it is still of this world; let alone someone for whom worship is an incidental matter and worldly life is primary.
Mysticism for the sake of the Divine, not for mysticism’s sake.
The late Khawaja continues, stating: The Sheikh’s statement that the mystic wills the primal Divine not for anything other than the Divine establishes that the mystic’s will is directed towards the Divine itself and that the mystic does not choose anything other than the Divine. Even mysticism itself is merely a means for the mystic, not an end, and he chooses the Divine over mysticism itself.
Sometimes, a person may wish to speak of mysticism, and sees no form more suitable than the Divine, and hence, presents the Divine as the form through which they can express their own merit. Such a person is not a mystic, but rather ignorant; and sometimes a person chooses the Divine, and in order to do so, they must have a way, and mysticism is the nearest path to the Divine. They then study mysticism to reach the Divine, and mysticism is an external means for them.
If the Divine is the form of the work, mysticism is the effect by itself, and the Divine is the effect through something else. If the Divine is the effect by itself, mysticism is the path and the effect through something else. This is why Khawaja says: “Nothing other than the Divine affects the mystic, for the Divine affects the mystic,” as the Divine is chosen over mysticism, and mysticism is merely the way and not the direct cause. If one says, “I want to be a mystic,” this would not be the case if the Divine is not the ultimate goal, because in this case, the Divine is the form of the work, just like someone who wishes to exercise in order to grow stronger, where the exercise tools (such as dumbbells and weights) are just the means. Hence, the tools are not the end goal; rather, it is the outcome of becoming stronger that is the true goal.
If mysticism is truly understood as mysticism, the Divine is just like the weights or the dumbbells, and the person wants to “exercise” with the Divine. However, if they choose the Divine, then they will seek knowledge and thought to understand that mysticism is the closest path to achieving this goal.
Reflecting on the Words of the Sheikh and Khawaja
The Sheikh says: “The mystic chooses nothing other than the mysticism of the Divine.” This implies that the mystic seeks mysticism for the sake of the Divine, and, in other words, the statement of Ibn Sina (Avicenna) consists of two propositions: first, that the mystic wants the Divine alone, and second, that the mystic does not choose anything other than the mysticism of the Divine.
Khawaja and other commentators have not fully explained how the second proposition of the Sheikh’s statement is derived. To explain this, it should be noted that the mystic seeks the Divine in the sense that they desire the essence of the Divine, which is without prior or posterior, and thus cannot be counted among the created beings. It is superior to such attributes, and even beyond description. As the immaculate and pure ones (Ahl al-Bayt) have said: “There is neither affirmation nor negation for it,” and in the terminology of mysticism: “It has no name or form,” and even saying “It is a being without a name or form” does not suffice. Rather, silence must be maintained, and the expression of incapacity is not a description of the Divine, but an acknowledgment of our own limitations. This understanding of the Divine necessitates that the Divine is not the ultimate “last” in the way that has a beginning or end. The Divine, being beyond all descriptions, is the “Ultimate” in its essence. The mystic seeks this personality, which has the most expansive existence and is in perpetual communion with all beings. As it is stated: “He is with you wherever you may be” (Quran, 57:4).
The Mystic and the Divine
Thus, the mystic, in the realm of determinate existence, desires nothing but the Divine and does not prioritise anything over the Divine. For the Divine is the first and the last, and nothing comes before or after it, hence nothing can be preferred over it. In the realm of indeterminate existence, there is no description, even of the Divine, as the Divine is beyond even such designations. The “Divine” in this context is considered an appellation to reflect its role in the realm of determinate existence.
Consequently, the mystic, whose heart is filled with the Divine light, will not settle for anything less than the Divine, and nothing other than the Divine satisfies them. The mystic’s worship is not for the sake of any worldly benefits, but purely for the Divine. The mystic’s love is not for their own sake or for the sake of their own mystical journey, but solely for the Divine.
Final Reflection on the Sheikh’s Words
In conclusion, the Sheikh emphasizes that the mystic’s will is directed towards the Divine alone, and that mysticism, for them, is merely the path. The mystic does not desire mysticism for its own sake, but only as a means to attain the Divine. Thus, the mystic’s journey is to direct all efforts towards the Divine alone, and all other things are secondary or instrumental to this ultimate goal.
The mystic desires God, but not for something else, like paradise or similar rewards. The mystic reaches a state where they choose nothing other than God. For example, if God were to become a beggar, despite His dominion, wealth, the world, the afterlife, and heaven, the mystic would still be affected by His presence—not because He is capable or sustains, or because He grants heaven or avoids punishment—but because He is the Truth, and the mystic desires the Truth itself. Even though God encompasses all perfections, the mystic is free from any desire for these perfections.
The mystic worships God solely because God is God, not because of the obligation of servitude or because God is generous. Rather, the mystic’s truth draws them to worship. They do not worship because they love the act, nor because they seek heaven or wish to avoid punishment. The mystic worships out of pure love.
If a mystic chooses God, even if God were to put them in hell, they would still say, “I love You” and, “I have found You worthy of worship.” Imam Khomeini, a complete mystic, once said, “I have not prayed two units of prayer for God.” This statement does not diminish his greatness but actually elevates him. The mystic goes on a path not for any selfish purpose but for the love of the Divine.
If a person does not seek this understanding of mysticism, and does not ask God for it, reading mystical texts can harden their heart. Reading such texts with the wrong intentions can bring harm, as it leads to ignorance rather than enlightenment.
The mystic’s heart must be softened by seeking the love of God. If one does not ask for the mystic’s path, they risk becoming arrogant and tainted by their desires. Speaking about mysticism is not enough; one must genuinely follow the path, otherwise, it is like publicly attacking an innocent person and then claiming it was a joke. Mystical teachings should be approached to purify oneself from worldly desires, not to gain worldly advantages.
In regard to the three types of devotion of mystics: either devotion is for the essence of God, or for one of His attributes, or for the completion of the self. Devotion to the essence of God is the highest level of worship, and for a beginner or intermediate mystic, devotion might involve seeking perfection or experiencing God’s attributes.
Some scholars argue that devotion cannot be directed towards God for His own sake, as will can only apply to possible beings. However, this argument is incorrect. Devotion to God should not be about gaining something from Him, but rather it should be about recognizing the intrinsic value of the Divine. True devotion seeks nothing but God.
As for the philosophical critiques on mysticism, it is often debated whether God’s essence can truly be the object of a mystic’s will. Some philosophers argue that will and desire are tied to the realm of possible beings, and thus cannot directly pertain to the necessary existence of God. However, other scholars, such as Imam Khomeini, assert that mystics ultimately aim for God not out of a desire for personal gain but purely out of love for the Divine, independent of any worldly benefits.
From what has been discussed, it is evident that the essence of mysticism transcends the views presented in the works of Avicenna or Khwaja, and in fact, the mystic does not will the Truth; their movement is not voluntary, but rather a movement of love and existence. This is explained further in the words of Imam Ali (AS) who said, “I found you worthy of worship”; meaning, it is You who impels us towards worship and knowledge. In this sense, the mystical experience is the embodiment of perfection, and the mystic does not exercise their will to seek the truth because they lack nothing. The exercise of will is characteristic of beginners or intermediates on the spiritual path, and the master transcends this. The complete mystic has no will of their own; rather, it is the will of God that operates through them. The mystic does not will the Truth because they are not deficient. Will, therefore, pertains to the stage of perfection that is reserved for beginners and intermediates in spiritual practice, a stage that the master has surpassed. The true mystic’s will is absorbed into the divine will, and they no longer possess any personal volition, rather, the will of God becomes the ultimate agent of action.
Indication: The Primacy of the Truth
The one who mistakenly takes the Truth as a means, without having experienced the bliss of connection with it, continues to seek it in other things. Such a person is akin to a child who plays with material pleasures, unaware of the higher pleasures known to those of greater experience. Similarly, someone who turns their eyes away from the true joy of the Truth, clinging instead to illusory pleasures, is likely to remain in this state of ignorance until they realize their error. The one who follows such illusory pleasures does so out of a lack of true understanding. This is further demonstrated by Avicenna’s view that someone who places the Truth as a means rather than the end is a person who has not yet experienced the complete pleasure of the Truth.
The mystic who truly seeks the Truth is not driven by any form of material reward, unlike the one who seeks paradise and avoids hell out of self-interest. The mystic does not see the Truth as a means to another end but as the ultimate goal in itself. When such an individual turns to the Truth, they are not interested in the temporal rewards but rather in the satisfaction of the Divine itself.
Avicenna posits that someone who sees the Truth as merely a means, rather than the ultimate goal, is a person still in the early stages of spiritual development. This individual, while they may engage in piety and worship, does so with the goal of attaining some reward, either in this life or the next. They are, therefore, still in the stage of self-interest and personal gain.
Avicenna’s Perspective on the Seekers of the Truth
Avicenna asserts that those who seek the Truth merely as a means to achieve something else are still immature in their spiritual journey. They are compared to children who, immersed in the pleasures of play, are unaware of the deeper joys and higher truths. The true mystic, by contrast, seeks the Truth not for any reward or external gain but simply because it is the ultimate, complete goal.
The passage in Avicenna’s writings suggests that such individuals, who are still attached to material pleasures and rewards, are on a path of self-interest and will not attain true wisdom or enlightenment until they overcome these attachments. The mystic’s journey, in contrast, is one of surrender to the will of God, where personal desires and goals are transcended, and the soul is drawn irresistibly toward the Truth.
Clarification of the Will in the Mystical Journey
In the mystical journey, the first step is the development of will, which Avicenna defines as the capacity to seek and choose the Truth. This will is not merely a rational exercise but a spiritual aspiration that begins with the soul’s yearning for connection with the Divine. At the early stages, the seeker is still in the process of developing their understanding and belief in the Truth, guided by external and internal signs. As the seeker progresses, they move from this initial stage of will into a deeper, more intuitive understanding, where their will becomes increasingly aligned with the Divine will.
Avicenna describes the seeker’s will in terms of different stages, starting with intellectual awareness, belief, certainty, and finally, a firm resolve to follow the path of the Truth. This process culminates in the mystic’s total surrender to the Divine will, where personal desire is absorbed into the larger, all-encompassing will of God.
In conclusion, the distinction between the mystic who seeks the Truth for its own sake and the one who uses the Truth as a means to achieve some personal gain is fundamental to understanding the true nature of spiritual ascent. The mystic’s journey is one of love and surrender, where will is not directed towards personal desires but towards a deep, transformative connection with the Divine.

“If you do not see, certainty does not exist. If certainty is present, willpower is also there, for it is the will that sets the inner self into motion. Thus, the one who desires is one who is steadfast, and if a master or guide tells him to die, he will die, knowing it as his own good.

The interpretation of Khwajah: “I’tarah; meaning, a covering” – that is, certainty falls upon him, and certainty follows him, and it is not necessary for him to pursue certainty.

Thus, the first stage is for the heart to embark on the path towards truth; however, this will must be strengthened. That is, one must attain the heart. Of course, the self (nafs) must be overcome, and the desires of the self must be abandoned. After the self and its desires have been overcome and one reaches the station of the heart, becoming the possessor of will and certainty (either from knowledge or from the speech of the general public), the individual becomes the seeker (mureed) and must obey and progress through the stations. The first station is that of will. Without will, success in any task is unattainable. Just as in academic knowledge, if a person does not believe in a book and reads it, or if they do not believe in a teacher, no matter how much time they invest, they will gain nothing beneficial. They may have memory and knowledge, but not true learning. They may remember what they have heard, but nothing will be extracted from it, because they do not have true will, and thus, the benefits of this knowledge do not materialize. It is due to the critical role and function of will that it has been placed as the first station. Once the will is attained, the possessor of will follows whatever they understand, and no longer is the self disturbed by desires or external distractions. The self can no longer be tempted to deviate; instead, it is like “iron bars”—firm and unwavering in its beliefs, moving towards its goal. This station is a high one, and although it is the first station, it is the first in which the will settles in the heart, free from the distractions of the self and its various influences.

Explanation and Interpretation of Khwajah:

“I’tarah; meaning, a covering. And the holding of the firmest rope means to cling to it.”

Know that the Sheikh, after mentioning the teachings of the mystics and others, intends to describe their states as they proceed on the path of truth from the beginning of their movement to its end, which is union with the Divine. He outlines these stages in eleven consecutive chapters, the first of which is this chapter, which discusses the beginnings of their movements. He states that will is the first degree of their stages, and it is the immediate beginning of the movement. Its origin lies in the conception of the inherent perfection of the First Cause, which radiates its effects upon those who are prepared to receive them according to their capacity. The belief in the existence of this perfection is a firm and unwavering belief, accompanied by the tranquillity of the soul. Whether this certainty is derived from logical reasoning or from faith in the words of the guiding Imams, each of these beliefs leads to action in pursuit of the Divine bounty.

Since will is a derivative of belief, the Sheikh defines it as a state that arises after one has gained insight or conviction, whether through reasoning or through faith in the words of the Imams. He further states that will is the desire to cling to the firmest rope, symbolizing the quest for a deep and unwavering connection to the Divine realm. Thus, will becomes the origin of the movement of the soul towards the sacred world, with its ultimate goal being the attainment of spiritual union with that world.

Reflection on the Words of the Sheikh and Khwajah:

The Sheikh says that the first degree of the mystics’ movements is will. By “movements,” he refers to the spiritual journey of the mystics, which is a philosophical term used here to describe the process of spiritual evolution. It is important to note that in mysticism, there is no physical movement in the philosophical sense. Philosophical movement is understood as the transition from potentiality to actuality, whereas the mystic’s path is not about physical steps but about a journey of transformation. Spiritual movement in mysticism is not about physical motion but rather about transcending the mundane and reaching the realm of divine insight.
In the path of spiritual journey, it is said that the seeker must follow their guide. Khwajah, in this context, refers to the necessary following of the Imams, as the ultimate guides. The truth is that the guide must possess a state of infallibility, for if they do not, they would be lost: “Whoever is misled by their guide, how can they lead others to salvation?” This necessitates that the guide be one of the infallible Imams, as it is only their guidance that can lead the seeker to the right path.
In the process of practical behavior and spiritual advancement, the only solution is training. Someone who desires to become a hero must practice and engage in physical discipline, as relying solely on the strength and leadership of the soul is not enough. Those with great natural abilities who abandon discipline will eventually fall behind.
For example, someone being trained for espionage will undergo various hardships and pressures, akin to those they would face if captured by the enemy. They may be severely beaten for a period, and if they can endure this, they are considered brave and prideful, claiming to have endured all the torment the enemy might inflict, finding joy even if their limbs were broken. They assert that they have trained themselves so rigorously that the challenges they face are smaller than they appear, even encouraging others to take action.
Now, in the realm of spirituality, the task becomes even more difficult and precise. A virtuous person, if left to their own devices, will become corrupt; just as a student who neglects their studies will struggle with their knowledge. Thus, spiritual training must be pursued from every aspect to bring the soul under control. Those who fail to train themselves are unsuccessful; their outward appearance may be impressive, but their inner nature is weak, akin to a fetus lacking resistance or a hollow shell that cannot stand on its own.
As the scholar Khwaja expresses in his teachings, the soul is of an animalistic nature (the commanding soul, al-nafs al-ammārah). If this soul grows and progresses towards perfection, it transcends its animalistic form, rising to the level of a contented soul (al-nafs al-mutma’innah), which represents the height of spiritual advancement.
Between the commanding soul and the contented soul lie many stages. If a person’s faculties follow the commanding soul, their desires and impulses control their decisions, making them governed by animalistic instincts. However, if their faculties—anger, lust, imagination, and will—fall under the command of reason, the soul becomes content, no longer governed by these impulses but by intellect. The average person, however, may fluctuate, sometimes giving in to their animalistic desires, feeling guilty afterward, which causes their conscience to rebuke them, reflecting a state of self-accusation.
In the path of spiritual progress, it is crucial to train the soul through disciplined efforts. Anyone aspiring to become a champion must undergo rigorous training, which requires far more than relying on the natural strength of the self. Without consistent training, even those with great inherent power will eventually fall behind. Similarly, in the spiritual realm, training is necessary. Just as a student who neglects their studies will struggle to retain knowledge, so too must the spiritual aspirant engage in ongoing discipline to train the soul.
Khwaja explains that the human soul is inherently animalistic, and through proper training, it can rise above this animal nature and reach the level of the contented soul. There are many stages between these two souls, with the faculties sometimes succumbing to the animal soul’s impulses, only to later feel remorse. However, this remorse leads to self-awareness and the eventual mastery of the soul’s faculties through reason and intellect.
Spiritual training is not about quick fixes or sudden transformations. It involves ongoing effort, akin to taming a wild horse. The soul must be guided away from desires and urges, forcing it to obey the command of reason. This discipline is achieved through gradual practice, starting with manageable steps and avoiding excessive strain, which might cause the soul to rebel.
The animal faculties, which are the basis for our desires and actions, must be disciplined to follow the command of reason. Without such discipline, they will be driven by emotions such as anger or lust, resulting in erratic, animal-like behavior. Through the consistent exercise of reason and control, the soul becomes obedient and aligned with the higher faculties, ultimately reaching a state of peace and contentment.
Between these two states—rebellion and tranquility—there are various intermediate stages. A person’s spiritual journey may sometimes lead them to act in ways contrary to their higher principles, only to later feel remorse. In such cases, the soul remains in a state of fluctuation, between guidance and misguidance, until it fully submits to reason and discipline.
Khwaja further emphasizes that this process of training the soul is crucial for spiritual success. Those who do not engage in this training will find that their outward appearance may seem impressive, but their inner nature remains weak and susceptible to external pressures. Only through consistent spiritual practice can one attain the true peace and strength of a contented soul.
In summary, the ultimate goal of spiritual training is to attain the perfection of the soul, which is only achievable through the diligent exercise of discipline, reason, and self-awareness. This process is gradual, requiring constant effort and reflection, and the soul must be constantly refined to avoid succumbing to base desires and impulses.
The Subtlety of the Secret
It is impossible to thread a needle unless there is calm, and thus one cannot accomplish this task while in motion. Attaining the truth also requires serenity. Moreover, reaching the truth necessitates subtlety and compatibility with the delicate essence of the subject. Someone whose soul lacks subtlety, if the finest divine or aesthetic words are spoken to them, will have no effect. However, if the same divine words are spoken to those who are attuned to them, they may even faint. This is why it is advised not to conceal words from those who are worthy of them, not to be miserly with the words of the wise, and to avoid offering them to those who are not prepared, so that the words are not wasted, and no harm comes to anyone.
Subtlety of the Secret
The subtlety of the secret refers to the inner preparedness required for the intellectual forms to manifest within it. The secret does not become subtle quickly but gradually reaches subtlety in a gentle manner. However, when the secret becomes subtle, it rapidly understands matters. The human soul is like a tool that initially moves slowly but eventually gains speed. It is akin to a well that, though slow to reach water, becomes unstoppable once the water is reached, and when it does, its knowledge becomes divine! Before this, the seeker must think carefully before speaking; however, after this, they must control themselves to avoid speaking hastily. Thus, those who are patient and work diligently tend to achieve greater depth and suitability.
Explanation and Commentary of the Master
“Then, when the Sheikh completed the mention of the aims of spiritual exercise, he discussed the means that assist in reaching each of these aims. As for the first aim, he mentioned one thing that aids in it: true asceticism, which is attributed to the gnostics, meaning detachment from everything that distracts the heart from the truth, as discussed earlier. This is clear.
As for the second aim, he mentioned three things that aid in it:
First: Worship accompanied by thought, which is attributed to the gnostics. The benefit of coupling worship with thought is that worship makes the body entirely follow the soul. If, at the same time, the soul is directed towards the Divine Presence through thought, the person becomes fully focused on the truth; otherwise, worship becomes a source of misery, as the Qur’an states: ‘Woe to those who pray, those who are heedless of their prayer.’ The reason this worship helps in the second aim is that it also trains the desires of the worshipper and the powers of the soul, pulling them away from vanity towards the Divine, as explained earlier.
Second: Melodies, which assist in two ways, inherently and indirectly. The inherent assistance comes from the fact that the rational soul is drawn to the harmony of melodies, being fascinated by the orderly arrangements of sounds, which diverts it from using its animal faculties for their individual purposes. Consequently, these faculties follow the soul, and the melodies become instruments that serve it.
The indirect assistance is that melodies make words associated with them more acceptable to the imagination due to the imitation contained within them, which the soul naturally inclines towards. If these words, at the same time, are exhortations that encourage the search for perfection, the soul becomes alert to what needs to be done, overpowering the distracting faculties.
Third: Words of the preacher, which are beneficial for convincing the soul of what should be done in a calm and persuasive manner. This type of speech stimulates the soul, enabling it to dominate the faculties, especially if it meets four conditions:
One of these conditions relates to the speaker: they must be virtuous, for the efficacy of advice from one who does not act on it is null. The three other conditions pertain to the speech itself. The first relates to the words: they must be eloquent, clear, and accurately convey the meaning without addition or omission, like a mould that shapes the intended meaning. The second relates to the form of the words: they must be delivered with a pleasant tone, as a smooth voice helps the soul receive the message more willingly, while a harsh tone causes resistance. The third relates to the meaning of the words: they must lead to sound conviction that is beneficial for the seeker, guiding them towards their spiritual journey swiftly.
And know that the words of the preacher are referred to as the “column” in rhetoric, while the subsequent aspects that assist in persuasion are called “gradual steps.”
As for the third aim, he mentioned two things that help:
First: Subtle thinking, which should be balanced in both quality and quantity, at times when bodily distractions such as fullness or extreme exhaustion do not disturb the soul’s cognitive capacities. Engaging in such refined thinking helps the soul adopt a disposition that allows for easy understanding of spiritual matters.
Second: Chaste love.
Know that human love can be genuine or metaphorical. The metaphorical love can be either psychological or animalistic. The psychological love arises when the lover’s soul aligns with the soul of the beloved in essence, and they are more drawn to the beloved’s inner qualities, which are reflections of the lover’s own soul. The animalistic love, on the other hand, is driven by physical desire and attraction to the beloved’s appearance, which is tied to their body and form.
The Sheikh refers to “chaste love” as the former, since the latter is linked to the dominance of the soul’s base desires, which leads to the soul’s enslavement to these desires. The former type of love, however, softens the soul, making it yearning and delicate, free from worldly distractions, and solely focused on the beloved. This makes the turn towards the true Beloved easier, as there is no need to disregard many other things. This is why it is said, “Whoever loves chastely, keeps it hidden, and dies, dies a martyr.”
Means of Spiritual Training
After discussing the aims of spiritual exercise, Avicenna outlines what assists in achieving each aim by removing external and internal obstacles and refining the secret of the heart.
The First Means:
The first means to achieve readiness is through engagement in limited activities. Someone who is constantly occupied is like a person trying to eat multiple kinds of food simultaneously. Clearly, their stomach will turn into a vessel of illness, unlike the one who empties their inner self and consumes a single dish that is absorbed in its purest form. The meaning of readiness is to eliminate other activities, focusing solely on the essential. The true condition for spiritual progress is solitude, and someone who is overly busy cannot engage in spiritual practice. For example, a seminary student who simultaneously seeks to preach while studying will find no success, as they have not first purified themselves in solitude. Without inner transformation, they cannot guide others.
In the stages of spiritual development, a seeker must have solitude and distance themselves from numerous distractions to progress.
True asceticism, attributed to the gnostics, is not the asceticism of those who abandon the world for the sake of the hereafter. The gnostic’s asceticism is about detachment from everything that prevents the heart from connecting with the truth. The asceticism of the worldly person is focused on the hereafter, while the gnostic’s detachment is from both the world and the afterlife.
It is important to note that solitude is different from isolation; the two should not be confused, as isolation is as harmful to the seeker as excessive busyness. The nature of solitude depends on the seeker’s level, and it requires careful guidance, which can only be obtained through a proper teacher.
The Second Means:
The second means is engaging in activities that motivate the soul to move and become content, which help to remove internal barriers. These three things are: worship accompanied by thought, melodies, and words of a preacher, as elaborated later.
a) Thoughtful Worship
Worship that is accompanied by thought and intention, where the mind is present in the act of worship, is more than mere mechanical repetition. The seeker must have a sincere intention, and their mind should not wander during prayer or any other act of worship. If the soul is engaged in the prayer, the body follows naturally, and there is no distraction to divert the mind. If the soul is distracted, the prayer becomes mechanical and ineffective. This is why attentive worship is crucial for guiding the soul towards the truth.
b) Melodies
Melodies can assist in two ways, inherently and indirectly. Inherent assistance arises from the rational soul’s natural attraction to the harmony in music, which engages the faculties and directs them towards the divine.
c) Words of the Preacher
The words of the preacher should convince the soul and encourage the seeker to act upon them. These words must come from someone who is virtuous, as their actions must align with their words. The efficacy of the preacher’s advice depends on their personal integrity and sincerity in practice.

Another important characteristic refers to eloquence. Words and expressions must be eloquent, meaning that the language should be beautiful and the intended meaning of the speaker should be clear and transparent. The speech itself should have structure, but anyone who mumbles or stutters, even if they have something worthwhile to say, will waste their words.

The speech should neither be excessively long nor vague and imprecise. The message must be deeply ingrained in the speaker’s mind, so that they can convey it effectively to the audience, without merely reading from a book or looking at a piece of paper and simply uttering words. The speech should flow smoothly, be concise, and serve as a vessel in which meaning is poured. A slight deviation from this will be a distraction. Words should be pleasant because the softness of the sound and the sweetness of the melody help in its quick transmission. From this, the necessity of seriously learning the science of rhetoric, eloquence, and figures of speech becomes evident. Mere knowledge of grammar and syntax cannot guide the soul toward perfection, and the Holy Quran stands as the strongest evidence of this claim. The Quran is not only harmonious in sound but also rich in meaning, combining beauty of expression with wisdom.

If the meaning is heavy, the softness of the sound serves like a dessert that helps in digesting the food.

It has already been mentioned that the Quran describes the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as: “If you had been harsh and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from around you” (Quran 3:159). You speak with charm, gentleness, and dignity, and do not express the truth with harshness. When speech becomes severe, it is rejected, and for this reason, melodies can have various effects on the soul. For instance, if a loudspeaker is placed in a room and someone shouts through it, everyone will be repelled by it. Speech can sometimes be sorrowful and at other times joyful and uplifting. The Shushtari mode is appropriate for sadness, while the Chahargah mode is suitable for joy, festivity, and celebrations, as it brings joy and happiness.

Doctors use pleasant sounds and melodies to treat mental illnesses. Sometimes, they don’t give patients any medication but instead use sound to calm them. Orators, to effectively convince their listeners, use musical and rhetorical techniques. Even in the case of music, it is used to facilitate quick persuasion and belief in disciples and seekers. Words should be inspiring and meaningful. The essence of a preacher’s speech in the art of rhetoric is called “column.”

When a person with a particular tone reaches the state of love, they are intoxicated and detached from worldly concerns. The friends of God are all intoxicated. This is not like what the poet says:

“All that I see around me is calamity,
Yet I am the ring and my heart is the jewel.”

This poet speaks of being intoxicated amidst all calamities, and this kind of love brings peace and joy to the heart, without any sorrow. It is this love that gives him life, just as knowledge, the Quran, faith, and prayer keep a person young and full of spirit. The Quran has its own sweetness and intoxication, but only when the vessel is pure. This is why it is said: “Recite what is easy for you of the Quran” (Quran 73:20). This is not just for the reward but because every time this water is poured onto the mirror of the heart, it becomes cleaner and purer, and when it is purified, it brings reward. The reward in the hereafter is the consequence of a purified heart in this world.

Thus, the Quran and knowledge are invaluable. If a person can shape their character wisely, they are successful. It is disgraceful for a scholar to fall in love with a door, a wall, or someone who kisses their hand or opens a door for them. Open the door yourself and kiss every place of your own. When a seeker reaches a higher spiritual level, they themselves become the lover, the beloved, the seeker, and the sought. If they are taken to prison, they are still intoxicated; and if they are placed on a throne, they are still intoxicated. This is the state of the friends of God: “Indeed, dignity belongs to Allah and His Messenger and the believers” (Quran 48:29). The believer remains noble, even if their head is severed or they are trampled underfoot, for their true essence lies within themselves. People of the world age quickly, but the scholar does not. People may think they eat well, but in reality, they eat little, and it is knowledge that gives them vitality, serenity, and peace of mind. Many illnesses require psychotherapy, and a physician alone with medicine cannot cure people. Most of the ailments of people are psychological. The community must have an understanding of psychology, and when this is the case, the Quran, prayer, supplication, and invocation will regain their therapeutic value, and a suitable verse will be prescribed for each mentally ill patient. Prayer varies with time; sometimes a voluntary prayer must be repeated for a person to be healed.

May God grant success to people so that they understand what religion is and what sublime teachings it has for health and worldly life. Some scholars make use of these teachings and live longer lives, while someone who is muddled and disheveled will age prematurely, and by the age of forty, their face and body will be wrinkled, and they will have the scent of old age.

Subtle Thoughts and the Refinement of the Inner Essence

The Sheikh mentions two specific ways to refine the inner essence: one is subtle thinking, and the other is chaste love.

Healthy, balanced, and uncorrupted thought refines and purifies the human essence. A person who is either satiated, hungry, or ill cannot think, as their stomach or sickness prevents them from doing so. Subtle thinking allows a person to easily understand and grasp meanings. When the mind is clear, it can analyze matters with ease—something that a worried, tired, or ailing mind cannot accomplish.

Pure and Chaste Love

In addition to subtle thought, Sheikh mentions “chaste love” as an essential refinement of the inner essence. Love, in general, is of three kinds: real love or metaphorical love. Metaphorical love can be either animalistic or psychological. Animal love is focused on the physical beauty of the beloved, such as their appearance, features, or gestures. Psychological love, on the other hand, concerns the character and qualities of the beloved. In true love, the form, shape, and appearance are irrelevant; instead, the essence of the beloved is sought.

By “chaste love,” the Sheikh does not mean animalistic or psychological love, which are associated with sensuality and bring problems for the individual. Rather, he refers to true love, which purifies the person and leads them toward truth.

In explaining these two modes, the Sheikh says: The third goal, refining the inner essence, involves two factors: balanced and moderate thinking that is neither too fast nor slow, neither superficial nor overly deep. Thought should be exercised at an appropriate time, and the stomach should neither be full nor empty. When thinking, the stomach should be neither full nor empty, and one should avoid thinking while tired, ill, or angry, as such thoughts will not be pure and might lead to errors. Through training in thoughtful reflection, the seeker or disciplined individual embodies the following saying: “Whoever dedicates themselves to Allah for forty mornings, the springs of wisdom will flow from their heart onto their tongue” (Hadith).

As the seeker becomes accustomed to thinking subtly and reflects with a sound, balanced mind, free from bias, without excessive love or hatred, and focused on reaching the truth rather than personal gain or harm, their soul is aided in thinking clearly. This clarity enables them to understand matters with ease and express them naturally, unlike others who struggle to comprehend or express the same ideas. Even subtle thinking influences expression, as the seeker understands easily and can convey the idea smoothly. Conversely, someone who struggles to understand will also struggle to express themselves, as the matter will be heavy on them. Hence, one should learn from a teacher with a sharp mind who can easily grasp concepts, as such a teacher will not frighten the student but will gently instill the meaning, resulting in a calm and peaceful mind for the student.

Pure love pertains to the heart, while subtle thinking pertains to the soul. Human love comes in two forms: real and metaphorical. Real love was discussed in the context of joy and bliss. Metaphorical love also has two forms: animalistic and psychological. Animalistic love is the desire for physical beauty, such as the appearance of the beloved. Psychological love, however, seeks the beloved’s character and personality. In true love, physical appearance or personality is irrelevant; it is the true essence of the beloved that is pursued.

Thus, love for the form is animalistic, while love for the essence is psychological. However, true love transcends form and essence, as it seeks the deeper truth. The Sheikh’s notion of chaste love refers to love of the essence, as it leads to spiritual purity. Animalistic love follows the base desires, which enslave the intellect, while true love elevates the soul.

The love for the essence softens the heart and fills it with joy and serenity. The beloved’s qualities detach the lover from worldly distractions and bring them closer to the object of their affection, creating a singular focus on the beloved’s essence. Therefore, the lover, having passed beyond all other attachments, can easily surrender to the true love of the beloved. Hence, it is said that a person who loves the beloved’s essence and hides their love, even if they do not reach union with them and die from separation, is considered to have died as a martyr.

Critique of the Author on Spiritual Exercises and their Conditions

Music and Melodies

It should be noted that in religious rulings, one must follow those whose reasons for issuing rulings are clear and well-founded, and we know that what Allah has decreed is true. However, in the case of music, the issue is complex, and no jurist can decisively claim, “This is the judgment of Allah.” The subject and ruling on music are difficult to ascertain, and many who give fatwas on religious matters do not have a deep understanding of music and singing. Therefore, they struggle to understand both the subject and the ruling. It is essential to be cautious to avoid neglecting the subject or the ruling. Moreover, it is not correct to say universally that any loud sound is prohibited simply because it is music or singing. Not all music is good, and there is a difference between the intent and the performer. One must consider the purpose behind listening to music. If someone is in a state of lust and sin, listening to music prepares them to commit more sins, but if someone is in a state of worship, music might serve as a tool for their devotion. Music has its own characteristics, and we need to understand what it prepares the person for, before deeming it permissible for them.

In music, the person, the tone, and the content all matter, and this is why it is said that the speaker must have certain characteristics. For example, a person who is detached and spiritual will have a more impactful sermon.

Before entering into a discussion on the permissibility or impermissibility of music, it is essential to distinguish between theoretical and practical discussions. Theoretical discussions are mental and deal with what should be, whereas practical discussions focus on reality and what is.

This discussion is also raised in the context of music, and there are narrations related to instruments that were used by the corrupt and the lowly; however, if the same harp is in the hands of a disciple of certainty rather than an ordinary follower or a believer with awareness, the narrations are not applicable, and it can be said that sometimes using musical instruments may even be necessary. However, since in reality and within society, the believers have not had access to such means and have always been in a state of dissimulation (taqiya), and merely surviving has been valuable for them, the realm of music was largely controlled by the depraved, the immoral, dancers, musicians, and those indulged in sinful acts. Hence, a ruling of prohibition regarding the use of such instruments was established. Of course, it is not always the case that one should play; rather, you should first attain certainty and will, then play. Music should serve as an aid, not as a detriment. The discussion is about the specific context, and it has been stated that a disciple of certainty and will may, alongside everything else they do, use music as well—not that they should constantly say:
“Drunk I am, cupbearer, take my hand,
So I do not fall, hold my hand.”
Thus, there is a difference between the statement of a philosopher and that of a jurist in music, each referring to two different subjects and contexts. Both are correct, and only a philosopher-jurist can analyze it accurately and identify the instances where it is permissible or not. Music, like singing, has a sensory and animalistic pleasure, and no one can deny this. From a psychoanalytic perspective, it weakens the will, the soul, and the nerves, and thus, it is not beneficial for people who enjoy it. Rather, it resembles alcohol. Alcohol has both beneficial and harmful effects: it can cure some illnesses, fatten the body, eliminate stomach ulcers, and improve complexion, but it destroys the human spirit, rendering one dishonourable and lacking in vigour. In contrast, opium deteriorates the body, making it yellow and dry, turning the skin to a withered form. Both alcohol and opium are harmful, but the harm of opium is not the same as that of alcohol. Alcohol ruins the inner essence, while opium harms the external appearance.
Music also belongs to the category of alcohol; it may improve one’s outward state and make one feel happy, but it ruins the inner essence, unless it is prescribed by a mystic of knowledge.
Now the question arises: Is singing and music inherently good or bad, without condition, or conditionally dependent on something else? Is their use universally forbidden, allowed only in cases of necessity, or not?
It must be said that, in principle, music is corruptive and harmful without benefit; it does not bring one closer to God but leads to sin, immorality, and vice. However, this is not the case in practice. If it is in the hands of the right person, it becomes beneficial. In other words, it is conditionally permissible. Therefore, if someone says music can bring one closer to God, one must ask: which music? The kind that leads one to the bathhouse and even refrains them from consuming dates? For this reason, one must be careful in discussions of music. The narrations and evidences prohibiting music are based on the external context of their time and not intended to engage in abstract philosophical discussions.
Thus, melodies, in theory, do not imply good or bad in and of themselves, similar to knives, television, video, satellites, and the internet. These things do not inherently lead to either good or evil; they have the potential for both. In practice, however, music and other media mentioned above are mostly associated with the corrupt, the immoral, and those indulged in sinful activities. This distinction must be made between theory and practice. The philosopher discusses it in terms of potential, while the jurist focuses on the external reality. The jurist looks at music and sees it as a tool of distraction, entertainment, and futile activity, all of which contribute to sin. The philosopher, however, in theory, approves of music for the disciple of certainty and will when the circumstances are right. However, no philosopher would endorse music as a formal, widespread practice.
My conclusion is that if, in the real world, music serves a useful function for an individual and listening to it stirs their feelings, leading them to perform good actions and approach God, then the prohibitions do not apply to such music and its instruments. The use of such music is not problematic for such an individual, even though it may be problematic for others. The question is one of suitability, and even though a certain melody may not be problematic for one person, it may be problematic for another, depending on their personal situation. This is separate from the theoretical position, which, in most cases, does not manifest.
Based on this, the consensus on the prohibition of musical instruments and listening to music is concerned with the external, observable reality, not the theoretical potential. If someone claims that music is categorically the same as alcohol, they are showing rigidity in their view, which contradicts the purpose of creation. The beautiful sound found in nature is not inherently harmful, unlike alcohol, which is not naturally occurring, but rather the product of fermentation. In nature, nothing exists that is universally harmful, even poison and venom, which are not harmful in every case but can have beneficial uses in medicine. Human-made creations, unlike divine creations, can have both positive and negative effects. Even things considered repulsive, such as waste products or semen, have their uses and are not inherently harmful. The benefit must be lawful, and thus music cannot be universally condemned, as it has the potential for both good and harm. It should be noted that the use of music in sinful acts points to the external application of music, not its theoretical potential.
Singing and music, though permissible under some conditions, should be treated like medicine in modern society, not as a necessary food or drink like water and bread. They are like spices—important when used in the right proportions, but requiring careful consideration of their use.
One should avoid rigidity in this matter. A rigid person lacks love and purity, much like a barren pumpkin or a wall with cracks:
“The heart that lacks love is like a barren pumpkin,
The lips that lack a smile are like a wall cracked.”
A rigid person is like the crack in the wall, devoid of connection to the angels during prayer.
Unfortunately, no mystic or philosopher has ever had the extensive authority to specify the permissible and therapeutic uses of music, such as for improving the tone in the recitation of prayer. Even prayer itself has a melodic aspect, and the necessity of tone in recitation is clear. For example, the phrase “وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ” (and not of those who are lost) must be pronounced in a specific way, which creates a musical system on its own, generating a melody that enhances the recitation.
Furthermore, a psychoanalyst distinguishes between patients who constantly laugh and those who constantly cry. Such people may require music or singing as a remedy. However, this does not imply that music is permissible for everyone. In the mystical journey, the disciple does not need music once they enter a higher state of contemplation. In fact, music may even be harmful to them as it might lead to distraction, whereas they should be focused on a different spiritual realm.
It should be noted that I have discussed all aspects of music in extensive volumes, offering a thorough and detailed explanation of the different types of sound, music, and their instruments, along with deep analysis of the jurisprudential sources. This work aims to provide comprehensive insights into the rules regarding sound, music, and singing, offering resolution to many of the disputes on this matter. This book, which spans several volumes, is the result of two years of discussion in the advanced jurisprudential study of music and singing.
A person can only become a disciple if they are immersed in hardship: “The affliction is for loyalty.” Suffering, pain, separation, fervor, and general love are different from the specific passion and suffering of a mystic. The love and blood are fit for those who endure affliction, and it must be said:
“Whoever is closer in this gathering,
The cup of affliction is given more abundantly.
He who is thirsty for the sword of the Beloved,
Water is given from the tip of the lance.”
It must be noted that even the water from the tip of the lance is not given; rather, one is first given the water at the very tip of the lance, which, once touched to the lips, reaches the disciple. The poet has not had access to a more complete expression or meaning than this. In mysticism, it is not the blade’s edge that strikes, but rather the tip of the dagger that severs the disciple’s head, and only then is it drawn to the blade’s edge. The path of asceticism is a path of pain, sorrow, and affliction; it is not a place for music or admiring beauty. It should be said that in this regard, it seems that in explaining the discipline of the mystics, the night of the wedding is confused with the day of asceticism.
Asceticism, in this sense, means keeping the soul in balance: not striking so harshly that it burns, not fleeing so much that it is destroyed, and not refraining from food to the point where the mind dries up and utterances become nonsensical. The path of asceticism is one of affliction, and when the friends of God engaged in ascetic practices, they did not require such things. The asceticism of a sheikh is the asceticism of the scholar’s path. When God throws someone into the path of asceticism, He knocks them to the ground so hard that their skull shatters, testing the disciple in this way because this path is one of affliction. Entering the path of asceticism is like entering the blessed month of Ramadan, where to attain closeness to the Almighty, one must endure the fast of the month of Sha’ban, fasting, and in this gathering, one reaches a state where one cannot speak of the Divine:
“In the name of God, by God, to God, and all the best names belong to God. I trust in God, and there is no power or strength except by God.”
Then they say: “O God, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad,”
And then they say: “Open to me the doors of Your mercy and repentance.”
After that, they say: “And close the doors of Your bounty and disobedience,”
And in the end, they say: “And make me one of Your visitors,”
While simultaneously acknowledging: “And remove from me the accursed Satan and all his forces.”
The disciple must rely on the Divine will and engage in asceticism on a path filled with affliction, but the type of asceticism described by Ibn Sina resembles comfort more than discipline. He did not speak of the challenges of the spiritual journey but only highlighted its aids. Indeed, he only mentioned that the path of asceticism is so difficult that the disciple should not dry themselves out. They should take care to monitor their food and appearance to avoid complete decay, and they should refrain from excess.
Although the sheikh mentioned the necessary aspects of asceticism, he did not detail the winding path, suffering, pain, and hardships that come with it. He only said that the disciple, in their earnestness, endures numerous challenges so that their soul does not perish or fall into ruin. In this respect, they become dependent on love for beauty, both in outward appearance and inner essence.
4) The Difference Between the Mysticism of the Lover and the Beloved
What is written in this book and similar mystical works about asceticism is specifically for the mystics of love. The rare mystics, the Beloveds, do not need such ascetic practices, and they do not experience the many states described in this text. Their actions stem from love and passion, even though they too face gifts and afflictions, for affliction itself is a gift for them, and the gift they receive is, in essence, their affliction.
The discourse on love and asceticism is more extensive than what the sheikh has conveyed and more intricate than what the sheikh has attempted to simplify. This matter requires a heart scorched by longing, a spirit torn open, one that has transcended everything and does not even harbor a desire for the Divine, as is elaborated in the writer’s detailed works on mysticism.

Stages of the Spiritual Journey:

The Station of Presence Between the Present and the Absent: In this stage, the seeker experiences a simultaneous state of presence and absence. As the seeker deepens in spiritual knowledge, their inner states become less apparent to those around them. Thus, the seeker may appear present in body while being absent in spirit, engrossed in the mystical journey, which is not visible to others.
The Station of Voluntary Vision: At this stage, the seeker begins to witness the Divine willfully and consciously, whereas, in previous stages, the vision of God came upon them involuntarily. In this state, the seeker’s vision of the Divine is guided by their own will and intent, reflecting their control over their spiritual experiences.
The Station of Reaching the Inner World (al-Bātin): In this stage, the seeker remains in constant communion with the inner reality, perceiving the Divine in all things. The vision of the Divine becomes automatic, not dependent on will, and the seeker experiences the inner world as a continuous, spontaneous presence.
The Stage of Spiritual Exercise and the Joy of Union: When the seeker reaches the stage of attaining, their inner self becomes a polished mirror reflecting the Divine, receiving spiritual pleasures that bring joy and fulfilment. However, the seeker in this stage finds themselves torn between looking at the Divine and contemplating their own being, reflecting a dual focus of perception.
The Journey from Creation to the Divine: At the final stage of the spiritual journey, the seeker completely loses awareness of their own self and becomes fully absorbed in contemplating the sanctity of the Divine Presence. When the seeker does look at themselves, they perceive themselves not as an individual, but through the lens of the Divine. This marks the completion of their journey from creation to the Divine (the ultimate union), and the seeker reaches the state of “Fana” (annihilation in God), where their personal identity dissolves in the realization of the oneness of the Divine.

Each of these stages reflects the process of spiritual maturation and the evolving relationship between the seeker and the Divine. The journey is not immediate but gradual, with each stage opening up new dimensions of connection, awareness, and ultimately, union with the Divine. The text suggests that the path is structured in three main phases—beginning, middle, and end—each of which contains further sub-stages, resulting in a total of nine stages of progression toward spiritual completion. These stages encompass different forms of awareness, ranging from the seeker’s initial experiences of divine presence to the eventual dissolution of the self in the Divine.

The first three stages of the spiritual journey are “Time” (Waqt), “Establishment” (Tamakkun), and “Stability” (Isthikrar). The first stage, “Time” (Waqt), is characterized by an instantaneous and fleeting vision, a brief glimpse or spark. Everything before this stage is considered wasted because the individual has not yet established a connection with the Divine. While all beings, from the smallest particle to the greatest, have the potential for perfection, completion, goodness, and survival—even poison and venom partake in this—ultimately, as the Quran says, “I did not create the jinn and the humans except to worship Me” (Quran, 51:56). Thus, anyone who has not yet perceived the Divine is lost and wasted, as reflected in the verses, “Most of them do not reason” (Quran, 7:179) and “Most of them do not believe” (Quran, 36:7).

The second stage occurs when this momentary vision is experienced outside of formal ascetic practices, and the seeker (Sālik) gains “Establishment” (Tamakkun), so that fear and instability no longer disturb them.

The third stage is “Stability” (Isthikrar) in vision, where the seeker reaches a point of serenity and inner peace, and restlessness ceases to affect them.

The next three stages are related to the transformation of “Time” into “Tranquility” or “Dignity” (Sakīnah or Waqār), the “Discourse of Presence and Absence,” or “Non-Ascetic Establishment” (Tamakkun ghayr i’tibārī), in which the seeker can control their external appearance such that others do not perceive them as they truly are. This is followed by the “Achievement of Will in the Seeker” or the station of “Iradah” (Will).

The last three stages are the final stages of the spiritual journey. The first of these is the “Realization of Vision or Connection Without Will,” the second is “Stability in Vision Without Ascetic Practices,” and the third and final stage of the first journey is the “Confirmation of Vision Without the Consideration of the Self or Hesitation.”

The Sheikh summarizes all the previous stages in the following manner, emphasizing that all the stages of the spiritual journey, apart from the station of a select few, are not considered to be “truly” in the presence of the Divine. This is because, as the saying goes, “The good deeds of the righteous are the sins of the near ones” (al-‘Ulūm), meaning that even the highest of seekers, the accomplished mystics, negate the lower stages when compared to the higher ones, for they are united with something other than the Divine. If they were not, each stage would still be considered part of the Divine. This is why the Sheikh uses the term “Reminder” (Tanbih) in reference to these stages.

Reminder (Tanbih):
“Turning towards what is beyond, avoiding distractions, claiming what is within the nature of the soul as weakness, and boasting in the adornment of the self as an end unto itself, even if in truth it pertains to the Divine, leads to confusion. Turning entirely towards the Divine is the ultimate deliverance.”

The Sheikh divides the spiritual journey into four parts: attention to asceticism (Zuhd), attention to worship (Ibadah), focus on the joy of the soul through the Divine, and the journey to the Divine.

He notes that asceticism, worship, and the joy of the soul are all distractions from the Divine. True focus on the Divine is only achieved when the seeker sees only the Divine.

Asceticism involves renouncing everything other than God. In order to do this, one must first conceive of things other than God and then work towards renouncing them. Therefore, renunciation of the world is, in itself, still a focus on something other than God.

Worship has the same destiny. A worshipper aims to tame the soul’s desires and faculties, leading to a sense of incapacity, where they are attempting, through persistence, to bring someone into submission. But this is not God; it is the submission of the soul.

The joy derived from the vision of the Divine is also not the Divine itself, but rather the soul’s pleasure. The true path is for the seeker to reach a state where they no longer see the self, asceticism, or worship, but see only the Divine. At that point, they are truly in the presence of the Divine, and nothing else—no person, object, or perspective—remains with them. Upon reaching this state, the seeker declares, “I have found You worthy of worship,” referring to the realization of Divine presence, existence, and being.

If a person is able to conceive of this state and then, upon confirming it, progresses through the stages of the spiritual journey without any pride or attachment to their own asceticism, worship, or any form of self-interest, they will reach the stage of total detachment. They will understand the true meaning of nearness to the Divine—not as a merging, union, or dissolution, which are concepts espoused by the misguided, but rather as a realization of the singular, ultimate truth of the Divine.

Thus, annihilation (Fana) does not mean forsaking one’s self to unite with the Divine; for everything is God’s. The Sheikh’s point is that attention to what one has renounced is itself a distraction from the world. Since one must first conceive of the world in order to renounce it, renouncing the world is still in itself an attachment to something other than the Divine.

The focus on the soul’s obedience and its faculties submitting to the soul’s inner peace is indicative of weakness. It shows an attempt to tame the soul, but this is not Divine; it is an effort to control the soul itself.

Delight in the adornment of the soul is also a form of confusion, as it implies the soul’s independence. The soul may think, “I am the one who has become the house of God and have hosted the Divine.”

Turning entirely towards the Divine, without any attachment to the self, renunciation, worship, or worldly distractions, is the true form of deliverance. When the soul is truly free of all attachments, the seeker arrives at the Divine, experiencing ultimate clarity and presence.

This is the essence of the Sheikh’s teaching: “The purist is at great risk when they turn completely to the Divine”.

The author recalls an experience during which they were in the otherworldly realm, seeing God on the Day of Judgment. They recall that in this world, it is customary for students of knowledge to appear dignified and to wear dignified clothing. Such attire should be modest but respectful. However, in the vision, they let go of all worldly possessions, even their clothing, and lived humbly. They remember using patched clothes for years, reflecting a state of detachment from material things.

In the vision, their head was bowed, not because of any expectation from the Divine, but to avoid any sense of entitlement or expectation. They remained in this humble state, detached from all worldly desires, and waited for the Divine presence.

Ultimately, they realized that any attachment, even to “good works” like knowledge, worship, and charity, is an obstacle unless it is done purely for God, without any expectation or demand. Only by doing so can one achieve true deliverance, and only then can one say: “I have found You worthy of worship,” acknowledging the Divine alone without any other expectation. This is the true meaning of purity and deliverance.

The conclusion is that when one reaches the stage of complete detachment and purity, all worldly attachments, even the desire for reward or recognition, disappear. Only God remains, and this is the ultimate state of true spiritual arrival.

Levels of Purification and Sanctification
For both purification (Takhliyah) and sanctification (Tahleeyah), there are distinct stages. However, the stages of purification (Takhliyah) are those four stages that the Sheikh mentioned: differentiation, shaking off, abandonment, and rejection.
Differentiation (Tafreeq) refers to the intense act of distinguishing between two things, where one is not preferred over the other. It involves creating a separation between oneself and the worldly distractions, between oneself and everything except God. However, it does not mean completely detaching from oneself.
Shaking off (Nafz) means to shake something, like shaking off dust or small particles from a cloth or a bag. Similarly, the seeker (Salik) must shake off their desire for the world, distancing themselves from worldly distractions.
While “differentiation” pertains to the essential objects, creating a separation between the seeker and the world, “desire” is more like a shadow that is not controlled. To remove the dust of worldly distractions, one resorts to “shaking off.” For example, if someone gives their wealth to a poor person out of love, this represents differentiation; but if they give it without any further attachment, forgetting about it, they have reached the stage of shaking off. The mystic, in such a state, no longer identifies the wealth as theirs but views it as God’s that has been given to the other.
Abandonment (Tark) refers to renouncing desires and detaching from all worldly pursuits, removing even the idea of perfection from oneself.
The objects of differentiation and shaking off are external, while abandonment and rejection pertain to the individual seeker themselves.
The saying of Imam Hassan (peace be upon him): “Live as if you are going to live forever, and live for the Hereafter as if you will die tomorrow” reflects this concept. The profound meaning in this saying is that while one engages with the world, they must never forget their true purpose or attachment to the Hereafter.
In mysticism, the process begins with differentiation, where the mystic begins to distinguish between themselves and anything that distracts them from the Divine. This is followed by shaking off all worldly attachments to purify the soul. After that comes abandonment, which involves detaching from the pursuit of perfection. The final stage is rejection (Rafd), where the seeker completely surrenders to God and loses all sense of self.
Levels of Sanctification (Tahleeyah)
As for sanctification (Tahleeyah), the mystic, upon detaching from their own ego and self, no longer sees themselves as separate from God. Everything they perceive, every attribute and power, is seen through the lens of God’s omnipotence. “When the victory of God and the conquest comes, and you see people entering into the religion of God in crowds, glorify Him,” is a verse that reflects this understanding.
To see the entire world through the divine lens, the mystic perceives everything as emanating from God. The notion of separateness disappears as all things are seen as part of God’s creative power. For instance, the wind moves freely without restriction, and all actions, from the trees’ movements to the actions of the prophets, are seen as the expression of God’s will. Thus, the mystic who has detached from their ego sees the divine in everything.
In this state, the mystic is no longer concerned with worldly or personal attachment, but sees everything as belonging to God. This understanding is crucial in the mystic path, where the ultimate goal is not just union with God but the complete dissolution of the self in the divine essence.
The mystical journey ultimately leads to a state where the seeker has nothing left of their own, and they are completely absorbed in the divine attributes. They no longer see themselves as separate from God, but rather as one with Him. At this stage, all concepts of the self, the seeker, and the sought become meaningless.
The concept of “unity” in mysticism is not just intellectual but experiential. True mysticism requires experiencing the Divine directly, not just through concepts or words. Thus, the journey towards sanctification and union with God transcends words and intellectual understanding, entering into the realm of direct spiritual experience.

Chapter Four: The Characteristics of the Gnostics

The Ninth Pattern / Chapter Four / The Characteristics of the Gnostics

– Note: The Station of Contentment

The gnostic is cheerful, smiling, and joyful. He honours the humble as much as he honours the great, and he extends his kindness to the lowly just as he would to the distinguished. How could he not be cheerful when he is delighted with the truth and with everything in existence, seeing the truth in all things? How could he not treat everyone equally when he perceives all as equal before God, with mercy occupying their hearts and being unconcerned with the trivialities of the world?

The late Sheikh, in recalling the station of contentment, enumerates its characteristics: the gnostic is happy, joyful, and always smiling because he is successful. He has attained the truth and sees all creation as belonging to the family of the truth. If he is in a station higher than this, he only sees the truth, and thus he settles into the station of contentment. This is a lofty station that is only reached by the close friends of God. In this state, the seeker does not distinguish between God’s servants, seeing neither the rich nor the poor, the famous nor the unknown, as different. Like a judge who must treat both sides of a dispute with equal fairness, the gnostic sees all equally.

The gnostic is exuberant, cheerful, and open-hearted. He may be happy and joyful but not open in the same way. His smile reflects his openness, but his heart remains wide, not constrained. He is open both in spirit and in appearance, with his lips, face, and heart open, although not to an exaggerated degree, but enough to show his essence without exposing the sharpness of his intellect.

“One whose heart lacks love is like a barren gourd;
One whose lips lack laughter is like a cracked wall.”

A seeker must have an open heart, not an open mouth. The one who shouts has an open mouth, but the one who smiles opens his lips without revealing the depth of his thoughts. The gnostic has an open heart and open appearance, and his love extends to all, as they are all the dependents of God.

Thus, he who is happy with the truth must be happy with everything because he sees the truth in everything. How can he not view the humble and the distinguished as equal, when all of existence is the property of God? The gnostic holds no grudges and offers love to all because they are all part of God’s creation, and he loves them as such.

Explanation by the Honoured Master:

“I say: After having discussed the stages of the gnostics, the Sheikh proceeds to describe their moral traits and states. The terms used—‘hush’ (bright), ‘bash’ (smiling), and ‘bessam’ (always smiling)—all point to someone who has a cheerful and open face. The term ‘nabeeh’ (distinguished) is contrasted with ‘khameel’ (unknown). The word ‘sawa’ (equal) is derived from the root meaning ‘same’, which signifies similarity, and this is the basis of the gnostic’s equal view of all beings.”

These two attributes—being cheerful and treating all with equality—are manifestations of a single quality, known as contentment. This quality does not leave room for denial, fear of external threats, or grief over losses. As the Almighty said, “And His contentment is greater” (Quran 48:17).

The Sheikh further points out that those in the station of contentment reach a state of complete tranquillity, unaffected by worldly concerns. This level of contentment transcends mere submission and involves a deep, unshakable alignment with the truth.

– Note: The Gnostic’s Distaste for Distractions

The gnostic has states in which he cannot tolerate even the faintest sound, let alone other distractions. These occur when his inner focus is directed solely towards the truth, and any disturbance, whether internal or external, becomes unbearable. When he reaches his destination, his connection with the truth either completely absorbs him or grants him a broader capacity to encompass both inner and outer realities. Similarly, when he is ready to depart in his moment of honour, he is the most cheerful of all God’s creatures, exuding joy.

Before reaching his ultimate goal, the gnostic may experience heaviness or anxiety, much like a preacher who, before stepping onto the pulpit, feels uneasy and unable to focus on anything else. During this period, even the smallest sound or movement can cause discomfort, as his focus is entirely dedicated to the journey towards the truth. Once the gnostic has reached his goal, he becomes immune to external distractions; his spiritual strength allows him to either remain solely focused on the truth or to embrace both inner and outer experiences without disruption.

Explanation by the Honoured Master:

“The gnostic has states of being where he cannot tolerate distractions, whether the faintest sound or any form of disturbance. These occur during his intense concentration on the truth. When he has reached his goal, he is either fully absorbed in the truth or able to accommodate both his inner and outer realities. Upon returning to the world, he is filled with joy and exudes happiness, engaging with others in a joyful manner.”

– Note: The Gnostic’s Qualities and Virtues

The gnostic is not concerned with spying on or scrutinizing others, nor does he succumb to anger when confronted with wrongdoings. Rather, he is moved by mercy. He understands the hidden wisdom in divine decree and when commanded to enjoin the good, he does so gently, offering counsel without harshness or judgment.

The gnostic is always engaged, never idle, and does not concern himself with the faults of others. He may witness wrongdoing but does not react with anger. Instead, he maintains his composure, as he understands the divine wisdom behind every circumstance. If he observes that an important act of goodness is lacking, he may choose to remain silent as a form of respect, as silence can sometimes be a more effective response than direct confrontation.

Indeed, commanding good and forbidding wrong does not necessarily involve anger, reproach, mockery, or scorn. The absence of anger towards a sinner does not contradict the act of enjoining good and forbidding evil.

For the mystic, investigating or prying into the affairs of others is not significant. “Tahsiss” (seeking information) and “Tajasus” (prying) refer to the act of examining or scrutinising the private matters of others. From the perspective of psychoanalysis and psychological issues, those who engage in such activities are often either flawed or idle. These individuals are either people without work, purpose, or responsibility, or those who are fearful and weak. They seek to find companionship through such acts.

A mystic, therefore, does not seek to find fault in others. However, if by chance they witness someone committing an immoral act, they do not become angry or enraged. This is because they see the “secret of divine will.” They perceive the interconnectedness of the world and, although they acknowledge the sinner as the immediate perpetrator, they view the cause of the sin as shared, stating: “There is no power and no strength except with Allah.” The theory of the shared nature of human actions is elaborated in the author’s book Godlessness and the Principles of Atheism, where certain divine matters, particularly the nature of belief in God, its distinction from godlessness, how one conceives and acknowledges God, and the realization of the Divine Essence, are discussed. The book also delves into certain stages and levels of spiritual progression, the unity of the Divine Presence, and the relationship between the manifestation of phenomena and God, exploring the boundaries of human freedom and choice, the existence of evil, and its relationship to the divine names and the challenge of reconciling the presence of evil in the world.

The mystic does not attribute all blame solely to the sinner. Instead, they recognise the contribution of all causes, from the parents and environment to the Divine itself. Hence, the mystic embodies the reality of the verse: “And when they pass by vain talk, they pass by with dignity.”

Explanation by Khwaja

“He does not concern himself” means he is not preoccupied. In a hadith, it is stated: “Whoever seeks what does not concern him, he misses what does concern him.”

“Tajasus” means scrutinising or probing. “Tahasas” means seeking information or news. When Satan entices and distorts, it leads to shame and mockery. The term “ghar” refers to jealousy, and the man who becomes “ghayr” is said to have jealousy in a different sense.

The mystic does not concern themselves with the private affairs of others, as they are focused on their own matters, not following the flaws of others. Only those who are idle, fearful, or critical engage in such actions. They lack sincerity and honesty, and cannot avoid lying. If a person becomes fixated on information, they cannot remain truthful or possess nobility. Intelligence and investigative powers must be trained extensively to avoid deviation and control the negative consequences of such actions, ensuring they do not fall into disbelief or total suspicion.

The mystic does not pursue either the faults or the virtues of others. It is possible for someone to feel concerned when others praise their virtues, such as wealth or knowledge, as they fear others may covet what they have, leading them to lie or sin.

Those who pry into the lives of others are often idle and purposeless. When choosing a place of residence, it is important to consider whether a neighbour is occupied or idle. If the neighbour is idle, they may have time to engage in disputes or create trouble. Similarly, when choosing a companion for discussion, one should avoid those who are unoccupied and have no significant activity, as they will only be a source of harm.

In the past, when we frequently visited a great master’s house, we had been attending for many years, yet we never noticed the ceiling of his room—whether it was wooden or made of steel beams. We were only focused on him. However, a person who had visited for only one day asked me: “Why is the ceiling of the master’s house like this?” I was surprised because this person, only on their first day, had been so observant, indicating that they were idle and had time to scrutinise such details.

The second group of people who pry are those who are fearful. These individuals seek to uncover others’ weaknesses in order to use them to their advantage at a later time.

The third group comprises those who have flaws themselves and wish to share their flaws with others.

Based on what has been discussed, anger does not overpower the mystic. Whenever they wish to command good, they do so gently, with advice, not through harshness, mockery, or fault-finding. In fact, they approach others as a father would approach his child. As the saying goes, Shah Abbas used to say: “All the poor are my children, and all the wealthy are my fathers. I take aid from the wealthy and give it to the poor.” Of course, he was a ruler who acquired his wealth through oppression and force.

The mystic’s approach to commanding good resembles the advice a father gives to his child; it must be done gently and with kindness, not through harshness or mockery. The mystic must show compassion for all of God’s creation, and if a major and painful sin occurs, they may even choose to ignore it, concealing it out of a sense of jealousy.

Khwaja explains that Fakhr al-Razi, in his interpretation of the phrase “from other than his own people,” writes it as “without his own people,” claiming that “when the good deed is great and performed by someone who is not part of his group, the mystic feels a sense of jealousy, not envy.” However, this does not align with the text, as the original phrase in Sheikh’s work refers to the mystic’s sense of protective jealousy towards a great deed, which should be hidden from others.

Furthermore, in the phrase “as mercy overcomes him,” Khwaja comments: “The mystic is not moved by anger upon witnessing wrongdoing, but rather by mercy.” This phrase implies that when the mystic sees someone performing a good deed, they feel joy and extend mercy, praising and thanking the benefactor. However, if they witness wrongdoing, they do not immediately become angry but instead bear the wrong with patience, in the same way they would bear good deeds.

Remark: Courage

The mystic is courageous because they are free from fear of death, standing apart from the fear of dying, as they have experienced the voluntary pleasure of death through their spiritual practices.

If it is argued that a reckless person is not afraid of death, it should be noted that the absence of fear of death is not the criterion of courage. Rather, the mystic’s fearlessness is rooted in wisdom, not recklessness.

The mystic is generous because they do not desire worldly possessions. Generosity is defined by giving that which is not obligatory, whether it is through giving one’s life (courage) or wealth (generosity), or anything that holds value.

If someone is able to give yet does not forgive or forget their grievances, it may be due to a lack of humility or deeper wisdom. However, in the mystic, these virtues are cultivated to an extent that no injury, no matter how grave, can hurt them deeply.

Conclusion on the Various States of the Mystic

The mystics differ in their aspirations according to the internal thoughts that arise within them. As a result, their decisions and inclinations vary because their hearts are different, and the state of their souls influences their actions. Some mystics might prefer hardship over luxury, simplicity over adornment, or hardship over comfort, depending on their personal spiritual understanding. This diversity is not only due to external circumstances but also to the internal thoughts and experiences that guide their spiritual journeys.

The mystic may choose an old, unattractive woman over a beautiful one, because their heart is bound to the truth. When they look at her, they are drawn closer to the Divine and find greater certainty. This is because they see the ultimate worldly rewards and, in turn, feel a stronger attachment to the Divine. They may choose the “ugly” in order to diminish any attachment to the mundane and to regard anything other than God as insignificant. Sometimes, they may be inclined towards beauty, selecting the best of everything and avoiding anything imperfect or lowly, as long as they regard these things as manifestations of the Divine. They do not attribute any flaws to the Divine, but rather perceive neither the ugliness nor imperfection in the world as truly ugly or imperfect. In other words, when a mystic is comparing their soul and choosing between God and something else, they may turn to the “bad” in order to draw closer to God, and when they wish to attend to the Divine manifestations, they are drawn to beauty. At times, a mystic may prefer the beauty of external appearances, while at other times, they may lean towards the internal, spiritual aspects. These different states may exist in a single mystic or be spread across different mystics. What matters is the intention behind the choice, which is often difficult to discern. Without a guide or a mentor, a mystic might deviate, leading to a misunderstanding or even disrepute regarding mysticism, which has sometimes been tarnished by illogical practices.

Explanation by Khwaja of Tus:

“I say: The term ‘Qashf’ refers to the burning sensation caused by the sun or poverty, leading to a change or weariness. The ascetic is one who sustains himself on simple food and patched garments. The term ‘mukhtari’ (or “affluent”) refers to those who are indulgent or overindulgent, while ‘Tafl’ means unpleasant or foul, and this is not a desirable term in mysticism.”

Indeed, mysticism should not be associated with negative or impure connotations. A mystic does not prefer unpleasantness or filth, and the comparison to an old woman might not be suitable when referring to someone in the presence of the Divine. Rather, a mystic may prefer worn clothing over new attire or old age over youth, but not filth or unpleasantness, which are associated with the practices of ascetics far removed from faith.

“‘Saghā ilayh’ means inclination. ‘Aqīla of everything’ refers to the finest aspect of something, and the ‘aqīla of the sea is its pearls.”

Further Clarification on Concepts:

‘Khudāj’ means imperfection, while ‘Saqṭ’ refers to poor goods. ‘Irtād’ means to seek something with frequent coming and going. The mystic desires beauty and goodness that they associate with the Divine and seek to be in the company of the best things.

‘Bahā’ refers to beauty, and ‘Mizīyah’ refers to virtue. The term ‘Hawā’ in the context of mysticism refers to the love or desire for the Divine, which is often expressed through a mystic’s yearning for beauty. The mystic thus seeks beauty and excellence because it brings them closer to God, as beauty is a manifestation of the Divine.

A Note on the Mystic’s Attention to Worship:

It is rare, but sometimes a mystic becomes so absorbed in their connection to the Divine realm that they become oblivious to worldly matters, including the very acts of worship that guide them toward God. In such moments, the mystic is not considered to have neglected their duties or fallen into sin, as they have transcended the awareness required for legal accountability. The Prophet (PBUH) expressed this in a way that demonstrates the divine love for beauty and goodness, even in acts of worship, saying: “Three things from your world have been made beloved to me: fragrance, women, and the coolness of my eyes in prayer.” Thus, when a mystic becomes absorbed in their communion with the Divine, they might forget even their acts of worship, becoming so absorbed in their spiritual state that they are no longer bound by the rules of legal obligation, just as a child or a madman is not legally accountable for their actions.

Conclusion by Khwaja:

Khwaja explains that mystics may forget their duties or their connection to the physical world because their awareness has transcended ordinary understanding, and they are no longer bound by the legal obligations of regular worship. Just as a child or a madman is not held responsible for failing to fulfill obligations, the mystic, in their heightened state of awareness, is not considered sinful for neglecting their prescribed acts of worship. The only obligation remains the understanding of divine will and the connection to God, which transcends mundane acts of piety.

The Criticism of the Author on Sheikh’s Claim

It must be noted that the ruling of a mystic who has voluntarily lost the capacity to fulfil their religious duties is akin to someone who, by drinking alcohol, becomes intoxicated. Although the obligation of prayer is no longer effective for them, and the command to pray does not apply to them, they will still be held accountable for having drunk alcohol. Similarly, the mystic should conduct their actions and spiritual exercises to such an extent that their external conduct remains intact, and their mystical states do not conflict with the religious duties. Otherwise, such a situation marks the beginning of their deviation. In this regard, attention must be given to the fundamental legal principle, “What is impossible by choice does not negate choice”. It is true that worship may currently be impossible for the seeker, but it is a result of their own choice, and due to this, they will be punished for their chosen course of action.

At every level, stage, and degree of mysticism, one’s religious obligations should not be lifted. If this happens, it is a sign of deviation and falsehood. A mystic should not neglect any aspect of religious law. Mysticism that leads a person to the point where their reason, intellect, and attention are lost—such that if they do not pray or engage in illicit acts like adultery, they feel no guilt—has misguided them. The religious law is never suspended, and the Hadith of “Raf’ al-Ma’la” is a concession; even during the Eid al-Zahra celebrations, religious duties are not lifted. Such statements are mere superstitions, indicating ignorance and the spiritual decline of the individual. Mysticism must align with religious law and should not contradict what has been revealed by God (“Ma Anzala Allah”). The shortcomings within mysticism often stem from the foreign ideas of mystics who were not Muslim.

The author has observed individuals who, for extended periods, pursued mysticism with full devotion and reached the highest spiritual levels, to the point that everything seemed to be in their control and they were regarded as possessors of divine authority. However, because they neglected their prayers and failed to perform them at their proper times, they fell into despair, misfortune, and ruin. They forgot the very essence of their spiritual status and were left in a state of paralysis and emptiness.

The ruling on this matter, in terms of its ontological validity, is as follows: with the presence of misleading thoughts within the mystics’ ranks, permissiveness has become widespread among certain groups of so-called mystics and Sufis.

The Ahl al-Bayt (the Infallible Household of the Prophet) are the standard-bearers of mysticism and, indeed, they themselves are the embodiment of religious law, truth, and mysticism. For instance, Imam Ali (A.S.) was not heedless of his duties even in the face of martyrdom, as he instructed that the milk be given to his enemies. Similarly, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was taken to the heavens in the Night Journey (Isra’ and Mi’raj) and returned without any prayer being missed: “Glory be to Him who took His servant by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque” (Quran 17:1).

Moreover, even though the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has a unique position as the “Waliyy al-Mu’minin” (the Guardian of the Believers), it is impossible to find a single instance where he, in light of his absolute divine authority, interfered with another person’s wealth or property.

Thus, it is categorically impossible to relieve a person of their religious duties before their death; while a person is alive and in the realm of physical existence, religious obligations cannot be removed without a compelling and rational argument. Even someone who is drowning must, to the extent possible, engage in prayer, even if it is just through an eye movement or the intention of the heart. Abandoning prayer or religious obligations in this world is not permissible, except by clear religious or rational evidence, such as “what they do not know is lifted” or “what they are compelled to do is excused”, which are only applicable under specific circumstances like unconsciousness or sleep, where the person is incapable of performing the duties.

If a mystic, without knowing or anticipating it, acts in a way that causes their religious duties to be exempted, then no blame attaches to them in this regard. This situation is akin to someone drinking what they think is water, not realizing it is alcohol, or someone engaging in sexual play during Ramadan with the intention of not becoming impure but unexpectedly becoming so. There is no sin attached to them in such cases because they did not have an intentional act in the moment. The mystic in a state of bewilderment or trance is in a similar position, where if they are careful and vigilant, yet still fall into such a state unexpectedly, no sin is attributed to them.

It should also be noted that the path of mysticism is very dangerous, and thus the seeker should never walk it without a guide or mentor, so they know where the path leads. Anyone who remains in prostration for an entire day, neglecting all their prayers, falls into the trap of Satan and is no different from someone who is addicted or intoxicated, unable to distinguish day from night and neglecting their prayers.

Furthermore, in this discussion, just as in the case of music, the distinction between the ontological reality and its practical application must not be confused. In practice, it is very rare for a mystic to reach a state where this issue arises, and this occurs particularly if the mystic has no teacher or guide. This ruling does not apply to someone who merely practices rituals like shaving their beard or singing some poetry in a Sufi lodge.

A mystic, like any other person, must obey religious law. A mystic who is not a jurist should still follow the rulings of a jurist, even if they are a high-ranking mystic.

A Note: Reaching the Truth is a Rare Blessing

(The majesty of the Divine is too great to be a law for everyone who enters or becomes aware of it, except for one after another. This is why what is found in this science is a laughing matter for the ignorant, and a lesson for the knowledgeable. If someone hears it and is repelled by it, they should suspect themselves, for it may not be suited to them, and everyone is destined for what they are created for.)

The path to the Divine is too exalted for every traveller to enter, nor for everyone to comprehend. It is only occasionally that one individual after another is granted this understanding. What is found in mysticism may be laughable to the ignorant, but it is a profound lesson for the seeker of knowledge. Thus, if someone hears of it and is put off by it, they should question themselves, for perhaps mysticism is not suited to them. “Everyone is destined for what they were created for.” As the saying goes, “A bird that eats figs has a crooked beak.”

And there is a category where the origin is from lower bodies;

There is also a category where the origin is from celestial bodies, and these alone do not cause any earthly incident unless accompanied by an earthly receptivity capable of receiving them.

What is stated in the book is clear.

The distinguished commentator classifies the category attributed to all elemental bodies as niranjats and includes the magnetic attraction of iron within this group, which contradicts both the common understanding and the Sheikh’s words. This is because the Sheikh attributed both niranjats and magnetic attraction to this category without stating that this category specifically refers to niranjats, as he also did in the case of talismanic practices.

The power of the mystic is described as incomplete, due to the mystic’s training in minimal sustenance and reduced desire for sensory pleasures.

“Esjah”: the act of pardoning and being forgiving, as expressed in the saying, “If you possess power, forgive.” It is also said, “When asked, be gentle,” meaning to ease the words and respond with kindness.

After the Sheikh has completed his exposition of the stages of the mystic and clarified that a mystic and seeker can will to reach the truth and attain it, in the tenth section—which is the final section of the Isharat—he aims to expound upon the effects and secrets of mysticism and the mystic. As part of this, he also discusses the wonders of creation and the extraordinary occurrences that happen in the lives of the saints and practitioners of the path. He states: “In the secrets of the verses,” referring to the extraordinary and wondrous phenomena that manifest in the lives of God’s friends and the people of the path. This includes their unconventional sustenance, how they live with minimal needs, performing strange and extraordinary actions, or possessing knowledge of the unseen. They are capable of revealing things beyond the normal scope of human perception, without relying on external signs, ordinary knowledge, or physical awareness. Here, the Sheikh discusses the secrets and wonders that are normally beyond the capacity of ordinary people to bear.

The Sheikh, in his first mention, speaks of sustenance and says: “If you hear that a seeker abstains from food, which they have minimized to the bare minimum through asceticism, accept that this is an extraordinary act; however, it is possible and not impossible. It is in line with nature, reason, logic, and evidence.”

It should be noted that abstaining from food or consuming it in an extraordinary or excessive manner through ascetic practices is possible, even for someone who is not a believer. This is because abstention from food and sustenance is within the control of the human being. The reason for this may either be divine or demonic.

It is possible for someone to acquire the strength to perform feats that ordinary minds might consider impossible. For instance, a person can train themselves to chew iron and glass and digest them or to engage with animals in ways beyond the capacity of normal human beings. Such feats become possible through experience, training, and time.

In times of illness, a person may also refrain from eating. This occurs because the illness interrupts the stomach’s ability to digest food, and the appetite is lost as the body is occupied by an abnormal state. Similarly, in mysticism, it is possible for a seeker to turn away from nature and focus on abstractions or the Divine, which makes food unnecessary for them.

Previously, it was discussed that the body and soul are interconnected. The state of the soul affects the body, and bodily conditions impact the soul. For instance, someone who is upset or overwhelmed by fear will lose their appetite, and their desires will be weakened.

Thus, extraordinary actions are in accordance with human nature. When the soul of the seeker becomes strong and transforms into a tranquil soul, it brings the bodily faculties into submission. Even though the seeker may still perform bodily actions, they acquire spiritual states, and at this point, the mystic requires less physical sustenance. The mystic is more prepared to abstain from food than a sick person or someone who is frightened. This is because although a sick person has turned away from nature and food, they still struggle with the illness, which weakens their ability to resist nature. However, the mystic does not face such challenges. Furthermore, the mystic possesses serenity, tranquility, and composure, which prevent their natural processes from undergoing significant disruptions.

The Sheikh intends to explain that it is not impossible for someone to abstain from food for a period, and this can be achieved through experience, training, and a gradual approach.

“Do you think you are a small body?

In you is contained the greater world.”

A person can reach this level and perform extraordinary feats.

Throughout human history, various forms of extraordinary actions have been carried out by human beings. For instance, one can become impervious to electricity or heat, where even a small amount of electricity could typically incapacitate a person, or one might develop such a relationship with venomous creatures like snakes and scorpions that the poison no longer affects them. Similarly, one could train themselves to go without food or sleep for six months, maintaining composure and calm as if it were a voluntary act.

The Sheikh describes the sustenance of a mystic as minimal due to the low cost of their needs.

“Shahh”: refers to material and sensory desires.

“And esjah is the beauty of pardon”; meaning to remain calm and not engage in conflict. As it is said: “When you possess power, forgive”—meaning when you have authority, forgive those who have wronged you.

“And it is said, ‘If you are asked, be gentle'”; meaning that when you are asked, respond with kindness, calmness, and consideration.

Note: Factors of abstention from food

Remember that the natural faculties within us, when occupied with the digestion of beneficial materials and not engaged in processing harmful ones, keep the beneficial materials intact for longer periods without requiring replacement. For example, a person might go without food for an extended period, perhaps even longer than what would be fatal for a typical person, as their life remains preserved.

The explanation of Khwajah:

I say: Abstaining from food may occur due to extraordinary circumstances, whether physical, such as a hot fever, or psychological, such as fear. The consideration of this shows that abstention from food due to strange conditions is not impossible; in fact, it exists. Therefore, the Sheikh noted this in two sections to remove any doubts, and he pointed out the cause of this in the required place in a third section.

In the text, the comparison between the mystical (or spiritual) form of fasting and fasting due to illness is discussed. The author points out that while mystical fasting is driven by a spiritual state that transcends physical needs, fasting due to illness arises from material causes, namely the body’s physiological need for food. Ibn Sina does not compare mystical fasting with fasting arising from fear, as both fear and mysticism are psychological conditions. Instead, he compares them to material fasting, which occurs due to physical factors, such as the body’s requirement for sustenance to maintain balance when faced with physical deterioration.

The text emphasizes that mystical fasting, driven by a spiritual state, is superior to fasting caused by illness. Illness, in certain cases, involves two factors that create a need for food: one factor pertains to the body’s substance, and the other to the form of the body. The first refers to the breakdown of bodily fluids, due to an imbalance caused by excess heat (referred to as ‘bad temperament’), which leads the body to require food to replenish these fluids. The second factor involves the physical weakness caused by the disease, which makes the body require nourishment to maintain bodily strength and balance. As the body weakens, the need for food intensifies.

Mysticism, however, involves a different process altogether. Mystics engage in a form of stillness that leads to the suspension of bodily functions, including those related to food intake. The state of the mystic’s body is not influenced by the material breakdowns and imbalances seen in illness. Mystical fasting, therefore, emerges from a non-material, spiritual state that does not require physical sustenance, unlike the physiological fasting linked to illness.

Therefore, mystical fasting is argued to be superior because it is a product of a higher state of consciousness and spirituality, whereas illness-based fasting is tied to material needs and physical degeneration.

Chapter 10, Section 3: Connection to the Unseen

Note: Knowledge of the Unseen

(When you hear that a mystic has informed you about the unseen, or that a prediction or warning made earlier has come true, then believe it, and do not find it difficult to have faith in it. This is because, according to the laws of nature, there are known causes and reasons for this, and it is considered a natural event.)

Explanation by Khwaja:

“I say: This is another attribute, superior to the two previously mentioned, which the mystic claims in this chapter. He will elaborate on it in the following sixteen chapters.”

After discussing the two characteristics of refraining from food and the mystic’s extraordinary power, the Sheikh now points to another feature of the mystic—knowledge of the unseen. This is even more noble than the previous two attributes. He will further elaborate on this in the chapters to follow.

Indication: Awareness of the Unseen While Awake

“Experience and reasoning agree that the human soul can access the unseen during sleep. Therefore, there is no objection to such an experience occurring while awake, unless there is an obstacle, in which case, it may become possible once that obstacle is removed. As for experience, both oral tradition and personal acquaintance testify to this, as no one has failed to experience it themselves, except for those with disturbed temperaments or those with strong imaginations and memories. As for reasoning, it becomes clear in the next sections.”

The experience and reasoning align regarding the human soul’s ability to access the unseen during sleep. Hence, it is also possible for the same to occur while awake, unless some obstacle exists. If this obstacle is removed, it can happen.

Experience is supported by both tradition and personal encounters, as everyone has experienced such moments, except those with unbalanced temperaments or those whose imagination or memory is weak. The reasoning and proof of this will be explained in further sections.

Explanation by Khwaja:

“I say: The Sheikh wishes to prove this claim convincingly. He mentions that humans can access the unseen while sleeping, and thus, there is no reason to rule out the possibility of the same occurring while awake, unless some obstacle exists, which can be removed, such as distractions by worldly matters.”

The Sheikh points out that the ability to access the unseen during sleep is a known phenomenon, proven by both experience and reasoning. This phenomenon can also occur while awake unless hindered by certain conditions, such as a preoccupation with worldly matters.

Note: Evidence for the Possibility of Accessing the Unseen

“You have already learned that particulars are inscribed in the intellectual world as general forms. I have also pointed out that the celestial bodies have souls with partial perceptions and wills, which cause specific actions based on individual opinions. These celestial bodies are not obstructed in considering the detailed consequences of their movements in the elemental world.”

You already know that the details of the physical world are reflected in the higher, intellectual realm. I have pointed out that the celestial bodies possess souls with partial perceptions and wills, which lead to specific actions based on individual reasoning. These celestial bodies can imagine the detailed consequences of their movements in the material world.

Khwaja’s Explanation:

“I say: The reasoning for the possibility of humans accessing the unseen during sleep and wakefulness is based on two premises. The first is that the forms of particularities from the material world are inscribed in the higher principles before they manifest in the physical world. The second is that the human soul has the capacity to perceive and connect with these higher principles.”

The Sheikh reiterates that the detailed elements of the material world exist as general forms in the higher realms, and human souls can connect with them, allowing for the potential to perceive the unseen.

The Sheikh emphasizes that the soul’s connection to the higher realms is a natural phenomenon, even though it is often considered a hidden or secret knowledge. However, with proper refinement and spiritual purification, humans can access this hidden knowledge.

Chapter Ten / Third Section / Connection to the Unseen

– Warning: Announcement of the Unseen

(And when you hear that a mystic has spoken of the unseen, or that a prediction or warning made previously has come true, do not find it difficult to believe. For this has its known causes within the laws of nature, and it is regarded as a natural phenomenon.)

Explanation by Khwaja

“I say: This is another characteristic, more noble than the two previously mentioned. It has been claimed in this section, and will be further elucidated in the next sixteen sections.”

After mentioning the two qualities of abstaining from food and the extraordinary powers of the mystic, the Sheikh now refers to another characteristic of the mystic, which is the ability to reveal the unseen. This characteristic is far superior to the previous two, and he will elaborate on it in the following sixteen chapters.

– Sign: Knowledge of the Unseen in Wakefulness

(Experience and reasoning agree that the human soul can attain knowledge of the unseen in a dream state. Therefore, it is not improbable that one can attain such knowledge in a wakeful state, unless there is an obstacle, in which case, with the removal of that obstacle, it becomes possible. As for experience, hearsay and mutual acquaintance bear witness to it. There is no one who has not experienced it themselves or has been inspired by such experiences, unless they have an unhealthy temperament, with strong imagination and memory. As for reasoning, it will be clarified in further sections.)

The experience and reasoning both align with the fact that the human soul can attain knowledge of the unseen in a dream state. Therefore, it is possible for one to acquire knowledge of the unseen while awake, unless there is an obstacle. In such cases, this can be resolved once the obstacle is removed.

Experience substantiates this in two ways: firstly, through hearing from others, and secondly, through personal encounters with the unseen that have inspired belief. However, an individual with a corrupt temperament or with impaired imagination or memory may not experience this phenomenon. The logical justification for this will be clarified in the subsequent sections.

Explanation by Khwaja

“I say: He seeks to demonstrate the validity of the claim convincingly. He states that a person can experience knowledge of the unseen during sleep, and therefore, obtaining such knowledge in a wakeful state is not far-fetched, unless there is an obstacle, such as being preoccupied with sensory distractions. Knowledge of the unseen during sleep is supported by both experience and reasoning. Experience is established in two ways: first, through hearing from others (i.e. hearsay), and second, through personal acquaintance. This is a well-established phenomenon, as it has been witnessed by many. However, an individual with an unhealthy temperament or deficient imagination or memory may not experience it. The logical reasoning for this will be clarified in the subsequent sections.”

– Warning: Proof of the Possibility of Connecting to the Unseen

(You have already learned that the particulars of the material world are imprinted in the intellectual world in a general form. It has also been pointed out that celestial bodies possess souls with particular perceptions and wills, which emanate from specific judgments. There is no obstacle for these celestial bodies to conceive of the specific details of the movements occurring in the material world. Furthermore, if the interpretation of this matter seems hidden, it is only clear to those firmly rooted in transcendent wisdom, for these celestial bodies have separate intellects that, like their principles, are not imprinted upon their substances. Rather, they maintain a relationship with them, just as our souls relate to our bodies. Through this relationship, they attain perfection, and their specific and general judgments converge, as we have mentioned, so that the particulars of the material world are imprinted in the intellectual and psychic worlds in both specific and general forms.)

You know that the particulars of the material world are imprinted in the intellectual world in a general form, and the inhabitants of the higher worlds have knowledge of specific events occurring in the lower worlds in a general manner. This is not the same as a modern astrologer observing that the moon is in a particular position; rather, it is similar to an astrologer predicting that the moon will be in that position a month from now based on general knowledge. Knowledge is constant and unchanging in this context, whereas the particular events in the material world change. Despite this, knowledge itself remains constant.

Ancient natural philosophers believed that the system of nature was structured based on the seven heavens, four elements, and three categories of beings (plant, animal, and human). The seven heavens, which were once believed to be the seven planets, later expanded to include nine celestial bodies. The four elements are water, earth, air, and fire, and the three categories of beings are plants, animals, and humans. The seven heavens, along with the four elements, form the foundation of existence, and from this union of material and form, life in various forms arises.

The Sheikh further explains that celestial bodies possess souls, and these souls have specific perceptions and desires, from which specific judgments are made. These souls are capable of understanding the specific details of material movements in the material world. The Sheikh’s explanation aligns with the Peripatetic philosophers’ view that celestial bodies have souls with both particular and general forms of knowledge.

The Sheikh concludes by asserting that the celestial bodies, in addition to having a particular soul, also possess a rational soul, akin to the rational soul of humans. However, unlike the human rational soul, which is imprinted upon the body, the rational soul of celestial bodies maintains a relationship with their bodies, allowing them to have a higher degree of knowledge and understanding.

Explanation by Khwaja

“I say: The reasoning that supports the possibility of a person attaining knowledge of the unseen during both sleep and wakefulness is based on two premises: the first is that the particulars of the material world are imprinted in the higher principles before they come into being. The second premise is that the human soul can imprint what is imprinted within the higher principles. The first premise has already been established. The Sheikh repeats it here: ‘You know that the particulars are imprinted in the intellectual world in a general form.’ This refers to the imprinting of particulars in the intellectual world. The statement about celestial bodies possessing particular souls and perceptions refers to the idea that celestial bodies can perceive and understand the particular details of the material world through their relationship with the intellectual world.”

The Sheikh mentions that the celestial bodies have rational souls that are capable of perceiving both the general and particular aspects of reality, and through this relationship, they can attain knowledge of the unseen. Thus, it is possible for one to connect with the higher realms and gain knowledge of the unseen, provided the soul is purified and capable of attuning itself to these higher principles.

Critique and Conclusion

The correct view is that the possibility of accessing the unseen can be justified by the fact that the world of the intelligible has authority over the material world. The celestial realm oversees the material world, and through this connection, one can gain knowledge of the unseen. However, the Sheikh’s argument that the celestial bodies possess rational souls and that this allows access to the unseen is flawed. According to the Peripatetic philosophers, the celestial bodies only have particular souls and not rational souls. Therefore, the Sheikh’s argument is inconclusive.

Moreover, Ibn Sina’s view that knowledge is inherently universal and not particular has been critiqued elsewhere. According to his logic, divine knowledge is fixed and universal, which is in contrast to the more particular knowledge he attributes to celestial bodies. In this sense, the Sheikh’s argument on the rational souls of celestial bodies fails to convince.

The idea that the celestial bodies have rational souls is contested. While Ibn Sina asserts that the celestial bodies possess both particular and rational knowledge, this claim lacks support, and further examination is required to fully understand the implications of these ideas.

This image is not an illusion or a mere fancy, but rather a perception, albeit one that does not occur through the eyes. What represents the image is referred to as the common sense.

The evidence for the existence of common sense lies in the fact that the faculty of imagination and fancy is the creator of images. The imagination creates individual images, meaning, and the fancy brings forth representations and forms. Common sense holds these individual images and meanings within itself, supported by memory. In essence, common sense is the place where these images are held, and memory acts as its guardian. Since no single faculty can perform all these functions alone, the question arises: Is there one faculty with different aspects that works from various angles, or are there multiple faculties within humans, each performing its own task? As discussed in the third part, humans possess multiple faculties, each of which, though united with the soul, performs distinct tasks based on its characteristics.

The philosopher further states that in the ninth chapter of the third part, it was explained how a raindrop, when descending, takes a straight-line form, and how a spinning flame adopts a circular shape. It was also mentioned that this process occurs within common sense.

Explanation by Tusi

“This is another introduction, reminding us of what was established in the previous discussion on the action of common sense. It was stated that whatever is imprinted in common sense is seen as long as it remains imprinted in it. The imprinting has an inevitable cause, either from within or from without. What happens alongside the cause is the formation of the image of the descending raindrop in the imagination upon seeing it in its original place. The image remains in the second place with the persistence of the cause, or it remains even when the cause has vanished, such as the image that stays in the first place upon seeing it in a second location. These three phenomena are clearly evident, as the observation of the descending raindrop in a straight line can only occur through them. As for the internal cause of the imprinting, it requires further indication, which will be discussed later. This is why the philosopher does not assert its existence in this section.”

This cautionary note is an introduction to the way humans access the unseen, and as previously mentioned, it pertains to the function of common sense.

The causes of the formation of images in common sense are as follows:

The internal cause results in the formation of an image in common sense (this will be discussed in the next section).
The cause of the formation of an image in common sense originates from an external sensory perception, such as a raindrop or a spinning flame.
The cause persists as the formed image remains due to the persistence of the external object, such as the transferred image reaching a second location.
The cause exists after the external object has disappeared, leading to the stabilization of the image.

Indication: Internal Cause of Imprinting of Images

“Some individuals, such as patients or those suffering from mental disturbances, perceive visible images that have no relation to external perceptions. The imprinting of these images must then stem from an internal or secondary cause. Common sense can also be imprinted by images circulating in the realm of imagination and fancy, just as it is imprinted from the realm of common sense onto the imagination, similar to the interplay between facing mirrors.”

This highlights the internal cause of the imprinting of images in common sense.

Patients with psychological disorders or those experiencing neurological disturbances may see images that do not exist externally. In such cases, the cause of these images lies within. These images have no direct relationship with the eye but are formed in the common sense through the faculty of imagination. For instance, fear influences the soul, and the soul, in turn, affects the imagination, causing one to see a figure in the dark or to imagine a dead person. In such a case, the imagination perceives the influence of fear within the soul. At times, common sense may pass such an image to the internal faculties, which perceive the images without external influence.

For such patients, two methods may be used to divert their attention from common sense: either an external obstacle can engage their external senses, or their internal faculties can be distracted, linking the common sense to the external senses. Alternatively, the faculty of imagination can be preoccupied with intellectual thoughts or fancies, thus preventing it from influencing the common sense.

Thus, it must be said that information about the unseen is possible because knowledge is not limited to the eyes or external perception. Mental images themselves are real perceptions, even though others may not see them. Based on this, it must be concluded that acquiring knowledge and insight is not restricted to visual or sensory experiences alone, and it is possible for someone to “see” something that does not exist externally.

Explanation by Khwajah

“I say: The philosopher intends to establish the proof of the imprinting of imagination from an internal cause. His argument is that the images seen by the mentally ill, for instance, those whose temperament is influenced by an excess of black bile, are not nonexistent. This is because nonexistent things cannot be seen. Rather, these images are imprinted in an internal faculty capable of retaining external perceptions, which is called common sense. The imprinting of these images is not due to the action of external senses; therefore, it must stem from an internal cause, namely the imaginative faculty acting in the storehouse of imagination. Alternatively, it may result from an influencing cause in the internal faculty, namely the soul, which causes the images to pass through the imaginative faculty into the common sense.”

This highlights that common sense can retain images without external input and can receive these images from the imagination or the soul, which influence its perception.

Critique of Fakhr

Fakhr asserts that a patient seeing something that does not exist externally is fallacious because what does not exist cannot be seen. In response, Khwajah argues that this view is baseless. The mentally ill often see things that others do not. Their observations are real, albeit not externally observable. The fallacy lies in denying the experiences of the mentally ill, who may perceive truths that others do not. Thus, denying the perception of the mentally ill is itself fallacious.

Preventive Measures for the Imprinting of Images

“The distractions that prevent this imprinting are external sensory distractions that occupy the common sense with external images, forcing it away from the imagination. There are also internal, intellectual, or fanciful distractions that prevent the imagination from disturbing the common sense, leading it to focus on mental or imagined tasks rather than interfering with the common sense.”

Intellect and Imagination in Relation to the Common Sense and Perception

Intellect and imagination, by focusing on non-material forms, divert thought and imagination towards the actions that intellect and imagination demand. This process draws the imagination away from interacting with the common sense, limiting its weak function, whether in relation to real or imaginary matters. This occurs when both external and internal obstacles intervene; however, if either of these two factors ceases to function, the weak faculty may be unable to interact with the common sense and imagination will return to its own operation.

Fakhr al-Razi’s Objection

Fakhr al-Razi argues that just as the brain, despite its small size, can receive large forms, the common sense likewise has the capacity to receive both the obstructive and the imaginative forms simultaneously. If one were to claim that such a situation is impossible, Razi contends that the brain itself lacks this ability, presenting a contradiction to the assertion.

Khwaja’s Response

Khwaja’s response clarifies that Fakhr al-Razi’s objection can be resolved by understanding that knowledge is a matter of addition, and when the soul focuses on one side, it remains incapable of attending to the other. Fakhr, himself, acknowledges that knowledge is inherently additive, and with the soul’s focus directed to one aspect, the other side is left unattended.

The author further critiques Razi’s assertion by questioning the nature of the brain and soul that Fakhr refers to. Does Fakhr refer to a strong, healthy brain or a weak and ill one? If he refers to a healthy, strong brain, then the claim can be made that the soul, as the embodiment of intellect, is capable of focusing on both the common sense and imagination at the same time. However, if the soul is weak due to physical or psychological disturbances, its ability to attend to both the intellect and imagination becomes compromised.

Thus, human vision and observation are not restricted to external physical phenomena. Psychological and mental disorders may cause individuals to perceive things that cannot be seen with the physical eye.

For one experiencing such mental disturbances, either an external obstacle could distract the common sense, or an internal one could turn the imagination’s attention elsewhere, causing it to engage in the creation of non-existent forms within the shared sense.

The Role of Distractions (Shawāghil) in Perception

In relation to this, it is said that sleep, which distracts the external senses, often involves a diversion of the soul’s attention towards bodily processes, such as digestion, which require natural energy. This process diverts the soul’s attention away from other functions, causing it to focus on these natural processes. Sleep, thus, is described as resembling illness rather than health, as it involves the soul’s need to support the body’s function, particularly in managing nourishment.

When the body requires food, the soul engages with nature to aid in digestion, thus weakening the strength of the soul’s faculties. The imagination, however, may seize this opportunity to dominate, as the soul, in its weakened state, is no longer in full control of the common sense. Similarly, when a person is ill, the soul becomes focused on the disease and recovery, once again weakening its capacity to control the common sense, thus allowing imagination to create forms and scenarios not grounded in physical reality.

The Interaction Between Intellect and Imagination in States of Weakness

The text suggests that when the soul is in a state of full health, alertness, and vitality, it maintains control over the common sense, which, in turn, governs the imagination. Under such conditions, the imagination is limited and cannot affect the shared sense. However, if the soul becomes distracted—whether through illness, exhaustion, or sleep—its power weakens, and the imagination can gain dominance, forming perceptions of things beyond the perceptible world. These perceptions, although not based in external reality, are still experienced as if they were tangible.

In this context, it is noted that when the soul is distracted or weakened by natural processes, the common sense is no longer able to prevent the imagination from shaping unreal forms. Therefore, it is not inherently impossible for someone to perceive or “see” things that are beyond the normal physical realm; rather, it depends on the state of the soul and its faculties.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the text highlights the delicate balance between the intellect, imagination, and common sense in human perception. When the soul is in a state of health and alertness, the common sense remains dominant, and the imagination is subordinated. However, when the soul is weakened, distracted, or preoccupied with bodily functions, the imagination may take control, leading to the perception of things not grounded in the external world. Such experiences, though often attributed to mental disturbances or dreams, are not impossible, but rather arise from the complex interplay between the faculties of the soul and its state of health.

Critique of the Sheikh’s Words

The Sheikh stated: “Sleep occupies the external sense,” whereas, in fact, sleep does not occupy the external sense. Rather, during sleep, the soul detaches from the external senses and, as a result, gains strength and tranquility to enhance the imagination and witness a dream. Therefore, sleep serves as a means to strengthen the imaginative power by providing tranquility to the soul, which is distinct from a disease that weakens the soul.
The Sheikh said: “The soul may, in essence, also become occupied with itself.” However, it must be stated that the soul never occupies itself. It is the attraction of sensory stimuli that occupies it, and it must act in conjunction with nature to digest food, seek comfort, and so forth, in order to prevent its own weakness.

Indication: Disease and its effect on the soul’s occupation

(When a serious illness affects a major organ, the soul becomes entirely absorbed in the disease, which distracts it from its inherent functions and weakens one of its controlling faculties. Consequently, it is not surprising that imagined images might appear in the shared sensory faculty due to the weakening of one of these controlling faculties.)

When a serious illness strikes an essential organ, such as the eye or heart, the soul becomes preoccupied with trying to heal itself and expends its energies to address the illness. The soul becomes entirely absorbed in the disease, which impedes its ability to control itself and results in an increase in imaginative faculties, leading to daydreams. However, if the illness affects a non-essential organ or is not serious, though the soul may still direct attention to the illness, it does not become completely absorbed by it, and the aforementioned problem does not occur.

Khwajah’s Explanation:

“I say: The meaning is clear, and this situation is rare; for the illness in which the soul becomes wholly absorbed and diverts its energy toward an essential organ is uncommon, unlike sleep, where this does not happen. However, even under these circumstances, one of the two controlling faculties does not remain still. Instead, the imaginative power continues to function and becomes strengthened, using the shared sense to produce images that may not correspond to external reality.”

Note: The nature of the formation of images

(As the soul becomes stronger, its response to external stimuli and its control over the senses intensifies. Conversely, when the soul is weaker, it becomes more reactive and less able to control the external and internal impulses, including desires and anger.)

In this note, the Sheikh outlines two principles:

First Principle: As the soul becomes stronger, it reacts less to sensory stimuli or external attractions (such as desires or anger). The weaker the soul, the more it becomes affected by these stimuli, and its ability to control both the external and internal faculties weakens.
Second Principle: The stronger the soul, the fewer distractions it has, and more energy is devoted to its essential functions. The weaker the soul, the more distractions it faces, as the soul becomes absorbed in minor matters. A strong soul corresponds to personal power and health, while a weak one brings about complications. When people say, “I have so much work,” they are essentially expressing weakness. Strong people say, “We have no excessive tasks; we simply do what is necessary,” maintaining a balance without stress.

The Sheikh continues by saying that when the soul becomes strong, it experiences increased power, unity, and tranquility, and, through discipline, these attributes become even more pronounced. When practicing discipline, no distractions can prevent it. A disciplined and powerful soul is more adept at avoiding distractions that oppose this discipline, such as desires or physical needs, and it moves according to what aligns with its purpose.

Khwajah’s Interpretation:

“I say: Once he has confirmed the formation of images in the shared sensory faculty due to the internal cause and explained how images form during sleep and wakefulness, he now intends to explain how these images arise from an external cause influencing the internal one. He starts by noting that when the soul is strong, it does not allow its engagement with any power, such as desire, to distract it from its inherent functions. The weaker the soul, the more likely it is to become absorbed by these distractions. Power and weakness are gradable qualities, so the levels of souls are infinite.

The Sheikh says: ‘The stronger the soul, the less it reacts to external impressions.’ In some copies, this is written as ‘less affected by attractions,’ which is more accurate, and the earlier version may be a misprint. According to the first version, it suggests that the imaginative power is primarily drawn to those things that match its nature directly or indirectly, and the soul’s reaction to such impressions distracts it from its core functions. The Sheikh explains that the stronger the soul, the less distracted it becomes by external forces, and its ability to control both external and internal functions strengthens.”

Ecstasy, Immediate Connection, and the Role of the Imagination

Ecstasy refers to an instantaneous, momentary connection with the earthly or transcendental unseen world, where the individual becomes oblivious to themselves and breaks free from the mundane and the descent into the material. Entaz refers to an immediate, urgent engagement. In ecstasy, it is the briefness of the moment, while in entaz, the speed of the action is paramount.

When the soul is able to control its faculties in various directions, a spiritual connection is established, leading it to a sublime and luminous joy. In this state, the soul either conveys a sense of that experience to memory or is unable to do so.

If the rational soul aids the imagination, and the rational soul does not return to another direction, the imagination can present a form of the unseen meaning to the common sense, just as illusions in patients or those with psychological disorders help the imagination and create such forms in the common sense.

Exposition and Interpretation by Khwajah

“I say: An example of the descending effect upon the memory is the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him): ‘The Holy Spirit breathed into my soul’ [111]. An example of the influence and radiance in the imagination and the clear impression upon the common sense is what is reported about the prophets: that they saw the images of angels and heard their speech. Such a phenomenon occurs in patients and those who are afflicted with psychological disorders due to their distorted illusions and weakened imagination. However, among the friends of God, such occurrences arise from their noble and powerful sanctified souls. This is more appropriate and rightful than in the case of the ill. These impressions vary in strength and weakness, sometimes manifesting only as the vision of a face or a veil, other times as hearing the voice of a caller. It may also occur as the vision of a perfect example or the hearing of a well-ordered speech. In the greatest states of beauty, it is described as the vision of the noble Face of God and the hearing of His speech without an intermediary.”

Spiritual influxes manifest in various forms. Sometimes, it appears as an impression that descends into memory, such as the statement of the Prophet (peace be upon him): “The Holy Spirit breathed into my heart.” Sometimes, it appears as a radiance in the imagination, creating a clear impression in the common sense, similar to what is reported about the prophets, who saw the forms of angels and heard their voices.

Mentally ill individuals, through their corrupted illusions and distorted imaginations, may perceive such images. However, among the saints, these experiences arise through their powerful and noble sanctified souls. When such phenomena occur in the ill, they are more fitting for the saints than for the mentally disturbed. The impressions vary in intensity and may sometimes manifest as the vision of a face or veil, sometimes as the hearing of a voice, sometimes as the perception of a vivid example, or as hearing a structured and ordered speech. At the highest level of beauty, it is described as the vision of the blessed Face of God and hearing His speech directly.

It should be noted, however, that one should not confuse the claims of many people or the visions of those with mental disorders with actual connections to the unseen. Their perceptions are merely the result of fantasy and illusion, whereas true communion with the unseen is reserved for the saints and those who have access to the spiritual worlds.

Thus, it is possible, with the strength of the soul, to reach a point where one becomes connected to the world of meaning and, from there, derives a treasure that is brought into the imagination and leads to the direct vision of the Divine Beauty and the hearing of God’s speech without any intermediary. The Shaykh affirms that this is not impossible; rather, it is feasible and should not be confined solely to the perception of material objects.

It is also noteworthy that a person can, without contact with higher abstractions and principles, gain dominion over the material realm. Although such a mystic may not attain this state without prior connections, this state of elevated perception is the result of the soul’s strength and divine grace, and not merely from a direct engagement with the abstract or the immaterial.

Moreover, not every immaterial being has a direct causal relationship with every material being. It is not the case that everything above causes everything below. There must be a necessary connection between cause and effect, and therefore, simply establishing a connection with the immaterial does not give one dominance over everything in the material or abstract realms. This is why one must consider the specific properties and conditions of the causal relationships, and how the nature of the individual may affect their connection with the unseen, as one may have access to certain forms of knowledge yet remain unaware of others.

A Warning: The Role of the Imagination

“The imaginative faculty is naturally disposed to imitate everything that follows from it in terms of perception or temperament, quickly moving from one thing to its likeness or its opposite, and in general to what is associated with it. There are specific causes for this, although we may not fully comprehend them. If this faculty were not inherently so, we would have no means to guide our thoughts through intermediary steps and would struggle to recall forgotten matters or make decisions. This faculty can be disturbed by external or internal influences, but it can also be controlled. This control can be either through the opposing strength of the soul or through the vividness of the image impressed upon it, making it easier to grasp and focus on the imagination’s representation. This provides stability and prevents distractions, just as the senses work similarly in maintaining focus on a peculiar situation.”

In this observation, the Shaykh emphasizes the importance of the imaginative faculty. Its significance lies in the speed and movement within it. The imaginative faculty mirrors whatever the soul perceives, whether abstract or material, presenting it in a form similar to that thing, its opposite, or even something entirely different. It creates illusions, transforming insignificant things into monumental ideas and vice versa. If the imaginative faculty is disciplined and controlled by the soul, its importance increases, and it becomes a powerful tool. Otherwise, it can lead to distractions and confusion.

As mentioned, the imaginative faculty aids in the flow of thought, particularly in reasoning and recall. It helps navigate the middle terms in logical reasoning and assists in recalling forgotten memories, as well as supporting other cognitive functions.

The imaginative faculty also holds dangers, as even a small influence can sway it, unless it is strongly controlled by the soul, making it obedient. Otherwise, it can be quick to shift, moving from one idea to another with little stability.

The imaginative faculty is controlled in two main ways: First, through the strength of the soul, which counters distractions and keeps the imagination focused on what it has decided upon. Second, through the clarity and vividness of the images impressed upon the imagination, which prevents it from shifting focus.

At its best, the imaginative faculty serves as a helper to the soul. It can provide clarity, offering insight and stability in a person’s thoughts. Without this control, however, it may lead to aimlessness and confusion.

The Spiritual Influence and its Degrees

The spiritual effects that influence the soul in states of wakefulness or sleep can be weak, leaving no trace on the imagination or memory. In other cases, these effects are stronger, causing the imagination to become active, but without being fully controlled by memory or conscious thought. In the strongest instances, these spiritual influences are vivid and clear, leaving lasting impressions that remain undisturbed.

The Shaykh notes that these spiritual states are not limited to the examples given but apply to other instances in the soul’s experiences. Some of these impressions remain, while others dissipate. The strongest spiritual experiences leave a clear and lasting mark on the soul, guiding it towards divine truth.

The connection with the spiritual realm, if weak, cannot stimulate the imagination, and thus it does not serve as a trigger for the memory, leaving no trace in it. However, if the spiritual effect is strong, it stimulates the imagination, though it does not remain in the memory or the imagination. The imagination’s role is to retain the conditions and representations, so one might say, “I had such and such a dream but couldn’t understand what it was,” meaning the main spiritual effect does not remain, but its representations do.

However, if this connection and effect are very strong, the soul assists in this and provides a clear and obvious form of the spiritual image in the imagination, which then falls into the memory, forming a powerful impression. With the soul’s assistance, no confusion arises in transferring this, and a clear and distinct image is conveyed.

The three mentioned categories are not exclusive to spiritual effects; rather, all human knowledge works in a similar way. For example, some thoughts stay in the mind, while others are forgotten. Sometimes a thought is well retained in memory, and other times the mind discards a thought and shifts to another, causing the initial thought to be forgotten. Consequently, one must analyze this in reverse, tracing the lost thought through a significant event and linking it back to a forgotten matter, sometimes finding it and other times not. At times, with analysis and interpretation, the thought can be retrieved, with the individual regaining control of their mental state.

The human mind is often scattered and diverse regarding intellectual or spiritual impressions, through the imagination. Sometimes it is so vivid and strong that it cannot be forgotten, while at other times, its characteristics or even the whole thought may be forgotten. This happens with spiritual and mental effects as well.

Explanation and Interpretation by Khwajah

“The spiritual effects that affect the soul in both sleep and wakefulness are many in number, depending on the strength or weakness of their impressions. The Sheikh mentioned three of these: weak, which leaves no trace in memory upon recall; moderate, where the imagination can move beyond it but can return to it; and strong, where the soul remains calm and stable when receiving it, assisting in its retention, ensuring that it does not fade.”

These three stages are not exclusive to spiritual effects but apply to all thoughts retained in memory. Some thoughts do not leave the mind, while others can be recovered with effort. Some are accessible through analysis, while others cannot be retrieved even with such attempts.

Thus, the human mind does not always retain intellectual, spiritual, or mental impressions in the same way. This explains why some truths are seen but not retained, and why dreams might be forgotten, while others are preserved vividly and even have lasting effects on the waking state. For example, one may dream of crying or shouting, and the soul may be so strong that it carries over into their waking state, leading to similar emotional responses.

Notes: Revelation, Inspiration, and Dreams

“What was firmly fixed in the memory through speech during wakefulness or sleep, if clearly fixed, is either inspiration, a clear revelation, or a dream that does not need interpretation. What was lost but left behind as a representation requires interpretation, which varies according to individuals, times, and customs. Revelation requires interpretation, while dreams require explanation.”

When a spiritual effect is retained in memory, it is either inspiration or revelation for prophets, and in non-prophetic individuals, it is inspiration or a dream that is so clear it requires no interpretation. Dreams, in this context, are distinct from mere sleep; sleep is the vessel in which dreams occur. However, when the effect dissipates and only its representation remains, interpretation becomes necessary, and its explanation differs based on the person, their habits, and the circumstances.

The Sheikh’s explanation of “interpretation and explanation” acknowledges the flexibility of human perception and the varying ways one can interpret spiritual phenomena.

The arguments presented to prove the correctness of communication with the unseen are not conclusive, rational, or certain. The testimony on this matter merely provides a possibility of its occurrence and is based on speculative assumptions. Access to it is only attainable through intellectual reasoning. However, the important point is that if someone has experienced such a state or witnessed another person possessing such abilities, they cannot deny it. Once it is established that such matters exist in reality, one naturally seeks to discover the causes behind them.

Among the possible sources of happiness for someone who cherishes insight is that they may either experience such a state themselves or observe it repeatedly in others. This experience serves as a means to confirm the existence of extraordinary phenomena, motivating the search for the underlying causes. Such individuals, whether through experience or the guidance of a mentor, are able to direct their senses and imagination into a state of wonder or bring them under the control and supervision of the intellect.

In earlier times, spiritual and academic circles engaged in the cultivation of such practices, but today academic institutions are devoid of such teachings. As a result, even the smallest action in this field can elevate the practitioner to a position of prominence, even though they may have undertaken only the most minor task in this path.

Those who claim to possess knowledge of the unseen are often unaware of its true nature and thus make erroneous statements, as these phenomena are merely representations.

The Sheikh (Ibn Sina) presents his argument concisely, and if anyone were to object by asking why the discussion has not been elaborated in greater detail to provide a basis for belief in it, he responds in a succinct and insightful manner: “If someone does not believe in the summary and concise explanation, they will not believe in the detailed one either.”

Finally, it is important to note that the story Ibn Sina recounts about the Turks is not limited to them alone. Such phenomena, in their various forms and types, are present among all peoples and nations. They have historically sought to weaken the faculties of sensation and imagination in order to attain knowledge of the unseen and the inner workings of existence.

Explanatory Note by Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi

“I say: The term ‘I raqaba al-qawm’ (راقبت القوم رباً) means to observe or supervise them, which occurs when you are above them or have a position of superiority over them. This is a subtle metaphor for the intellect that has gained knowledge of the unseen, in relation to the other faculties. The rest of the passage is self-explanatory. This is the final part of his discussion regarding how one can be informed about the unseen.”

“I raqaba al-qawm rabban” refers to the intellect that has gained knowledge of the unseen, and this metaphor illustrates how the intellect, compared to the other faculties, has access to knowledge of things beyond the ordinary.

This reminder serves as the final section in Ibn Sina’s explanation of how one can be informed about the unseen and the reasons behind such knowledge. Ibn Sina has discussed the possibility of acquiring knowledge of the unseen, i.e., non-apparent phenomena, in earlier parts of his work.

As previously discussed, the Sheikh argues that not everything that we desire to see or speak of must be perceived by the senses. There are certain things that can be seen without the use of the external senses, and it is possible to speak of, see, or smell things through means other than ordinary sensory perception. If this becomes established, no one can deny the claims of those who have attained such capabilities, because the possibility of it has been proven. On the other hand, if the intellectual possibility of knowing the unseen is not established, then one can deny those who claim such knowledge, as their assertions would be nonsensical, akin to someone claiming that the Earth is not different from the sky or that a heavy object moves upwards rather than downwards.

In summary, Ibn Sina concludes that knowing the unseen is not impossible, and since it is intellectually plausible, one cannot dismiss those who claim to have access to it. Throughout this discourse, the Sheikh establishes the intellectual possibility of such phenomena but leaves the proof of their actual occurrence to those who possess the abilities in question.

Chapter Four: The Source of Extraordinary Actions

The Tenth Pattern / Chapter Four: The Source of Extraordinary Actions

Note: The Saints of God and Extraordinary Actions

“It is possible that you may hear from the mystics of reports that seem to defy the ordinary course of nature, which might lead you to immediately disbelieve them. These include reports such as a mystic asking for rain and the people receiving it, or asking for healing and the sick being cured, or cursing and causing a calamity, or praying for protection from plagues, floods, and other disasters. There are also tales of wild animals becoming calm in the presence of mystics or not being disturbed by birds. Such occurrences, though seemingly impossible, have causes within the hidden secrets of nature. Do not hasten to deny them; for the causes of such actions, when explored, may be understood rationally. I will probably recount some of these causes to you.”

It is possible that you will hear from the mystics of extraordinary acts that seem to defy the ordinary, but do not hastily dismiss them, as there are causes behind these acts within the mysteries of nature. If these causes are followed, reason will understand them, whether it is a request for rain or healing or other similar events attributed to prophets and saints.

Explanation by Khwajah

“I say: After discussing the well-known three miraculous occurrences attributed to the mystics and other saints, the Sheikh now seeks to explain the causes of other extraordinary actions attributed to mystics. He mentions these extraordinary actions in this chapter and will elaborate on their causes in the following chapters. The phrase ‘they almost happen contrary to the ordinary course of nature’ (يكاد تأتي بقلب العادة) is used because these actions, when one is aware of their causes, are not actually extraordinary; they are only extraordinary in comparison to those who do not understand the underlying causes. The term ‘mewatan’ (موتان) is used to refer to the death of animals, while ‘mawtan’ (موتان) is used in the context of minerals, which is not relevant here, as the death of animals has more direct effects on human life.”

Thus, when hearing reports of mystics or prophets performing extraordinary acts, one should not hastily dismiss them but should seek to understand the causes and explanations for these phenomena. The Sheikh outlines these causes in detail, emphasizing that extraordinary acts are not inherently impossible, but their understanding requires knowledge of the hidden causes behind them.

Explanation and Interpretation by Khwaja Nasir al-Din Tusi

Introduction:

I assert that the reminder in this section involves two things. Firstly, the rational soul is not imprinted upon the body. Rather, it is self-sustained, with no attachment to the body except for its role in governance and action.

Secondly, the established dispositions of beliefs within the soul, and their subsequent effects, such as conjectures, imaginations, or even feelings of fear and joy, can manifest in the body, despite the soul being essentially distinct from the body and from the forms that occur within it due to these psychic states.

Two points substantiate this idea: First, the mere illusion that a person walking on a branch suspended in the air will fall if the branch gives way is a manifestation of how an imagined or feared outcome can affect the body’s behavior. Second, the belief or imagination can significantly alter a person’s temperament—either gradually or suddenly—leading to physical manifestations such as a change in the color of the skin, from blushing to paling. Such effects can even cause a healthy body to experience a certain illness or a sick body to be cured and rejuvenated.

Moreover, it is essential to understand that some rational souls, especially those of great strength, can exert influence not only upon their own bodies but upon other bodies as well. This power is akin to how the soul affects its own body, and the intensity of this power can extend to other bodies in the world, provided they have a special connection or correspondence with the soul’s own body, whether through touch or sympathy.

If someone questions the ability of a rational soul to bring about such effects in the world outside its own body, assuming that a cause cannot produce something it does not inherently possess, one should remember that not all things that heat are themselves hot. For example, light is a form of heat but is not intrinsically hot, just as water cools but is not itself cold. Thus, it is not strange for a soul to possess the power to influence bodies outside of itself, just as it does within its own body.

The Response to Objections:

The learned commentator’s objection does not support the claim, as the judgment that the imagination affects the body does not necessitate the conclusion that the soul, which is superior, has a stronger influence than mere imagination. Additionally, the mental states, like anger and joy, which influence the body, are corporeal in nature. Therefore, the suggestion that a material cause is responsible for extraordinary actions should not be used to suggest that the soul has such a power. This line of reasoning has no connection to the soul or its immaterial nature. If the intent is merely to dismiss such doubts, the conclusion is that there is no conclusive evidence for or against this hypothesis.

In response to this objection, I would suggest that this misunderstanding arises from the assumption that the Sheikh claims that the soul does not perceive particulars at all. However, the Sheikh has already stated that phenomena such as imaginations and emotions—including anger and joy—are indeed perceptions facilitated by the body’s organs. Thus, the objection is unfounded. Moreover, the learned commentator seems to have forgotten the Sheikh’s statement that these are not merely hypothetical beliefs but are actual experiences that require causal explanation. If that were not the case, why would it be acceptable to remain ignorant about them in the context of the stated argument?

The second point made by Khwaja concerns the relationship between the soul and the body, which is not merely one of impression. Rather, the soul is self-sustained, while the body needs the soul in a managerial capacity. The soul and the body have a reciprocal relationship in which the soul governs the body, yet the body remains obedient to the soul’s direction. While the soul acts upon the body, it does not depend on it.

The second key point is that the mental states and dispositions that stem from the soul, such as beliefs, imaginations, and the resulting temperaments or emotions, can manifest physically in the body. This effect highlights the idea that the soul and body are connected not just through passive influence but through active governance.

A further consideration is that an individual’s imagination can alter their physical state, either gradually or suddenly. This could lead to significant changes, such as flushing from embarrassment or becoming pale, with effects that might even transform a healthy body into one suffering from illness or, conversely, heal a sick body. The power of the soul can extend beyond the body itself, especially for those who have trained their faculties and achieved a high degree of mental discipline.

Finally, regarding the objection raised by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, he challenges the Sheikh’s argument by suggesting that the soul cannot produce effects outside of itself because a cause cannot generate something it does not contain. However, this objection misunderstands the Sheikh’s argument, which emphasizes that the soul’s power, while indeed capable of affecting its own body, can also influence other bodies, particularly if there is a special connection or correspondence between them.

Critique of the Author

The nature and acquisition of evil can also converge; in such a way that a person may have a strong innate inclination and, through the acquisition of evil, rapidly incline towards corruption and excess.

Indication: The Evil Eye

“The injury caused by the evil eye is nearly of this kind. Its origin lies in a psychological state of admiration that causes a significant weakening in the one who is admired by its specific property. This is dismissed by those who assume that the effect on bodies must occur by direct contact or through a transmitted particle, which leads to a specific quality being introduced into a medium. However, upon reflection, one can see that such contact is unnecessary to inflict harm, and this kind of contact (the gaze) can also cause harm.”

The evil eye may be an example of this, and it returns to the strength and power of the soul. When a person gazes upon someone and is astonished by them, they can cause harm or loss to that person, and sometimes even lead to their destruction. The distinguishing feature of such a gaze is that when someone is amazed by something, they diminish or destroy it. This may seem implausible to some, who believe that any harm leading to death must occur through physical contact. However, they fail to understand that harm can also be inflicted through sight. If one reflects on what has been established, they will see that contact is not necessary to cause harm, and this type of contact (the gaze) can indeed inflict damage.

Explanation and Interpretation of Khwāja

“I say: The term ‘nihk’ refers to the reduction or depletion due to illness and similar conditions. When it is said that so-and-so is ‘nihked’, it means they are debilitated, exhausted, or weakened by fever. ‘To assume’ means to make it obligatory. When I say ‘the injury caused by the evil eye is nearly of this kind’, I did not state this categorically because the evil eye is not a matter of certainty but of probability. The influence on bodies via direct contact is like the heating of a pot by fire, the attraction of iron by a magnet, the cooling of the earth and water by the surrounding air, or the heating of water in a pot through the action of fire, all of which are based on common understanding.”

Critique of the Author

The claim by Khwāja that the evil eye is a matter of probability is not accurate. In fact, the concept of the evil eye is accepted as a definite phenomenon, though it is uncertain in terms of who possesses this power and who does not. The noble Qur’anic verse (وَإِنْ يَكَادُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا) was revealed to dispel such doubts. The evil eye is one of the most potent forms of abnormal phenomena, where a gaze can pierce, burn, or destroy.

Clarification: Sources of Extraordinary Events

“Strange phenomena in the natural world arise from three fundamental causes: first, the psychological state mentioned earlier; second, the specific properties of elemental bodies, such as the magnet’s attraction to iron with its unique power; and third, celestial forces interacting with the temperaments of specific earthly bodies, whether through specific configurations or through the influence of celestial powers on earthly souls, which then lead to the occurrence of extraordinary effects. Magic is a product of the first kind, miracles, divine acts, and charms belong to the second, and talismans are a product of the third.”

Extraordinary events in the natural world stem from three sources:

Psychological states, like magic.
The specific properties of elemental bodies, for example, the magnet’s attraction to iron, which is a unique force.
Celestial forces that interact with particular earthly bodies in specific configurations, or with particular human souls in ways that bring about extraordinary effects.

Magic belongs to the first category, while miracles, divine acts, and wonders belong to the second. Talismans belong to the third.

Explanation and Interpretation of Khwāja

“I say: After discussing the causes of strange phenomena attributed to human souls, Khwāja then attempts to explain the causes of other extraordinary events in the world. He categorizes them into three types: those that originate from the soul, those that originate from elemental bodies, and those that come from celestial bodies, which alone cannot cause earthly events without the participation of an earthly counterpart. The term ‘nīranjāt’ (magical effects) and the attraction of iron by magnets were both attributed by the commentator to the same category, which contradicts the common understanding and the Sheikh’s original statements.”

Critique of the Author

It should be noted that the ability to perform extraordinary acts is not limited to celestial or human souls. Some miracles, divine acts, and magic originate from celestial bodies or even from jinn and similar entities. Wonders and magical effects also originate from both the soul and from physical tricks or dexterities. Similarly, talismans can originate from celestial souls or earthly forces.

In this section, Khwāja speaks about extraordinary acts and their causes, stating that such acts are possible and not impossible. He identifies their various forms, including good and bad powers, and discusses phenomena like the evil eye and the ability to perform extraordinary acts. Essentially, Khwāja emphasizes that humans have the potential to perform immense acts, which are often beyond normal human capabilities.

Advice: The Wrongfulness of Unfounded Denial

“Beware of being so cunning that your only distinguishing feature from the common people is to deny everything. That is rashness and incapacity. There is no fault in rejecting something unless it is evident to you after it has been clarified, just as there is no fault in accepting something unless it has been demonstrated to you. Rather, you should hold on to the rope of suspension, even if you are disturbed by the rejection of something that your ears have taken in, as long as its impossibility has not been proven to you. The correct approach is to place such things in the realm of possibility until clear proof denies them. Know that there are wonders in nature, and that higher active powers and lower receptive powers combine to produce strange occurrences.”

At the conclusion of the book Ishārāt and in another section of Asrār al-Āyāt, Khwāja gives a piece of advice to scholars: true intelligence and wit do not lie in the denial of everything. Rather, wisdom lies in accepting what is proven with evidence. Unfounded denial is as misguided as blind acceptance without justification. Every statement that is supported by evidence should be accepted, and any statement for which no evidence exists should be suspended, awaiting further proof.

Explanation and Interpretation of Khwāja

“I say: The term ‘to reject’ means to oppose or to turn away. ‘Rashness’ refers to impulsiveness and light-headedness. ‘Fault’ is the opposite of gentleness. To ‘let the cattle go’ means to neglect or disregard them. ‘Rejected’ means to push something away. The goal of this advice is to warn against the philosophical approach of those who deny things they do not fully understand, and to remind that the rejection of one side of a possible proposition without proof is no closer to the truth than the acceptance of the other side without evidence. In such cases, it is obligatory to suspend judgment.”

The purpose of Khwāja’s advice is to caution against the attitude of those who, without full understanding, reject everything. He highlights that rejection or acceptance without evidence is a sign of ignorance. The rational approach is to suspend judgment on matters where evidence is lacking. Furthermore, he concludes by stating that the occurrence of wonders in nature is not strange, and that extraordinary effects caused by celestial forces or earthly influences are a normal part of the world.

Conclusion and Advice: The Preservation of Wisdom

“O brother, I have distilled for you the essence of truth in these Ishārāt, and I have provided you with the kernel of wisdom in subtle words. Guard it from the ignorant, the mundane, and those who lack sharp intellect, habitual practice, and experience, and who incline towards the masses or the atheistic philosophers. If you find someone whose inner self is pure and whose conduct is upright, who refrains from what might disturb his thoughts, and who looks at the truth with sincerity and honesty, then give him what he asks, but gradually, piece by piece, ensuring he masters what you have already taught before proceeding to the next step. Make a pact with him in the name of God that he will not stray from this path. If you waste this knowledge by exposing it to the unworthy, then God is my witness and my protector.”

Explanation and Interpretation of Khwāja

“I say: The term ‘distill’ refers to extracting the essence from milk. The ‘kernel’ is the core or the purest part of something. The ‘cattle’ are those whose minds are not sharp. The ‘masses’ refer to the common people, and ‘atheistic philosophers’ are those who deviate from the truth. The main idea here is that wisdom should not be shared with just anyone, but only with those who are truly capable of understanding and preserving it.”

Final Note:

This passage concludes with Khwāja’s advice on the preservation of wisdom. It is a reminder to carefully select those who are worthy of receiving such knowledge, teaching them gradually and ensuring that they will pass it on responsibly. He warns against exposing sacred knowledge to those who would misuse it or fail to appreciate it, leaving the responsibility of its transmission in the hands of those who are equipped to handle it.

There are two aspects that return to themselves in relation to their aims: the first, in comparison to the opposite of the truth, is their caution against missteps and their reluctance to yield to fleeting thoughts. The second, in relation to the truth itself, is their view of the truth in a manner between contentment and sincerity.

Then, after these conditions have been established, he urges for utmost caution both rationally and according to the guidelines he has mentioned, concluding his advice. This is the final chapter of the book.

This is what I have managed to resolve of the problems in the book Ishārāt wa Tanbihāt, despite my limited knowledge and the constraints of my understanding in this field, compounded by difficult circumstances, accumulated responsibilities, and the condition I outlined at the beginning of the discussion.

I expect from anyone who encounters this work to correct any flaws or errors they find after reviewing it with an open mind, avoiding a stance of stubbornness. May God grant success and guidance, for He is the source of all beginnings and the ultimate return.

Explanation of Certain Terms:

Zubd: clarified butter.
Zubdah: the purest form of clarified butter.
Waqfiyyat al-shay’: the desirable qualities or attributes that one selects for a guest.
Ibtidāl al-thawb: to degrade or demean it.
Al-darb and al-‘ādah: the courage to lead the way.
Al-ghāghah: the general populace.

Know that when the beliefs and opinions of rational thinkers are compared to true knowledge and certain understanding, they can be divided into six categories. This is because their beliefs are either in harmony with the truth, opposed to it, or their minds are void of any belief, neither inclined towards the truth nor towards falsehood.

Believers in these opinions may either have certainty and confidence in their beliefs, or their beliefs are based on imitation and following, whether their belief is true or false.

Likewise, those who believe in true knowledge either have reached the truth, are travelers on this path, or are in pursuit of discovering it. Among them are those who, though not yet reaching the truth, either appreciate the value of true knowledge and mysticism, or undervalue it, considering it trivial.

Regarding the matter of the teaching of wisdom, those who have reached the truth do not require learning, for their direct teacher is the Divine. These are the beloved ones whose existence is rare and precious.

The other six groups are as follows:

Those who do not recognize the value of wisdom: Avicenna refers to them as “the degraded ones.”
Believers in falsehood, opposed to true knowledge: These are the ignorant ones.
Those empty of any inclination or disposition: These are people without enough intellect or instinct.
Imitators and followers of false groups: These are those who follow the opinions of the masses.
Imitators who are not certain in their belief in true knowledge: These individuals are associated with philosophy but lack faith in certain sciences, and are considered to be among the lowly.
Seekers who understand the greatness and value of true knowledge.

Among these six groups, the Sheikh considers the sixth group the most deserving of learning wisdom. He mentions four conditions for them:

They must be pure in nature.
They must be righteous in conduct.
They must avoid falling into error and missteps and not be swayed by doubts.
They must turn to the truth with contentment and sincerity.

At the end, Khwāja mentions that the explanation given here has been written with his limited ability in philosophy and wisdom, and he has endeavored to resolve the issues of the book to the best of his ability. He apologizes for any shortcomings, noting that he has been occupied with other matters, and he has adhered to the original intent stated at the beginning of the book — to defend the Sheikh, not to express his own views.

He hopes that those who come across his commentary will view its shortcomings with patience and avoid a stance of antagonism. He encourages them to work towards correcting any potential mistakes.

The Author’s Final Words:

“I wrote much of it in a state so difficult, it could not be worse. Most of the time, I was in an abyss of sorrow, each part of it filled with agony, remorse, and tremendous regret. The places I lived in were engulfed in the flames of eternal suffering. Every moment brought more tears, more melancholy, and deepening sorrow. And as the poet aptly said in Persian:

‘Surrounding me, I see nothing but disaster, a ring of misfortune, and I, the jewel, am lost.’

There was never a time in my life without endless hardship and regret. My life resembled an army, with grief as its general and worry as its soldiers.”

Quranic Verses Index:

Aātānī al-kitāb wa jaʿalnī nabīyan (We gave him the book and made him a prophet) 299
Iza jā’a nasrullāh wal-fath (When the help of God and victory come) 258
Iza marū bil-laghwi marū karāmā (When they pass by foolish talk, they pass by with dignity) 282
Ashrabū fī qulubihim al-ʿajl (They drank from their hearts the worship of the calf) 118
Iqraʾ bismi rabbika allathee khalaq (Read in the name of your Lord who created) 278
Illā alladhīna āmanū (Except for those who believe) 183
An-nabīyu awlā bil-mu’minīn min anfusihim (The Prophet is closer to the believers than themselves) 296
Ilāhuhu hawāh (His God is his desire) 199
Innā anzalnāhu fī laylat al-qadr (Indeed, We sent it down on the Night of Decree) 159
Innal-insāna lafī khusr (Indeed, mankind is in loss) 159, 199
Inna al-‘izzata lillāh wa li-rasūlihi wa lil-mu’minīn (Indeed, power belongs to Allah and to His Messenger and to the believers) 204
Inna al-nafsā la-ammāratun bis-sūʾ (Indeed, the soul is inclined towards evil) 125, 159, 177
In ajrī illā ‘alā Allah (My reward is only with Allah) 103
In aḥsan’tum aḥsan’tum li-anfusikum (If you do good, you do it for yourselves) 127
In tu‘addhibhum fa-innahum ‘ibādak (If You punish them, they are Your servants) 92
Innamā Allah ilāh wāhid (Indeed, Allah is one God) 256
In hiya illā ḥayātunā ad-dunyā (This is only our worldly life) 349
Inni jā‘ilun fī al-ardi khalīfah (Indeed, I am making upon the earth a vicegerent) 98

There is no compulsion in religion.
There is no slumber or sleep that overtakes Him.
You will not find any disparity in the creation of the Most Merciful.
Not a single leaf falls without His knowledge.
Perhaps you will destroy yourself with grief that they do not believe.
So that you do not grieve over what has passed you.
Why do you say what you do not do?
Had you been harsh and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from around you.
You will not find any disparity in the creation of the Most Merciful.
I have not created jinn and humans except to worship Me.
Worship your Lord until certainty comes to you.
And warn your nearest kindred.
And indeed, those who disbelieve are close to disbelief.
And the pleasure of Allah is greater.
And do not be among those who are misguided.
Not a single leaf falls except He knows it.
We are only destroyed by time.
He is above the highest heavens.
Woe to those who pray and are heedless of their prayers.
They prefer others over themselves even when they are in need.
They are the successful ones.
He was about to yield to it, but then he saw the proof.
They are a garment for you, and you are a garment for them.
He is with you wherever you are.
O tranquil soul, return to your Lord.
He eats food and walks among people.
He sells himself seeking the pleasure of Allah.
They prefer others over themselves.

List of Narrations:

People are enemies of what they do not know.
The Holy Spirit breathed into my heart.
People have two justifications before Allah.
I have special moments with Allah.
I have a time with Allah where I cannot afford to be occupied.
I love you.
Beware of the green and lush pasture.
Shall fire overtake faces that have prostrated before Your greatness?
I bear witness that You hear my speech and return my salutation.
In the name of Allah, and to Allah, and the best.
Take account of yourselves before you are taken to account.
Three things from this world have been made dear to me: perfume, women, and prayer.
Our servants are the worst of creation.
The one who was forced to do something.
Those who do not know what they do.
His mercy precedes His wrath.
I worship You out of love for You.
I have succeeded by the Lord of the Kaaba.
Say “There is no god but Allah” and you will succeed.
Like iron, it is like a block of iron.
Everything is made easy for what it was created for.
Live for the world as if you are going to live forever.
There is no power and strength except with Allah.
There is no god but You.
Nothing distracts Him from what He is doing.
I have a time with Allah when I cannot afford to do anything else.
I did not break the door of Khaybar with physical strength but with spiritual power.
He who sincerely dedicates forty mornings to Allah.
He who eliminates the burdens of his worries and doubts has safeguarded himself.
He who knows Allah speaks in every language.
He who seeks something beyond his ability loses that which is within his capacity.
Die before you die.
By Allah, I did not break the door of Khaybar with bodily strength.
I found you worthy of worship.

Bibliography:

The Holy Quran.
Ibn Tawus, Ali bin Musa, Iqbal al-A’mal, Qom, Islamic Media, First Edition, 1414 AH.
Abu al-Barakat, Muhammad bin Ahmad, Jawahir al-Matalib, Majma’ Ahya’ al-Thaqafah al-Islamiyyah, First Edition, 1415 AH.
Ihsai, Alawi al-Lawali, Qom, Sayyid al-Shuhada, First Edition, 1403 AH.
Al-Ajlouni, Ismail bin Muhammad, Kashf al-Khafa’ wa al-Mazil al-Albas, Beirut, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Third Edition, 1408 AH.
Harri Amili, Muhammad bin Hasan, Wasail al-Shi’a ila Tahsil Masail al-Shari’ah, Qom, Al-Bayt Institute for the Revival of Heritage, First Edition, 1408 AH.
Razi, Muhammad bin Hussein, Nahj al-Balagha, Edited by Muhammad Abduh, Beirut, Dar al-Ma’arifah.
Sadouq, Ali bin Babawayh, Al-Amali, Tehran, Ba’ath, First Edition, 1417 AH.
Tabarsi, Ali, Mishkat al-Anwar fi Ghrar al-Akhbar, Qom, Dar al-Hadith, First Edition, 1411 AH.
Tusi, Muhammad bin Hasan, Sharh al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat, Tehran, Haydari, 1379 AH.
Majlisi, Muhammad Baqir, Bihar al-Anwar, Beirut, Institute of al-Wafa, 1414 AH.
Nouri Tabarsi, Mirza Hussein, Mustadrak al-Wasail, Qom, Al-Bayt Institute for the Revival of Heritage, First Edition, 1408 AH.

آیا این نوشته برایتان مفید بود؟

بلی 0 خیر 0

Detailed Explanation of the Mystic’s States

Narrative Summary of the Second Tale

Mystical Interpretation by Khwaja

Author’s Observations and Critiques on the Second Tale

The Mystic and Perfection

The Distinction Between Worshipper, Ascetic, and Mystic

The Shaykh’s Definition of the Ascetic and its Critique

The Mystic: A Definition

Asceticism and Worship in the Eyes of the Mystic

Critiques by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi on the mentioned argument:

First Critique:

Second Critique:

Third Critique:

Fourth Critique:

Responses of Hakim Tusi:

Response to the First Critique:

Response to the Second Critique:

Response to the Second Critique on Miracles:

Response to the Third Critique on Omnipotence:

Response to the Fourth Critique on Punishment:

Critique by Khwajah:

Stages of the Spiritual Journey:

Explanation and Interpretation by Khwajah

Notes: Revelation, Inspiration, and Dreams

Critique of the Author

آیا این نوشته برایتان مفید بود؟

مصباح الانس

Library

Significant Sciences and Perspectives (Volume One)

The Scroll of Love

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید لغو پاسخ

آهنگ فعلی

آرشیو آهنگ‌ها

تصویر فعلی

آرشیو تصاویر

غزل