Mashrabaمشربة

The commentators side by side

One passage at a time. Each column is a commentator; each row gathers the comments on the same words, so readings and emphases can be compared.

فَصُّ حِكْمَةٍ نَبَوِيَّةٍ فِي كَلِمَةٍ عِيسَوِيَّةٍ

←→Read ¶13 in the text

13 · 82 words · shading: how many commentators stop on each word

فَهُوَ كَلِمَةُ اللهِ وَهُوَ رُوحُ اللهِ وَهُوَ عَبْدُ اللهِ وَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ فِي الصُّورَةِ الحِسِّيَّةِ لِغَيْرِهِ بَلْ كُلُّ شَخْصٍ مَنْسُوبٌ إِلَىٰ أَبِيهِ الصُّورِيِّ لَا إِلَىٰ النَّافِخِ رُوحَهُ فِي الصُّورَةِ البَشَرِيَّةِ فَإِنَّ اللهَ إِذَا سَوَّىٰ الجِسْمُ الإِنْسَانِيَّ كَمَا قَالَ فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُۥ نَفَخَ فِيهِ هُوَ تَعَالَىٰ مِنْ رُوحِهِ فَنَسَبَ الرُّوحَ فِي كَوْنِهِ وَعَيْنِهِ إِلَيْهِ تَعَالَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ لَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ فَإِنَّهُ انْدَرَجَتْ تَسْوِيَةُ جِسْمِهِ وَصُورَتِهِ البَشَرِيَّةِ بِالنَّفْخِ الرُّوحِيِّ وَغَيْرُهُ كَمَا ذَكَرْنَاهُ لَمْ يَكُنْ مِثْلَهُ فَالمَوْجُودَاتُ كُلُّهَا كَلِمَاتُ اللهِ الَّتِي لَا تَنْفَدُ فَإِنَّهَا عَنْ كُنْ وَكُنْ كَلِمَةُ اللهِ

So he is the Word of God, and he is the Spirit of God, and he is the servant of God. That does not belong to anyone other than him in the sensory form. Rather, every person is ascribed to his formal father, not to the one who breathes his spirit into the human form. For when God has proportioned the human body, as He said, "And when I have proportioned him" [Qurʾān 15:29], He Himself, exalted is He, breathes into it of His spirit, and so He ascribes the spirit, in its engendered being and its very self, to Himself, exalted is He. But Jesus is not like that. The proportioning of his body and of his human form was included within the spiritual blowing, whereas others, as we have mentioned, were not like him. So the existents, all of them, are the words of God that are never exhausted, for they come from "Be!", and "Be!" is the word of God.

On the whole passage · 4 of 5

al-Qāshānī

﴿بل كل شخص منسوب إلى أبيه الصوري لا إلى النافخ روحه في الصورة البشرية ، فإن الله إذا سوى الجسم الإنسانى كما قال – " فَإِذا سَوَّيْتُه " - نفخ فيه هو تعالى من روحه فنسب الروح في كونه وعينه إليه تعالى ، وعيسى ليس كذلك فإنه أدرجت تسوية جسمه وصورته البشرية بالنفخ الروحي وغيره كما ذكرنا لم يكن مثله﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

هذا تقرير لما ذكر من أن صورة عيسى روحانية غلبت عليها الصورة الممثلة المثالية المنتسبة إلى النفخ بخلاف سائر البشر ، لأن كل شخص إذا سوى الله جسمه الصوري نفخ فيه روحه بعد تسوية جسده فنسب الروح في كونه وعينه إلى الله ، بخلاف عيسى فإنه نفخ في أمه مادة جسده فسوى جسده وصورته البشرية بعد النفخ فصارت الروحانية جزء جسده . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

— this is an elaboration of what was mentioned: that the form of Jesus is spiritual, in which the imaginal represented form predominates due to its association with the breathing, unlike the rest of mankind. For in the case of every other person, when God fashions his formal body, He breathes His spirit into him after the fashioning of his body; so the spirit, in its coming-to-be and its very essence, is ascribed to God. Jesus, by contrast, had the breathing occur into his mother — the matter of his body — so his body and human form were fashioned after the breathing, and thus the spirituality became a part of his very body. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

﴿فالموجودات كلها كلمات الله التي لا تنفد فإنها عن كن ، وكن كلمة الله فهل تنسب الكلمة إليه بحسب ما هو عليه فلا يعلم ماهيتها ، أو ينزل هو تعالى إلى صورة من يقول كن فيكون قول كن حقيقة لتلك الصورة التي نزل إليها وظهر فيها فبعض العارفين يذهب إلى الطرف الواحد ، وبعضهم إلى الطرف الآخر ، وبعضهم يحار في الأمر ولا يدرى﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

أي الموجودات كلها تعينات الوجود المطلق الحق وصور التجليات الإلهية فهي كلماته الكائنة بقول كن وكن عين كلمة الله فإما أن يكون الوجود الحق من حيث حقيقته المطلقة ظهر في صورة الكلمة فلا يعرف حقيقة الكلمة كما تعرف حقيقة الحق . وإما أن ينزل الحق عن حقيقته المطلقة إلى صورة من يتعين بذلك التعين أي من يقول كن فيكون المتعين عين الكلمة التي هي صورة ما نزل إليه وظهر فيه وهو نفس التعين وعين كن . فبعض العارفين وجد الأول ذوقا فذهب إليه ، وبعضهم إلى الثاني . وبعضهم وقع في الحيرة فلم يدر حقيقة الأمر وهي الحيرة الكبرى التي للأكابر .. وأما الأكامل من المحمديين فلم يحاروا بل قالوا بتحقيق الأمرين معا ، فإن كل عين هي نفس المتعين وكل متعين متقيد هو عين المطلق . فإن المطلق ليس هو المقيد بالإطلاق الذي يقابل المقيد ، بل الحقيقة المطلقة من حيث هو هو فيكون مع كل تعين وتقيد هو هو على إطلاقه ، وعين المقيد الذي نزل إلى صورته ، وعين التعين الذي ظهر في صورته فلا حيرة أصلا . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

coming-to-be, so that the saying of "Be!" becomes a reality for that very form to which He descended and in which He manifested? Some of the knowers incline to one side, others to the other side, and some fall into bewilderment and do not know] — that is, all existent things are the determinations (taʿayyunāt) of the Absolute Real Existence and the forms of the divine self-disclosures; they are His words, coming into being through the saying of "Be!", and "Be!" is itself the Word of God. So either the Real Existence, from the standpoint of Its Absolute Reality, manifests in the form of the Word, in which case the reality of the Word is not known as the Reality of the Real is known; or the Real descends from Its Absolute Reality to the form of the one who is determined by that determination — that is, to the one who says "Be!" — so that the determined one becomes identical with the Word, which is the form of that to which He descended and in which He manifested, this being the very determination itself and identical with "Be!". Some of the knowers found the first by direct tasting (dhawq) and inclined to it, and some to the second, while some fell into bewilderment and did not know the reality of the matter — and this is the Greater Bewilderment reserved for the great ones. As for the perfect ones among the Muḥammadans, they were not bewildered; rather, they affirmed both matters together as realized, for every entity (ʿayn) is identical with the determined thing itself, and every determined, delimited thing is identical with the Absolute. For the Absolute is not "the delimited" in the sense of delimitation that stands opposed to the absolute; rather, the Absolute Reality, considered as what It is in itself, remains, together with every determination and delimitation, Itself in Its absoluteness, and [simultaneously] identical with the delimited thing to whose form It has descended, and identical with the determination that has manifested in its form. So there is no bewilderment at all. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Jandī

﴿فالموجودات كلَّها كلمات الله التي لا تنفد ، فإنّها عين « كن » و « كن » كلمة الله ، فهل تنسب الكلمة إليه بحسب ما هو عليه ، فلا تعلم ماهيتها ، أو ينزل هو - تعالى - إلى صورة من يقول له : « كن » فيكون قول : « كن » حقيقة لتلك الصورة التي نزل إليها وظهر فيها ؟ فبعض العارفين يذهب إلى الطرف الواحد ، وبعضهم إلى الطرف الآخر ، وبعضهم يحار في الأمر ، ولا يدري﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

يشير رضي الله عنه : إلى أنّ الموجودات كلَّها لمّا كانت تعيّنات الوجود الحق وتنوّعات صور تجلَّياته الإلهية ، فهي كلمات الله على ما مرّ مرارا ، ولأنّها صور «كن» فهي تحتمل اعتبارين: أحدهما : اعتبارها من حيث وجودها الحقّ : فتترك مطلقة على حقيقتها ، فلا تعلم حقائقها ، فإنّها كلمات الله المطلقات ، كهو مطلقا . والاعتبار الثاني : اعتبار تنزّل الوجود الحق إلى صور التعيّنات ، فيكون المتعيّن عين التعيّن ، فيكون كلمة « كن » إذن عين الصورة ، فذوق بعض العارفين اعتبر الوجه الأوّل ، فقال : التعيّن عين المتعيّن بذلك التعين ، والمتعين عين الحقيقة المطلقة غير المتعيّنة ، وعلى إطلاقه . وبعضهم قالوا : نزل عن الإطلاق بالتعين فتعين ، فكان الوجود الحق المتعيّن في كل تعيّن عين التعيّن وبحسبه على التعيين . وبعضهم رأى احتمال الاعتبارين معا من غير ترجيح ، فحار الحيرة الكبرى التي للأكابر . وأمّا أهل الأكملية من أرباب الكمال فلم يحاروا ، بل قالوا بتحقّق الأمرين معا دائما في كل عين عين ، وهذا الذوق من مشرب الختم ، ويختصّ بالخاتميّين والمحمديّين ، جعلنا الله وإيّاك منهم . قال رضي الله عنه : « وهذه مسألة لا يمكن أن تعرف إلَّا ذوقا كأبي يزيد - رضي الله عنه - حين نفخ في النملة التي قتلها ، فحييت ، فعلم عند ذلك بمن ينفخ فنفخ ، وكان عيسويّ المشهد». يشير : إلى أنّ معرفة الإحياء وكيفية نسبته إلى الحق في صورة عبده أو إلى النافخ بالله لا تحصل إلَّا بالذوق ، فمن لم يحي ولم يحي هكذا شهودا محقّقا ، لم يعرف ، ذوقا كيف الإحياء ؟ فإنّ الكيفيات لا تعلم بالحكاية ، وهو لا يتحكَّى كما قيل قبل . قال رضي الله عنه : « وأمّا الإحياء المعنوي بالعلم فتلك الإحياء الإلهية الذاتية العلمية النورية التي قال الله فيها : " أَوَمن كانَ مَيْتاً فَأَحْيَيْناه ُ وَجَعَلْنا لَه ُ نُوراً يَمْشِي به في النَّاسِ كَمَنْ مَثَلُه ُ في الظُّلُماتِ لَيْسَ بِخارِجٍ مِنْها " فكلّ من أحيا نفسا ميتة بحياة علميّة في مسألة خاصّة متعلَّقة بالعلم بالله ، فقد أحياه بها وكانت له نورا يمشي به في الناس أي بين أشكاله في الصورة » . يعني رضي الله عنه : أنّ الإحياء المعنويّ الحقيقيّ هو إحياء النفس الميتة بالجهل بالعلم ، فإنّه الحياة الحقيقية لنفوس العالمين العارفين بالله في الطبقة العليا ولنفوس الموتى بالجهل لله وأسمائه وآياته وكلماته وأنبائه. ولكن لا مطلقا في جميع مراتب العلم الكونيّ - أعني ليس لكلّ علم هذه الحياة والإحياء - بل هو العلم بالله خاصّة ، وقد أعطى الله ذلك لكمّل أوليائه وندّر الأفراد ، فهم يحيون بنفائس أنفاسهم نفوس المستعدّين ، ويفيضون عليهم أنوار الحياة العلمية النورية الذاتية ، وذلك أنّهم أقيموا في مقام التحقّق بالعليم وعلَّام الغيوب وعالم الغيب والشهادة وبالحيّ المحيي بهذه الحياة العلمية الإلهية الذاتية النورية ، وهي مخصوصة بالله ومن أحياه بهذا العلم خاصّة من خاصّة الخاصّة وصفوة الخلاصة ، فأقامهم الله به وقام بهم ، وهذا الإحياء مثل إحياء الموتى صورة ، فإنّ كلا من خصائص الله ومن أعطاه ذلك وأذن له أو أمره به . بل هو أعني الإحياء بالحياة العلمية أعلى وأرفع ، لأنّه إحياء النفوس والأرواح ، وذلك إحياء الأجسام والأشباح ، ولكن لمّا قلّ طلَّاب هذه الحياة وكثر طلَّاب الآخرة ، وجد حصول هذا من كمّل الرسل والأنبياء والأولياء ، وشوهد كثيرا . ولم يشهد إحياء الأجسام والموتى في الناس إلَّا في عيسى ومن كان عيسويّ المشهد من الأولياء ، وذلك بالنادر مع توفير الرغبات في ذلك ، واستشراف النفوس إلى ذلك ، استعظموا ذلك ، لعزّته وعدم الظفر به ، وأنّه - والله - عظيم ولكن إحياء النفوس بهذه الحياة العلمية النورية أعظم وأعزّ وأشرف ، لكون الأرواح والنفوس أشرف من الأجسام ، فافهم . قال رضي الله عنه

.] He—may God be pleased with him—points to the fact that since all existents are entifications (taʿayyunāt) of the Real Being and diversifications of the forms of His divine self-disclosures (tajalliyāt), they are the words of God as has been repeatedly stated; and since they are forms of "Be!", they admit of two considerations. The first: considering them in respect of their Real Being—in which case they are left unqualified (muṭlaq) in their reality, so that their realities are not known, for they are the absolute words of God, just as He Himself is absolute. The second consideration: considering the descent of the Real Being into the forms of the entifications, in which case the entified thing (al-mutaʿayyin) is identical with the entification itself, so that the word "Be!" is then identical with the form. The taste (dhawq) of some of the knowers took the first aspect into consideration, saying: the entification is identical with the entified thing by virtue of that entification, while the entified thing is identical with the absolute, non-entified reality, remaining in its absoluteness. Others said: it descended from absoluteness through entification and so became entified, so that the Real Being, entified in every entification, is identical with the entification and corresponds to it according to that specific determination. Others held both considerations to be possible together without giving preference to either, and so fell into the great bewilderment (al-ḥayra al-kubrā) that belongs to the great ones. But the people of utmost perfection (al-akmaliyya) among the masters of perfection were not bewildered; rather, they affirmed the realization of both matters together, always, in every single entity. This taste belongs to the fountain of the Seal (mashrab al-khatm) and is specific to the Seal-people (khātamiyyīn) and the Muhammadans (muḥammadiyyīn)—may God make us and you among them. He, may God be pleased with him, said: "This is a matter that cannot be known except by direct tasting (dhawqan), as with Abū Yazīd, may God be pleased with him, when he breathed into the ant he had killed and it came back to life; he thereby came to know by Whom he breathed when he breathed, and his was an experiential station (mashhad) of Jesus-likeness (ʿīsawī)." He points to the fact that knowledge of the giving of life, and how it is attributed to the Real in the form of His servant or to the one who breathes by God, is not attained except by direct tasting. Whoever has not given life, and has not given life in this manner through realized witnessing, does not know by taste how the giving of life occurs; for such modalities (kayfiyyāt) cannot be known by mere narration, and this reality cannot be conveyed by report, as was said before.] He, may God be pleased with him, said: "As for the spiritual giving of life through knowledge, that is the divine, essential, epistemic, luminous giving of life concerning which God said: 'Or is he who was dead and We gave him life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, like one whose likeness is in darknesses, not emerging from them?' So whoever gives life to a dead soul through epistemic life in some particular matter connected with the knowledge of God has thereby given it life, and it becomes for him a light by which he walks among the people—that is, among his likenesses in form." He, may God be pleased with him, means that the true spiritual giving of life is the giving of life to the soul that is dead through ignorance, by means of knowledge; for this is the true life of the souls of the knowers of God at the highest level, and of the souls dead through ignorance of God, His names, His signs, His words, and His tidings. But this is not so absolutely, for every degree of cosmic knowledge—I mean, not every knowledge carries this life and this life-giving—rather it is specifically the knowledge of God, which God has granted to the perfected among His saints and to rare individuals among them. They give life, through the precious breaths of their own souls, to the souls of those prepared for it, and pour upon them the lights of the essential, luminous, epistemic life. This is because they have been established in the station of realization through [the divine names] the Knowing (al-ʿAlīm), the Knower of the unseen (ʿAllām al-ghuyūb), the Knower of the unseen and the witnessed (ʿĀlim al-ghayb wa-l-shahāda), and the Living who gives life (al-Ḥayy al-Muḥyī) through this divine, essential, luminous, epistemic life. This is specific to God and to whomever He gives life through this knowledge in particular—from the elite of the elite and the choicest of the chosen. God establishes them through it, and sustains them by it. This giving of life is, in outward form, like the giving of life to the dead; for each belongs to the special prerogatives (khaṣāʾiṣ) of God and of whomever He has granted that to, and permitted, or commanded to do so. Indeed, this giving of life—I mean giving life through epistemic life—is higher and more exalted, because it is the giving of life to souls and spirits, whereas the other is the giving of life to bodies and physical forms. But since seekers of this [spiritual] life are few and seekers of the afterlife are many, this [epistemic life-giving] is found to occur through the perfected among the messengers, prophets, and saints, and is witnessed frequently. Whereas the giving of life to bodies and to the [physically] dead among people has not been witnessed except in Jesus and in those saints whose experiential station was Jesus-like (ʿīsawī al-mashhad)—and that rarely, despite the abundance of desires for it and the souls' yearning toward it. People regard it as momentous because of its rarity and the difficulty of attaining it, and indeed, by God, it is momentous. But the giving of life to souls through this epistemic, luminous life is more momentous, more precious, and more noble, since spirits and souls are nobler than bodies. So understand.] He, may God be pleased with him, said:

Jāmī

﴿فإن الله إذا سوى الجسم الإنساني كما قال تعالى «فإذا سويته» نفخ فيه هو تعالى من روحه فنسب الروح في كونه وعينه إليه تعالى. وعيسى ليس كذلك، فإنه اندرجت تسوية جسمه وصورته البشرية بالنفخ الروحي، وغيره كما ذكرناه لم يكن مثله. فالموجودات كلها كلمات الله التي لا تنفد، فإنها عن «كن» وكن كلمة الله. فهل تنسب الكلمة إليه بحسب ما هو عليه فلا تعلم ماهيتها، أو ينزل هو تعالى﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

صورة بشرية إذ ليس النافخ في صورته مشهودا

into a human form, since the blower in his form is not witnessed

Bālī Zāde

﴿فالموجودات كلها كلمات الله التي لا تنفد فإنها عن كن ، وكن كلمة الله فهل تنسب الكلمة إليه بحسب ما هو عليه فلا يعلم ماهيتها ، أو ينزل هو تعالى إلى صورة من يقول كن فيكون قول كن حقيقة لتلك الصورة التي نزل إليها وظهر فيها فبعض العارفين يذهب إلى الطرف الواحد ، وبعضهم إلى الطرف الآخر ، وبعضهم يحار في الأمر ولا يدرى﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

( وكن كلمة الله ) فتنسب كلمة كن إلى الله إما بحسب مرتبة الألوهية وإما بحسب نزوله إلى صورة من يقول كن لإحياء الموتى ، وإليه أشار بقوله ( فهل تنسب الكلمة إليه تعالى ) اه ( للطرف الواحد ) هو أن الله متكلم بكلمة كن في مقام ألوهيته ( والطرف الآخر ) أن الله متنزل في صورة من يتكلم بكن ، فالخالق للعبد بإذن الله والحيرة في أنه هل هو من الحق أم من العبد ، ومعلوم أنه من الخصائص الإلهية لأن هذا العارف يعلم أن الإحياء من الخصائص الإلهية ، فشاهد صدوره من العبد ، فيحار في نسبته إلى الله وإلى العبد لعدم ذوق هذا العارف من تلك المسألة

(and "Be" is the Word of God), so the word "Be" is attributed to God either according to the rank of Divinity or according to His descent into the form of the one who says "Be" to give life to the dead. To this he alludes by his saying (Is the Word, then, attributed to Him, exalted) and so on, (to one extreme) which is that God is the speaker of the word "Be" in the station of His Divinity, (and the other extreme) which is that God descends into the form of the one who speaks "Be," so the creating is from the servant by God's permission, and the bewilderment is as to whether it is from the Real or from the servant; and it is known that it is among the divine specificities, for this knower knows that giving life is among the divine specificities, so he witnesses its proceeding from the servant and thus remains bewildered as to attributing it to God or to the servant, due to this knower's lack of direct tasting (dhawq) in this matter.

Bālī Zāde's gloss, printed inside al-Qāshānī's commentary in the ibnalarabi.com text (line 8269); moved here

Ibn Turka

﴿فهو كلمة الله﴾

باعتبار حصوله من نفخ جبرئيل

by consideration of his occurrence from the breathing of Gabriel

Jāmī

﴿كلمة اللّه﴾

باعتبار حصوله من نفخ جبريل

by consideration of his coming-to-be from Gabriel's blowing

Ibn Turka

﴿وهو روح الله﴾

باعتبار مبدئيّته للإحياء

by consideration of his being the principle of giving life

Jāmī

﴿وهو روح اللّه﴾

باعتبار مبدئيته للإحياء كما قال اللّه تعالى فيهما

by consideration of his being the principle of life-giving, as God Most High said concerning the two of them

Bālī Zāde

﴿وهو روح اللّه﴾

لظهور الحياة فيمن نفخ فيه

because life appeared through him in the one into whom he was breathed.

Ibn Turka

﴿وهو عبد الله﴾

باعتبار صورته البشريّة

by consideration of his human form

Jāmī

﴿وهو عبد اللّه﴾

باعتبار صورته البشرية كما قال تعالى :" إِنِّي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ آتانِيَ الْكِتابَ "[ مريم : 30 ]

by consideration of his human form, as He Most High said: "Indeed I am the servant of God; He has given me the Book" [Maryam: 30]

Bālī Zāde

﴿وهو عبد اللّه﴾

لكونه على الصورة البشرية

because he is of human form.

Ibn Turka

﴿وليس ذلك … في الصورة الحسيّة لغيره … بل كلّ شخص منسوب إلى أبيه الصوري ، لا إلى النافخ روحه في الصورة البشريّة﴾

ضرورة تخالفهما وتباينهما ، حيث يكون الكثرة الكونيّة هو الغالب عليه

necessarily, due to their difference and distinction, since it is cosmic multiplicity that predominates over him

Jāmī

﴿وليس ذلك﴾

الخلاف والاختلاف لتعدد الوجوه ( في الصورة الحسنة لغيره ) ، أي لغير عيسى من بني نوعه إذ ليس شخص مثل عيسى منسوبا إلى جبريل

the disagreement and difference due to the multiplicity of aspects (in the sensory form for anyone else), i.e., for anyone other than Jesus among his kind, since no one like Jesus is attributed to Gabriel

Bālī Zāde

﴿وليس ذلك﴾

الاجتماع أوليس ذلك النفخ الحاصل في الصورة الحسية العيسوية حاصل

combination, or that breathing which occurred in the sensory Jesus-form, does not occur

Words 12–14 · 1 of 5

فِي الصُّورَةِ الحِسِّيَّةِ

Only Bālī Zāde comments here.

Bālī Zāde

﴿في الصورة الحسية﴾

البشرية ( لغيره ) حتى وقع فيه الخلاف الواقع بين أهل الملل في عيسى عليه السلام

of a human being (for anyone other than him), to the extent that the disagreement occurred among the people of the religious communities concerning Jesus, peace be upon him,

Jāmī

﴿بل كل شخص منسوب إلى أبيه الصوري لا إلى النافخ روحه﴾

حال كون ذلك النافخ متمثل

while that blower is one who appeared [in a form]

Bālī Zāde

﴿بل كل شخص﴾

لعدم اجتماع حقائق هذه الوجوه فيه

because the realities of these aspects do not combine in him,

Bālī Zāde

﴿منسوب إلى أبيه الصوري لا إلى النافخ روحه في الصورة البشرية﴾

وإنما لم يكن لغير عيسى عليه السلام من البشر ما كان لعيسى عليه السلام

and the reason this was not the case for any human other than Jesus, peace be upon him, is as follows:

Words 27–29 · 1 of 5

فِي الصُّورَةِ البَشَرِيَّةِ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿في الصورة البشرية﴾

ضرورة أنه ليس لأحد غير عيسى نافخ . كذلك على أن يكون الجار ظرفا مستقرا ، ولا إلى النافح روحه في صورته البشرية ، فإنه في غير عيسى غير مشهود وعلى هذا يكون الجار ظرفا لغوا للنفخ ، وإنما قلنا : ليس لغير عيسى نافخ متمثل في قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

necessarily, since no one other than Jesus has a [specific] blower in this way, on the basis that the preposition is a fixed circumstantial [modifier], nor to the one who blows his spirit into his human form, for in anyone other than Jesus this is not witnessed; and on this [reading] the preposition is a superfluous circumstantial [modifier] for the blowing. And we have only said: no one other than Jesus has a blower who appeared [visibly]— the Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

Ibn Turka

﴿فإن الله إذا سوّى الجسم الإنسانيّ - كما قال : " فَإِذا سَوَّيْتُه ُ " نفخ فيه هو تعالى من روحه ، فنسب الروح في كونه﴾

حيث قال : " وَنَفَخْتُ فِيه ِ " ( وعينه ) حيث أضاف إلى نفسه بقوله : "من رُوحِي " [ 15 / 29 ]

where He said: "And I breathed into him," (and specified it) where He attributed [it] to Himself by His saying: "from My spirit" [15:29]

Jāmī

﴿فإن اللّه إذا سوى الجسم الإنساني كما قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : "فَإِذا سَوَّيْتُهُ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ" هو … تعالى من روحه﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

لا بواسطة جبريل في صورة بشرية كما قال تعالى :وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِنْ رُوحِي

not through the mediation of Gabriel in a human form, as He Most High said: "And I have blown into him from My Spirit"

Bālī Zāde

﴿فإن اللّه تعالى إذا سوى الجسم الإنساني كما قالفَإِذا سَوَّيْتُهُ *﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

فنفخت فيه من روحي فقعوا له ساجدين . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

then I breathed into him of My spirit, fall down before him in prostration. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Words 40–45 · 1 of 5

نَفَخَ فِيهِ هُوَ تَعَالَىٰ مِنْ رُوحِهِ

Only Bālī Zāde comments here.

Bālī Zāde

﴿نفخ فيه هو تعالى من روحه﴾

جواب لقوله إذا سوّى الجسم الإنساني

is the answer to His saying "when He had proportioned the human body"

Jāmī

﴿فنسب الروح في كونه﴾

أي وجوده حيث قال : ونفخت فيه ، إذ نفخ الروح هو تكوينه فيه ( وعينه ) أي في ذاته حيث . قال : من روحي فنسب وجود الروح وذاته

i.e., its existence, where He said: "and I have blown into him," since the blowing of the spirit is its coming-into-being within him (and in its very identity), i.e., in its essence, where He said: "from My Spirit," so He attributed the existence of the spirit and its essence

Bālī Zāde

﴿فنسب الروح في كونه﴾

أي في وجود الإنسان ( وعينه ) الحسي

that is, in the existence of the human and its sensory entity, (is attributed)

Ibn Turka

﴿إليه تعالى ، وعيسى ليس كذلك﴾

لغلبة الوحدة الوجوبيّة عليه ، فليس لتلك التفرقة عليه قهرمان

due to the predominance of the necessary unity over him, so that separation has no dominion (qahramān) over him

Jāmī

﴿إليه تعالى﴾

لا إلى جبريل متمثلا بالصورة البشرية ففي كل شخص إنساني غير عيسى التسوية مقدمة على نفخ الروح والنافخ هو اللّه سبحانه بلا واسطة جبريل في صورة بشرية

not to Gabriel appearing in human form; for in every human individual other than Jesus, the proportioning precedes the blowing of the spirit, and the blower is God, glory be to Him, without the mediation of Gabriel in a human form

Bālī Zāde

﴿وعيسى عليه السلام ليس كذلك فإنه اندرجت تسوية جسمه وصورته البشرية بالنفخ الروحي﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

فلم يفصل بين تسوية الجسم العيسوي وبين روحه فلا يتقدم تسوية جسمه على نفخ روحه

so no separation occurred between the proportioning of the Jesus-body and his spirit, and the proportioning of his body did not precede the breathing of his spirit,

﴿إليه تعالى﴾

فكان نسبة الروح إلى اللّه في حقه بعد التسوية ففصل بين تسوية الجسم والنفخ الروحي في غيره فلم يسم روح اللّه

so the attribution of the spirit to God in his case came after the proportioning; thus a separation occurred between the proportioning of the body and the breathing of the spirit in the case of others, so he was not named the Spirit of God,

Words 53–55 · 1 of 5

وَعِيسَىٰ لَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿وعيسى ليس كذلك﴾

لانتفاء الأمرين فيه

due to the absence of both matters in his case

Ibn Turka

﴿فإنّه اندرجت تسوية جسمه وصورته البشريّة بالنفخ الروحي﴾

- فإنّ جسمه من الماء المتوهّم من نفخ جبرئيل -

— for his body is from the water supposed [to arise] from the breathing of Gabriel —

Jāmī

﴿فإنه اندرجت تسوية جسمه وصورته البشرية بالنفخ الروحي﴾

أي في النفخ الروحي . فإذا اندرجت التسوية في النفخ كانا معا ومعلوم أن ذلك النفخ كان من جبريل في صورة بشرية ، أو يراد بالنفخ الروحي الصادر من جبريل فإنه أيضا روح ( وغيره ) ، أي غير عيسى

i.e., [conjoined] within the spiritual blowing. So when the proportioning is conjoined within the blowing, the two occur together; and it is known that this blowing was from Gabriel in a human form—or else the "spiritual blowing" refers to that which issued from Gabriel, for he too is a spirit (and others), i.e., other than Jesus

Ibn Turka

﴿وغيره - كما ذكرناه - لم يكن مثله﴾

كلمة كن ثمّ إنّه لما بيّن وجه اختصاص عيسى وامتيازه عن سائر الكلمات ، أخذ يكشف عن وجه اشتراك الكلمات كلها ، لما تحقّق به عيسى ، وتحقيق سريان الوجوه الثلاثة المذكورة وصور اختلاف الملل فيها ، تبيينا للمماثلة المنصوصة عليها بقوله تعالى : " إِنَّ مَثَلَ عِيسى عِنْدَ الله كَمَثَلِ آدَمَ " [ال عمران : 59] بقوله

in the word "Be" (kun). Then, when he had made clear the aspect of Jesus's distinction and his being singled out from the rest of the Words, he began to disclose the aspect of the shared commonality of all the Words, by virtue of what Jesus was realized through, and the verification of the running-through of the three aforementioned aspects and the forms of the religious communities' disagreement concerning them — clarifying the resemblance stated in His words, exalted: "Truly the likeness of Jesus with God is as the likeness of Adam" [Āl ʿImrān: 59] — by his saying:

Jāmī

﴿كما ذكرناه﴾

من تقدم التسوية على النفخ وكون النافخ في صورة البشرية

regarding the precedence of the proportioning over the blowing, and the blower being in human form

Bālī Zāde

﴿وغيره كما ذكرناه لم يكن مثله﴾

أي لم يكن مثل عيسى عليه السلام في الخلقة فلا يكون غير عيسى عليه السلام محلا للخلاف كما كان عيسى عليه السلام فإذا كان نافخ الروح هو اللّه

that is, were not like Jesus, peace be upon him, in creation, so no one other than Jesus, peace be upon him, becomes a locus of the disagreement as Jesus, peace be upon him, was. So since the one who breathed the spirit is God,

Words 67–69 · 1 of 5

لَمْ يَكُنْ مِثْلَهُ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿لم يكن مثله﴾

ولما انجر كلامه رضي اللّه عنه إلى أن تجلى عيسى عليه السلام بأنه كلمة اللّه أراد أن ينبه على أن هذا الحكم عام لكل موجود لا اختصاص له بعيسى كما كان لبعض توهمات الناظرين فيه اختصاص به . فقال

And when his speech (may God be pleased with him) led to [the statement] that Jesus, peace be upon him, had a self-disclosure (tajallī) in that he is the Word of God, he wished to indicate that this ruling is general for every existent thing, with no exclusive specificity to Jesus—as some of the suppositions of those who reflect upon him supposed him to have an exclusive specificity. So he said

Ibn Turka

﴿فالموجودات كلها كلمات الله التي لا تنفد ، فإنّها عن : « كن »﴾

من حيث أنّ ظهورها من مستجنّ الغيب إلى مراتب المخارج بانبساط النفس الرحماني المعبّر عنه بـ « كن » فهي صور تنوعاته

insofar as their emergence from the hidden recess of the Unseen into the levels of outward issuance is by the unfolding of the Breath of the All-Merciful (al-nafas al-raḥmānī), expressed by "Be" — so they are the forms of its diversifications

Jāmī

﴿فالموجودات كلها﴾

روحانية أو مثالية أو جسمانية

whether spiritual, imaginal (mithāliyya), or corporeal

Bālī Zāde

﴿فالموجودات كلها كلمات اللّه التي لا تنفد فإنها﴾

أي الموجودات صادرة

that is, the existents, proceed

Words 72–76 · 1 of 5

كَلِمَاتُ اللهِ الَّتِي لَا تَنْفَدُ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿كلمات اللّه التي لا تنفذ﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

أي لا تتناهى وإنما سميت كلمات اللّه ( فإنها ) صادرة ( عن ) قوله

that is, they have no end. They are called "the words of God" (for they) proceed (from) His saying

Ibn Turka

﴿و " كُنْ " كلمة الله ، فهل تنسب الكلمة﴾

Quotes words that differ from our text (wavy underline).

هذه

Ibn Turka · line 8800English translation pending

Jāmī

﴿كن وكن كلمة اللّه﴾

فسمي ما صدر عنها بالكلمة تسمية للمسبب باسم السبب ، وإنما يذكر للتسمية بها وجه آخر وهو ما اشتهر فيما بينهم من الكلمات الوجودية هي تعينات واقعة على النفس الرحماني ، كما أن الكلمات اللفظية تعينات واقعة على النفس الإنساني . وإذا كان كلمة كن كلمة اللّه

So what proceeds from it is named by the word "kalima" (word) — naming the effect by the name of the cause. Another aspect for this naming is mentioned, namely what is well known among them (the Sufis) concerning the existential words (al-kalimāt al-wujūdiyya): they are determinations (taʿayyunāt) occurring upon the Breath of the All-Merciful (al-nafas al-raḥmānī), just as verbal words are determinations occurring upon the human breath. And since the word "Be" (kun) is the word of God

Bālī Zāde

﴿عن كن وكن كلمة اللّه﴾

فتنسب كلمة كن إلى اللّه . إما بحسب مرتبة ألوهية وإما بحسب نزوله إلى صورة من يقول كن لإحياء الموتى ، وإليه أشار بقوله

so the word "Be" is attributed to God either according to the rank of Divinity or according to His descent into the form of the one who says "Be" to give life to the dead, and to this he alluded by his saying:

Sources: where each commentator's text comes from
ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Qāshānī (d. 730/1330), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0730CabdRazzaqKashani.SharhFususHikam.IAC00084-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/qashani.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Muʾayyad al-Dīn al-Jandī (d. c. 691/1291), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0691MuayyadDinJanadi.SharhCalaFususHikam.IAC00080-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/jandi.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

ʿAfīf al-Dīn al-Tilimsānī (d. 690/1291), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0690CafifTilimsani.SharhFususHikam.IAC00081-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/tilmasani.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Ṣāʾin al-Dīn Ibn Turka (d. 835/1432), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0835SainDinTaraka.SharhFususHikam.IAC00087-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/taraka.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Nūr al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Jāmī (d. 898/1492), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0898NurDinJami.SharhMatnFususHikam.IAC00088-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/jami_matn.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Muṣṭafā b. Sulaymān Bālī Zāde (d. 1073/1663), Sharḥ Fuṣūṣ al-Ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 1073MustafaSulaymanBaliZadah.SharhFususHikam.IAC00082-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/bali.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Ṣadr al-Dīn al-Qūnawī (d. 673/1274), al-Fukūk fī asrār mustanadāt ḥikam al-Fuṣūṣ

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0673AbuMacaliQunawi.Fukuk.IAC00079-ara1 (commit 6b19bdc)

Print edition behind it: Not recorded by OpenITI: the barzakh file has no .yml metadata record, and the ibnalarabi.com page it was taken from names no printed edition.

Taken from: ibnalarabi.com/fusus/qunawi.php. The OpenITI file's own header (#META# source) names this page: the text was copied from the Ibn ʿArabī website directed by Dr Mohamed Ali Haj Yousef. Every IAC-coded file used here names a page of that site in its header; barzakh is OpenITI's repository for texts awaiting integration into the corpus.

Licence: OpenITI distributes its texts under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; ibnalarabi.com states © 1999–2024. The commentary itself is a classical work in the public domain; the edition behind the digital text is unidentified.

Missing here: Dāwūd al-Qayṣarī: no text for chapters 15–27. The OpenITI barzakh file (and the ibnalarabi.com pages it was copied from) repeats chapter 14 in their place; a usable copy of the print has not yet been found.

The ibnalarabi.com texts sometimes print other hands inside a commentary: Bālī Zāde's glosses inside al-Qāshānī («إضافة بالي زادة»), and notes by the modern editor (al-muḥaqqiq) or compiler (al-jāmiʿ). We cut these out of the commentator's own text and show them as separate entries, each labelled with its author and the line of the file it came from.

Arabic of the commentaries from the OpenITI digital texts (each comment links to its line); Bosnevî's Ottoman Turkish from our collation of two OCRs of the 1873 Istanbul print (each comment links to its page scan at HathiTrust); passages matched to the commentators' quotations automatically.English translations of the commentaries and of the passage are AI (Claude) and marked. Differences are computed by comparing the words each commentator quotes with our working text; they may reflect a different manuscript reading, a paraphrase, or an alignment error. About this text.