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 سُبُّوحِيَّةٍ فِي كَلِمَةٍ نُوحِيَّةٍ

←→Read ¶14 in the text

14 · 79 words · shading: how many commentators stop on each word

فَقَالُوا فِي مَكْرِهِمْ وَقَالُوا۟ لَا تَذَرُنَّ ءَالِهَتَكُمْ وَلَا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّا وَلَا سُوَاعًا وَلَا يَغُوثَ وَيَعُوقَ وَنَسْرًا فَإِنَّهُمْ إِذَا تَرَكُوهُمْ جَهِلُوا مِنَ الحَقِّ عَلَى قَدَرِ مَا تَرَكُوا مِنْ هَؤُلاءِ فَإِنَّ لِلْحَقِّ فِي كُلِّ مَعْبُودٍ وَجْهًا يَعْرِفُهُ مَنْ عَرَفَهُ وَيَجْهَلُهُ مَنْ جَهِلَهُ فِي المُحَمَّدِيِّينَ وَقَضَىٰ رَبُّكَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوٓا۟ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ أَي حَكَمَ فَالعَالِمُ يَعْلَمُ مَنْ عُبِدَ وَفِي أَيِّ صُورَةٍ ظَهَرَ حَتَّى عُبِدَ وَأَنَّ التَّفْرِيقَ وَالكَثْرَةَ كَالأَعْضَاءِ فِي الصُّورَةِ المَحْسُوسَةِ وَكَالقُوَى المَعْنَوِيَّةِ فِي الصُّورَةِ الرُّوحَانِيَّةِ فَمَا عُبِدَ غَيْرُ اللهِ فِي كُلِّ مَعْبُودٍ

So they said in their devising: "And they said: 'Do not abandon your gods; do not abandon Wadd, nor Suwāʿ, nor Yaghūth and Yaʿūq and Nasr'" [Q 71:23]. For if they were to abandon them, they would become ignorant of the Real to the extent of what they abandoned of these. For the Real has, in every object of worship, a face which is known by whoever knows it and is unknown to whoever is ignorant of it. Among the Muhammadans [it is said]: "And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him" [Q 17:23], that is, He has ruled [it]. So the knower knows who has been worshipped, and in what form He became manifest so that He was worshipped. He also knows that separation and multiplicity are like the limbs in the sensory form and like the suprasensory faculties in the spiritual form. So in every object of worship none other than God has been worshipped.

On the whole passage · 2 of 7

al-Tilimsānī

﴿23 الإسراء. أي حكم. فالعالم يعلم من عبد، وفي أي صورة ظهر حتى عبد، وأن التفريق والكثرة کالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة وكالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية. فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود، فالأدنى من تخيل فيه الألوهية فلولا هذا التخيل ما عبد الحجر ولا غيره. ولهذا قال تعالى:﴾

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

قل سموهم

is the one who merely imagines divinity to be in it — for were it not for this imagining, the stone, or anything else, would not have been worshiped. Therefore He, exalted, said:] 'Say: name them' —

Jāmī

﴿في المحمديين: « وقضى ربك ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه » أي حكم. فالعالم يعلم من عبد، و في أي صورة ظهر حتى عبد، و أن التفريق و الكثرة كالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة و كالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية، فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود. فالأدنى من تخيل فيه الألوهية، فلو لا هذا التخيل ما عبد الحجر و لا غيره. و لهذا قال: «قل سموهم»، فلو سموهم لسموهم حجارة و شجرا و كوكبا.﴾

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

المعبودين جهل الحق من حيث الوجوه التي له سبحانه فيهم فلهذا نهوهم عن تركهم (و) جاء في المحمديين، ما يؤكد ما ذكرنا من أن للحق سبحانه في كل معبود وجها. وهو قوله تعالى: ("وقضى") يا محمد ("ربك") الذي هو الاسم الله مع

is one who imagined divinity to be in it; were it not for this imagining, the stone would not have been worshiped, nor anything else. Hence He said: «Say, name them,» for if they named them, they would name them stones, trees, or stars.] The worshiped [objects] — ignorance of the Real from the standpoint of the aspects (wujūh) He, Glory be to Him, has in them — hence they [the prophets] forbade them [only] from abandoning [Him] (and) it occurs among the Muhammadans, confirming what we mentioned — that the Real, Glory be to Him, has in every worshiped thing an aspect (wajh). This is His saying, Exalted is He: ("And has decreed") O Muhammad ("your Lord") who is the name Allāh, together with

al-Qāshānī

﴿فقالوا في مكرهم :" لا تَذَرُنَّ آلِهَتَكُمْ ولا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّا ولا سُواعاً ولا يَغُوثَ ويَعُوقَ ونَسْراً " - فإنهم إذا تركوهم جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء ، فإن للحق في كل معبود وجها يعرفه من عرفه ويجهله من جهله … في المحمديين "وقَضى رَبُّكَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاه " أي حكم ربك﴾

رب الكل أن لا موجود سواه فلا يرى في صورة الكثرة إلا وجهه فيعلم أنه هو الذي ظهر في هذه الصور فلا يعبد إلا الله لأن صور الكثرة في الوجود الواحد إما معنوية غير محسوسة كالملائكة وإما صورية محسوسة كالسماوات والأرض وما بينهما من المحسوسات . فالأولى بمثابة القوى الروحانية في الصور الإنسانية ، والثانية بمثابة الأعضاء ، فلا تقدح هذه الكثرة في أحدية الإنسان وهو معنى قوله

the Lord of all, that there is no existent besides Him, so that one sees, in the form of multiplicity, nothing but His face, and thus knows that it is He who has become manifest in these forms; so none is worshipped but God, for the forms of multiplicity within the One Existence are either intelligible, non-sensory, like the angels, or formal, sensory, like the heavens and the earth and what is between them of sensory things. The first are like the spiritual faculties within the human form, and the second are like the bodily organs; and this multiplicity does not impugn the unity of the human being. This is the meaning of his saying:

al-Jandī

﴿فقالوا في مكرهم : لا تذرنّ آلهتكم ولا تذرنّ ودّا ولا سواعا ولا يغوث ويعوق ونسر﴾

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

فإنّهم إذا تركوهم جهلو من الحق قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء ، فإنّ للحق في كلّ معبود وجها يعرفه من عرفه ، ويجهله من جهله." قال العبد : لمّا كان الوجود الحقّ المتعيّن في خصوصيات قابليات كل معبود من حجر ومدر وشمس وقمر ظهورا ووجها خاصّا هو الوجه الحق الباقي إذا عادت حجابيّات الأشياء هالكة ، فمن أنكر وجهل وجه الحق في كل شيء ، فقد أنكر الحق المتعيّن في مظهريته ، والمتجلَّي من حقيقته لصور خلقيته. فهو الظاهر في كل ظاهر ولا ظاهر إلَّا أفعاله ، فلا ظاهر إلَّا الله " وَما رَمَيْتَ إِذْ رَمَيْتَ وَلكِنَّ الله رَمى " ، فظهرت الألوهية والمألوهية ، والعابدية والمعبودية ، والساجدية والمسجودية في كل عين عين ، فمن عبد حجابيّته وصنميّته ، أو عبد تخيّله وهواه في ذلك المعبود أنّه إله ، فقد عبد هواه ، وعبد الطاغوت ، وعبد صنميّات حجاب اللاهوت . ومن عبد الله الواحد الأحد في كل ما عبد ، وعبد من غير حصر لله تعالى في صورة دون صورة وتعيينه في شيء دون شيء ، فذلك العارف الكاشف ، والعالم الواصف ، لا يحجبه شيء ، ولا يسعه نور ولا فيء ، ولا يحجزه ميّت ولا حيّ ، ولا يضرّه هداية ولا غيّ . ذلك هو العبد الحقّ " عِنْدَ مَلِيكٍ مُقْتَدِرٍ ". " في مَقْعَدِ صِدْقٍ " فافهم . وإذا علمت هذا فاعلم : أنّ لك نسبا في ربّك ليس لغيرك ، هو أحدية جمعك وبصورتك ظهر لك في كل معبود موجود ، وتجلَّى لك في كل مشهود معهود وغير معهود ، ولكن ظهوره بك في كلّ بحسب المظهر لا بحسبه ولا بحسبك ، فأنت حسبه إن كنت بحسبه ، وهو حسبك حسبا ، ونعم النسب التي بها جعل لك منه نسبا فأعطه ماله وهو أنت ، وخذه مالك وهو ربّك ، وقابل لتجلَّياتك لك به ، ولتجلَّياته بك لك من أحديّة جمع مظهريّتك عبدانيّة تناسب التجلَّي ، وقابل بكلَّك كلّ المتجلَّي ، تكن أديبا أريبا محبّا له في الكلّ حبيبا ، وقلبا كلَّيا متقلَّبا معه في شؤونه لبيبا ، تشاهد من تجلَّياته مشهدا غريبا ، وتكشف منك له حالا عجيبا ، والله الموفّق . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : في المحمّديّين

For had they abandoned them, they would have been ignorant of the Real to the very extent that they abandoned these [idols], for the Real has in every worshipped object a Face (wajh) which he who knows it, knows, and he who is ignorant of it, is ignorant of. The servant [author] says: Since the true Existence (al-wujūd al-ḥaqq), determined (mutaʿayyin) within the particular receptivities (qābiliyyāt) of every worshipped thing — be it stone, clay, sun, or moon — constitutes in each a manifestation and a specific face, which is the abiding true Face when the veiling aspects of things return to nothingness — then whoever denies and is ignorant of the Face of the Real in everything has denied the Real as determined in His locus of manifestation (maẓhariyya), and as self-disclosed from His reality into the forms of His created things. For He is the Manifest (al-Ẓāhir) in every manifest thing, and there is no manifest thing except His acts, so there is no manifest thing but God: "And you did not throw when you threw, but God threw." Thus Divinity (ulūhiyya) and being-divinized (maʾlūhiyya), worship-hood (ʿābidiyya) and being-worshipped (maʿbūdiyya), prostration-hood (sājidiyya) and being-prostrated-to (masjūdiyya) became manifest in every single entity. So whoever worships his own veiledness (ḥijābiyya) and idol-making (ṣanamiyya), or worships his own imagining and caprice in [supposing] that worshipped object to be a deity, has in truth worshipped his own caprice, worshipped the false deity (ṭāghūt), and worshipped the idol-forms veiling the Godhead (lāhūt). But whoever worships God, the One, the Unique, in everything he worships — worshipping without confining God, exalted is He, to one form rather than another, nor His determination to one thing rather than another — that one is the gnostic possessed of unveiling (al-ʿārif al-kāshif), the knower possessed of description (al-ʿālim al-wāṣif); nothing veils him, no light nor shadow contains him, neither the dead nor the living restrains him, and neither guidance nor error harms him. That is the true servant, "[seated] with a Sovereign, Omnipotent," "in a seat of truth." So understand. And once you know this, know: that you have a relation (nisba) in your Lord which no other has — it is the oneness of your all-comprehensiveness (aḥadiyyat jamʿika); and in your very form He has manifested to you in every existent worshipped object, and has disclosed Himself to you in every witnessed thing, familiar and unfamiliar. Yet His manifestation through you in each case is in accordance with the locus of manifestation (maẓhar), not in accordance with Himself nor in accordance with you — so you are in accord with Him if you are in accordance with Him, and He is sufficiently in accord with you. How excellent is the relation by which He has made for you a relation to Him! So give Him what is His — which is you — and take from Him what is yours — which is your Lord. Meet your self-disclosures to yourself through Him, and His self-disclosures through you to you, out of the oneness of the all-comprehensiveness of your locus-of-manifestation-hood, with a servanthood befitting the self-disclosure; and meet with the whole of you the whole of what discloses itself. Then you will be well-mannered, sagacious, loving Him in everything, beloved; an all-comprehensive heart, turning about with Him in His affairs, intelligent; you will witness from His self-disclosures a strange witnessing, and there will be unveiled from you to Him a wondrous state. And God is the Grantor of success. The Shaykh — may God be pleased with him — said, concerning the Muhammadans:

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فقالوا في مكرهم: "لا تذرن آلهتكم ولا تذرن ودا ولا سواعا ولا يغوث ويعوق ونسرا". فإنهم إذا تركوهم، جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء، فإن للحق في كل معبود وجها، يعرفه من عرفه ويجهله من جهله﴾

أي، قال قومه في مكرهم معه، ليدعو عليهم: (لا تذرن آلهتكم) . وهي (ود) و (سواع) و (يغوث) و (يعوق) و (نسر). لأن هوية الحق ظاهرة فيهم، كما في غيرهم. فلوتركوهم، جهلوا من مظاهر الحق على قدر ما تركوا، لأن للحق في كل معبود وموجود وجها، إذ الوجه الباقي مع كل شئ يعرفه، أي، يعرف هذا المعنى من عرف الحق ومظاهره، ويجهله من جهل الحق ومظاهره

That is, his people said, in their guile against him - so as to call down [ruin] upon them: ("Do not abandon your gods") - namely (Wadd), (Suwāʿ), (Yaghūth), (Yaʿūq), and (Nasr). For the Identity of the Real is manifest in them, as in others; so had they abandoned them, they would have been ignorant of [certain] loci of manifestation of the Real to the extent of what they abandoned, since the Real has, in every worshipped and existent thing, an aspect - for the abiding Face (wajh) present with every thing is known by whoever knows it, that is, whoever knows the Real and His loci of manifestation knows this meaning, and whoever is ignorant of the Real and His loci of manifestation remains ignorant of it.

Jāmī

﴿فقالوا في مكرهم﴾

عطف على قوله ، فأجابوه مرة ثانية وتفسيرا له، أي قال بعض منهم لبعض آخر منهم حين أجابوا نوحا مكرا: ("لا تذرن آلهتكم" ) ولا تتركن عبادتهم، فأجملوا أولا ثم فصلوا لزيادة التأكيد. فقالوا

is conjoined to his statement, 'so they answered him' — a second time and an explanation of it — i.e., some of them said to others among them when they answered Noah in scheming: ("Do not abandon your gods") and do not abandon their worship — they spoke first in summary, then elaborated for further emphasis. So they said

Bālī Zāde

﴿في مكرهم﴾

مع نوح عليه السلام: (

against Noah, peace be upon him:

al-Jandī

﴿وَقالُوا لا تَذَرُنَّ آلِهَتَكُمْ وَلا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّ﴾

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

ولا تدعنّ على ما تدعون ، وتدعون لود ودّا ، ولا يسوغ لكم أن تسعوا في ترك سواع ، وإلَّا فأنتم في خسار وضياع ، ولا يغوثكم يغوث . و لا يعوقكم عن مطالبكم يعوق ، ولا يسرّكم من نسر يمن ويسر ، وإنّكم إن أجبتموه إلى ما يدعوكم إليه من التنزيه والتوحيد ، لوجب عليكم القيام بموجب التقليد ، والقعود على قواعد التقييد ، وقبول الإقبال على التوحيد ،والإعراض عن القول بالكثرة والتعديد. قال الشيخ سلام الله عليه : « فعلم العلماء بالله ما أشار إليه نوح في حق قومه من الثناء عليهم بلسان الذمّ وعلم أنّهم إنّما لم يجيبوا دعوته لما فيها من الفرقان ، والأمر قرآن لا فرقان ، ومن أقيم في القرآن لا يصغي إلى الفرقان وإن كان فيه ، فإن القرآن يتضمّن الفرقان والفرقان لا يتضمّن القرآن » . قال العبد : علم المحقّقون من هذه الإشارات أنّ قوم نوح إنّما أجابوا لما دعاهم إليه في صورة الإعراض ، وأقرّوا بعين ما ادّعاه في ملابس الإنكار بنوع من الإشارة والإيماض ، وذلك لأنّه دعاهم إلى الاستغفار وهو طلب الغفر فتظاهروا بالاستتار عن تجلَّي الواحد القهّار ، في العكوف على عبادة حجابيّات الأغيار ، ممّا يحبّق من الخشب والأحجار ، فأجابوه بالفعل إلى ما دعاهم من الاستغفار ، فأثنى عليهم نوح عليه السّلام كذلك في صورة الذمّ . كما ظهروا بصورة الجهل فيما عندهم من العلم لأنّ دعوته لهم كانت إلى التوحيد وتنزيه التجريد ، وذلك تمييز وتقييد ، وفرقان بيّن بين السادات والعبيد ، والضالّ والرشيد ، والغاوي والسديد ، والمقرّ المريد ، والمنكر المريد ، وأنّ سوس الأمر وأساسه على الجمع والقرآن ، ليس على الصدع والفرقان ، لأنّ الوحدة كما عرفت تضادّ الكثرة والتوحيد ينافي التعديد ويحادّ أمره ، والحق سبحانه وتعالى كما لا ضدّ له في ذاته . فكذلك لا ضدّ له في صفاته ، فهذه الوحدة التي تقابل الكثرة وتضادّها لا تليق أن تكون صفة ذاتية لله تعالى فيحادّها ، وأنّها زائدة على ذات الواحد الموصوف بها ، ووحدة الله عن ذاته ليست عليها زائدة ، وإلَّا كانت عارضة وزائدة ، أو تكون كثرة منها فيها عليه عائدة ، بل هو تعالى منبع الوحدة والكثرة المتقابلتين ، وعين الحقائق المتباينة والمتماثلة ، وفي الحقيقة لا وجود للاثنينيّة إلَّا في التعيّن والتعقّل ، والحقيقة الأحدية تنقلب في صور الكثرة بالتحوّل والتبدّل ، في عوالم التمثّل والتخيّل ، والتصوّر والتشكَّل . وليس الوجود إلَّا للأحد الصمد ، وأحديّته عين حقيقته فيما تجرّد وتوحّد ، وتنزّه وتفرّد ، وفيما تكثّر وتعدّد ، وتحدّد وتجدّد ، فله تعالى الإطلاق الحقيقي عن التقيّد بإحدى الجهتين ، لكونه أحدي الذات والعين بلامين ، في عين تعيّنه في الصورتين ، فالتنزيه والتشبيه طرفان ، والوحدة الذاتية والكثرة الأسمائية ذاتيّتان للذات الإلهية والعين الجمعية الأحدية ، فلها منها بها أقران ، فيرتقي الفرقان الظاهر في الكفر والإيمان ، والطاعة والعصيان بحقيقة الجمع والقرآن . ولمّا كشف الله لنوح عليه السّلام عن سرّ ما هم عليه من الجمعية السارية فيهم والأحدية النورية المستهلكة الحكم في مظاهرهم ومرائيهم ، أثنى عليهم بلسان الحقيقة ، ولغة منطق طير الطريقة ، ثناء ظاهرا بصورة الذمّ ، وسرورا مستسرّا في هيئة الهمّ والغمّ ، كما يقتضي مقامه وحالهم فيما خصّ وعمّ . ولمّا كانوا في ظاهرية الفرق ، ووقع منه الدعاء إلى الباطن الحق ، ولا يخلو الظاهر من باطن فيه قاطن ، فلم يكونوا إلَّا على جمع مستهلك فيهم كامن ، فلا بدّ لأهل الجمع المستهلكين في عبدانيّة حقائق الجمع ، الساري في صور الفرق والصدع أن لا يصغوا إلى ما يباين مشهودهم ومعهودهم من الأنباء . فلم يستطيعوا إجابة نداء الجلاء ، ودعاء الفرق والتمييز والتنزيه والاعتلاء ، فردّوا دعوته إلى التمييز والتنزيه ، والفرق بين العين والعين والحق والخلق ، لكونهم في عين الفرق مجموعين ، وعلى جمع فرق الفرق مجمعين ، وعن إجابة دعاء تمييز التنزيه وعن سمع نداء التجريد والتوحيد معزولين ، فافهم . قال الشيخ سلام الله عليه

Do not call out concerning what you invoke, for you call upon Wadd with love (wudd); and it is not fitting for you to strive to abandon Suwāʿ, otherwise you are in loss and ruin; Yaghūth will not aid you (yughīthukum); Yaʿūq will not hinder you (yaʿūqukum) from your pursuits; and Nasr will not please you (yasurrukum) with good fortune (yumn) and ease (yusr). Indeed, were you to answer him in what he calls you to of declaring incomparability (tanzīh) and affirming unity (tawḥīd), it would be incumbent upon you to act according to the requirement of imitation (taqlīd), to remain seated upon the foundations of restriction (taqyīd), to accept turning toward unity (tawḥīd), and to turn away from asserting multiplicity and enumeration. The Shaykh, peace of God be upon him, said: 'Those who know God (al-ʿulamāʾ bi-Llāh) understood what Noah indicated concerning his people—namely, praise of them in the language of blame—and knew that they did not answer his call only because of the discrimination (furqān) it contained, whereas the true affair is combination (qurʾān), not discrimination (furqān). Whoever is established in combination (qurʾān) does not attend to discrimination (furqān), even though it be contained within it, for combination (qurʾān) comprises discrimination (furqān), while discrimination (furqān) does not comprise combination (qurʾān).' The servant said: The verifiers (muḥaqqiqūn) understood from these indications that the people of Noah did indeed answer what he called them to—but in the form of aversion (iʿrāḍ)—and acknowledged the very reality of what he claimed, clothed in denial, by way of allusion and flashing hints. That is because he called them to seek forgiveness (istighfār), which is a request for covering (ghafr); so they displayed concealment from the self-disclosure (tajallī) of the One, the Overwhelming (al-Qahhār), by persisting in the worship of the veiling realities of otherness (aghyār), fashioned from wood and stones. Thus they answered him in deed regarding what he called them to of seeking-forgiveness/concealment, and Noah, peace be upon him, likewise praised them in the form of blame—just as they appeared in the form of ignorance regarding the knowledge they in fact possessed. For his call to them was to unity (tawḥīd) and the incomparability of abstraction (tajrīd), and that entails differentiation and restriction, a clear discrimination (furqān) between masters and slaves, the astray and the rightly-guided, the misguided and the upright, the acknowledging seeker (murīd) and the denying seeker (murīd). And [they knew] that the root and foundation of the matter rests upon gathering (jamʿ) and combination (qurʾān), not upon splitting and discrimination (furqān). For oneness (waḥda), as you know, is contrary to multiplicity, and affirming unity (tawḥīd) negates enumeration and stands opposed to its rule. Yet the Real, glory and exaltation be His, just as He has no contrary in His Essence, likewise has no contrary in His attributes. So this oneness which stands opposed to and contrary to multiplicity is not fitting to be reckoned an essential attribute of God, exalted is He, such that it would oppose multiplicity as its counter—for then it would be additional to the essence of the One qualified by it. But God's oneness, proceeding from His very Essence, is not additional to it; otherwise it would be accidental and superadded, or a multiplicity would arise from it and revert upon Him therein. Rather, He, exalted is He, is the very source of the two mutually opposed realities, oneness and multiplicity, and the very identity (ʿayn) of the disparate and the similar realities. In truth, duality has no existence except in entification (taʿayyun) and conceptualization; the unitary reality (al-ḥaqīqa al-aḥadiyya) transmutes into the forms of multiplicity through transformation and change, within the worlds of representation, imagination, conception, and configuration. Existence belongs to none but the One, the Everlasting Refuge (al-Aḥad al-Ṣamad), and His oneness (aḥadiyya) is the very reality of Him both insofar as He is abstracted, unified, declared incomparable, and singular, and insofar as He is multiplied, enumerated, delimited, and renewed. His, exalted is He, is the true absoluteness (iṭlāq) free from restriction to either side, since He is one in Essence and Identity without falsehood (mayn), even amid His very entification (taʿayyun) within the two forms. Thus incomparability (tanzīh) and similarity (tashbīh) are two extremes, while essential oneness and nominal (asmāʾī) multiplicity are both essential to the Divine Essence and to the unitary, all-comprehensive identity (al-ʿayn al-jamʿiyya al-aḥadiyya); from it, by it, it has counterparts. Thus the discrimination (furqān) manifest in disbelief and faith, obedience and disobedience, ascends by the reality of gathering (jamʿ) and combination (qurʾān). And when God unveiled to Noah, peace be upon him, the secret of what his people were upon—the all-comprehensive unity (jamʿiyya) pervading them and the luminous oneness (aḥadiyya nūriyya) whose ruling authority is absorbed within their loci of manifestation and their mirrors—he praised them with the tongue of reality and the language of the speech of the bird of the [spiritual] path: praise outwardly in the guise of blame, and joy concealed in the form of worry and grief, as required by his station and their state, both particular and general. And since they were [fixed] in the outwardness of differentiation (farq), while his call proceeded toward the true inward (al-bāṭin al-ḥaqq)—and the outward is never devoid of an inward dwelling within it—they were only upon a gathering (jamʿ) absorbed and latent within them. It is therefore necessary that the people of gathering, annihilated in the servanthood (ʿabdāniyya) of the realities of gathering pervading the forms of differentiation and separation, not heed what diverges from what they witness and are accustomed to of tidings. So they were unable to answer the call to clarification (jalāʾ) and the summons to differentiation, distinction, incomparability, and elevation; hence they rejected his call to distinction and incomparability and to the differentiation between entity and entity, the Real and creation—since they were, in the very locus of differentiation, gathered together, and united upon a gathering that transcends the differentiation of differentiation, while removed from answering the call to the distinction of incomparability and from hearing the summons to abstraction and unification. So understand. The Shaykh, peace of God be upon him, said:

al-Tilimsānī

﴿لا تذرن آلهتكم ولا تذرن ودا ولا سواعا ولا يغوث ويعوق ونسرا﴾

(نوح: 23). فكأنه قال: إنهم صرحوا بما كانوا واخفوه حالة مكرهم في الاجابة إذ قد علموا أن هذه التي دعوها آلهة هي عندهم ظهورات إلهية. والشيخ، رضي الله عنه، يسمى الظهورات مظاهر ومجالي ، بناء على قاعدته من الإقرار بالأعيان الثابتة . وأما عنده من يري أن الشيء قبل وجوده ليس له ذات وهو صاحب المواقف، رضي الله عنه، وغيره من الأكابر، فهو يسميها ظهورات وبين القولين بون عظيم لمن يعرف غوره. والجميع حق لعود مقاصدهم في التوحيد إلى ما لا يختلف، فتعود إلى معنى ما أشار إليه، رضي الله عنه، من أن هذه التي عددوها إنما هي مظاهر للحق تعالى، فلا جرم قالوا: "لا تذرن آلهتكم". قال: لأنهم لو تركوها لجهلوا من الحق تعالى على قدر ما تركوه منها. قال وقد يكون مجهولا في أكثر المحمديين مع تلاوتهم قوله تعالى: «وقضى ربك ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه" (الإسراء: 23) . والقضاء حكم فقد حكم أن لا تعبد سواه ، فما عبد أحد غيره تعالي غيرة منه ذاتية، وبين ذلك بقوله: وإن التفريق والكثرة کالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة و كالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية ثم أخذ يبين اعتبارات القائلين بعبادة الأصنام وجعل منهم الأعلى والأدنى التفاوت عقولهم في الاعتبارات . فقال: فالأدنى وهو الضعيف النظر من تخيل في الأصنام الألوهة، قال ولولا هذه التخيل ما أقدم على عبادة الحجر ونحوه مع حقارة الحجر عنده ومن أجل الحقارة ورد في الكتاب العزيز توبيخا لهم بما تقرر عندهم أنهم غالطون "خأطئون". وهو قوله تعالى: "قل سموهم" فإنهم إذا سموهم قالوا حجر أو شجر أو كوكب، فإنهم عبدوا الأصنام المتخذة من الحجارة والأصنام المتخذة من الخشب والأصنام التي هي کواکب، فقد عبدوا هذه الأنواع فطالبهم الرسول بأن يسموهم ليحصل لهم الإفحام لكن عذرهم أنهم تخيلوا أنهم آلهة لا حجارة وخشب وكواكب. فلو قيل لهم في صنم وأحد مثلا: من عبدتم؟ لقالوا: آلها !. ولا كانوا يقولون الله ولا الإله إذ ليسوا جاهلين بمرتبة معبودهم الحق الذي هو الله تعالى أو الإله الحق وهو الله تعالی ثم أخذ يبين حال من هو أعلى مقاما من هؤلاء الذين تخيلوا أن هذه الأصنام آلهة. فقال: والأعلى ما تخیل وهم الذين هم أفضل عقلا من أولئك قال فإنهم ما تخيلوا بل قالوا: هو مجلي " إلهي ينبغي تعظيمه فما اقتصروا على ما اقتصروا عليه أولئك الذين سماهم أدنى. ثم أخذ يشرح حال هذا الأدنى بقوله: فالأدنى صاحب التخيل لما لم تعبد بالأصنام أنها الله تعالی لكن اعتقد أنها آلهة . فكأن سائلا سأل فقال إذا لم تعتقد أنها الله تعالى فلأي شيء تعبدها؟ فكان جواب السؤال المقدر أن يقول

(Nūḥ: 23). It is as if he said: they declared openly what they had been concealing in the state of their scheming in [outward] compliance, since they knew that these things they invoked as gods were, in their view, divine manifestations (ẓuhūrāt). The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, calls these manifestations "loci of manifestation" (maẓāhir) and "theophanies" (majālī), based on his principle of affirming the fixed entities (al-aʿyān al-thābita). But as for one who holds that a thing, before its existence, has no essence (dhāt) — such as the author of al-Mawāqif, may God be pleased with him, and other great masters — he calls them "manifestations" (ẓuhūrāt). Between the two positions there is a vast gulf for one who knows its depth. Yet all of it is true, since their intentions, in [the doctrine of] unity (tawḥīd), return to that which does not differ — returning to the meaning to which he, may God be pleased with him, alluded: that these things they enumerated are but loci of manifestation (maẓāhir) for the Real, Exalted is He. Hence it necessarily follows that they said: "Do not abandon your gods." He said: for had they abandoned them, they would have remained ignorant of the Real, Exalted is He, to the very degree that they abandoned them. He said: and this may remain unknown to most of the Muhammadans despite their reciting His saying, Exalted is He: "And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him" (al-Isrāʾ: 23). The decree (qaḍāʾ) is a judgment (ḥukm), and He has judged that none be worshipped save Him; so none worships other than Him, Exalted is He, save out of an essential jealousy (ghayra dhātiyya) belonging to Him. He clarified this by his statement: separation and multiplicity are like the bodily organs in the sensory form, and like the spiritual faculties in the spiritual form. Then he began to clarify the considerations of those who professed the worship of idols, ranking among them a higher and a lower [class] according to the disparity of their intellects in these considerations. He said: the lower one — that is, the one weak in discernment — is he who imagined divinity (al-ulūhiyya) to reside in the idols. He said: were it not for this imagining, he would not have proceeded to worship stone and the like, despite the contemptibility of stone in his own estimation. And because of this contemptibility, there came in the Mighty Book a rebuke to them for that which was established of them, namely that they were mistaken, "erring" — that is, His saying, Exalted is He: "Say, name them" — for were they to name them, they would say "a stone," or "a tree," or "a star," since they worshipped idols fashioned from stone, idols fashioned from wood, and idols that were stars — they worshipped these kinds. So the Messenger demanded that they name them, so that they might be confounded; but their excuse was that they imagined them to be gods, not stones, wood, and stars. For if it were said to them concerning some idol, for instance: "Whom do you worship?" they would say: "A god!" — they would not say "Allah," nor "the deity" (al-ilāh), since they were not ignorant of the rank of their true Object of worship, who is Allah, Exalted is He, or the true deity, who is Allah, Exalted is He. Then he began to clarify the state of one whose station is higher than those who imagined these idols to be gods. He said: the higher one did not [merely] imagine, for these are they who are superior in intellect to the former; he said: they did not imagine, but rather said: "It is a divine locus of self-disclosure (mujallā ilāhī) deserving veneration" — so they did not restrict themselves to what those he termed "lower" restricted themselves to. Then he began to explain the state of this "lower" one, saying: the lower one, the possessor of imagination, is he who did not worship the idols [believing] that they are Allah, Exalted is He, but rather believed that they are gods. As if a questioner asked: if you do not believe them to be Allah, Exalted is He, then for what reason do you worship them? — the answer to this presumed question would be that he says—

Bālī Zāde

﴿وَقَالُوا لَا تَذَرُنَّ آلِهَتَكُمْ وَلَا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّا وَلَا سُوَاعًا وَلَا يَغُوثَ وَيَعُوقَ وَنَسْرًا (23)﴾

) [نوح: 23] كل ذلك أسماء الأصنام والآلهة شاملة لها . وإنما قالوا ذلك

[Noah: 23] — all these are names of idols and gods, comprehensive of them. They said this

al-Qāshānī

﴿ولا تَذَرُنَّ وَدًّا ولا سُواعاً ولا يَغُوثَ ويَعُوقَ ونَسْراً﴾

فإنهم إذا تركوهم ، فقد تركوا الحق وجهلوه بقدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء ، فإن للحق في كل معبود وجها يعرفه من يعرفه ويجهله من يجهله ، فهم مقرون بما يدعو الداعي إليه . وفي صورة الإنكار مجيبون دعوته في صورة الرد من حيث لا يشعرون ، فإن الدعوة فرقان وهم في القرآن ، فكأنهم مع كفرهم يقولون قد أتينا الله ونحن معه فإن المدعو معه عين المدعو إليه في شهود المكاشف وغيره في اعتقاد غير المكاشف . فعندهم أنه لو أجابوه ظاهرا لتركوا الحق إلى الباطل فلذلك كان مكرهم أكبر من مكره ، فقوله ادعوا إلى الله عين المكر على بصيرة أي على علم بأن الدعوة منه إليه

For if they were to abandon them, they would thereby abandon the Real and remain ignorant of Him to the extent that they abandoned these [idols]; for the Real has, in every worshipped object, an aspect known by whoever knows it and unknown by whoever is ignorant of it. So they are [in truth] acknowledging that to which the caller calls; and in the very form of their denial they are answering his call in the form of refusal, without being aware of it — for the call belongs to the [realm of] discrimination (furqān), while they are [immersed] in the [realm of] the Qurʾān [i.e., undifferentiated gathering]. It is as though they, despite their unbelief, were saying: "We have indeed come to God, and we are [already] with Him" — for the one called, being with Him, is identical with the one called to, in the witnessing of the possessor of unveiling (mukāshif), though other than it in the belief of one lacking unveiling. In their view, had they answered outwardly, they would have abandoned the Real for the unreal (bāṭil); hence their scheming was greater than his scheming. Thus his saying "call to God" is itself the very scheming "upon clear insight" — that is, upon knowledge that the call proceeds from Him to Him

Jāmī

﴿"ولا تذرن ودا ولا سواعا ولا يغوث ويعوق ونسرا" [نوح: 23]﴾

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

وإنما نهوا عن ترك هؤلاء المعبودين

] — and they only forbade the abandonment of these objects of worship

al-Tilimsānī

﴿فإنهم إذا تركوهم جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء. فإن للحق في كل معبود وجها يعرفه من عرفه ويجهله من جهله. في المحمديين:﴾

وقضى ربك ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه

. For the Real has, in every object of worship, an aspect (wajh) which he who knows [it] knows, and he who is ignorant [of it] is ignorant of. Among the Muhammadans [it is said]:] 'And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him' —

Ibn Turka

﴿فإنّهم إذا تركوهم جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء ، فإنّ للحقّ في كل معبود وجها يعرفه من عرفه ويجهله من جهله﴾

وأمّا محمّد صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم لما أطلق الدعوة إطلاق جمع بضمّ القيد إليها ، ظهر في قومه الجمعيّة الإطلاقيّة ، وسرت في سائر أحكامه ، ولذلك ترى ما يوازي تلك الوصيّة

; for the Real has, in every worshipped object, an aspect known by whoever knows it and unknown by whoever is ignorant of it] As for Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace—when he made the call unrestricted in the sense of comprehensiveness, by attaching the restriction (qayd) to it, the comprehensiveness of unrestrictedness appeared in his people and pervaded all his other rulings. This is why you see what corresponds to that counsel

Jāmī

﴿فإنهم إذا تركوهم﴾

أي هؤلاء المعبودين

i.e., these objects of worship

Bālī Zāde

﴿فإنهم إذا تركوهم جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء﴾

وإنما لزمهم الجهل من هذا الترك لأنهم حصروا التقريب إلى الله والعلم به في الأصنام لذلك قالوا

They fell necessarily into ignorance through this abandonment because they had confined access to God and knowledge of Him to the idols. Hence they said:

Jāmī

﴿جهلوا من الحق على قدر ما تركوا من هؤلاء﴾

المعبودين. فقوله : من هؤلاء بيان لما تركوا

] — his statement 'these' clarifies what they abandoned

Jāmī

﴿فإن للحق … في كل معبود﴾

منهم (وجها خاص يعرفه ) ، أي ذلك الوجه بل الحق من حيث ذلك الوجه

among them (a specific aspect, known) — i.e., that aspect, or rather the Real Himself in respect of that aspect,

Bālī Zāde

﴿فإن للحق في كل معبود وجها﴾

و هو اسم جزئي من أسماء الله داخل تحت حيطة الاسم الجامع بربه ذلك المعبود (يعرفه) أي وجه الحق

— that is, a particular Name among God's Names, falling under the encompassment of the comprehensive Name that is the Lord of that worshipped object — (which is known) that is, the face of the Real is known

Words 36–37 · 2 of 7

مَنْ عَرَفَهُ

Jāmī

﴿من عرفه﴾

أي ذلك المعبود (ويجهله) ، أي ذلك الجهل بل الحق من ذلك الوجه

i.e., that object of worship (and unknown) — i.e., that ignorance, or rather the Real Himself in respect of that aspect,

Bālī Zāde

﴿من عرفه﴾

أي الحق وهو مرتبة الكاملين . (ويجهله) أي الوجه

that is, [who knows] the Real — and this is the station of the perfect ones. (And is unknown) that is, the face [is unknown]

Words 39–40 · 2 of 7

مَنْ جَهِلَهُ

Jāmī

﴿من جهله﴾

أي ذلك المعبود فمن ترك هؤلاء قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

i.e., that object of worship. So whoever abandoned these [deities]... The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Bālī Zāde

﴿من جهله﴾

أي الحق وهم لا يعرفون الحق ولا الوجه لكنهم قالوا ذلك عن جعل مكرا معه . وإنما قال في كل معبود ولم يقل في كل موجود مع أن وجه الحق لا يختص بالمعبود إشارة إلى أن كل موجود معبود إما بشخصه أو بنوعه أو بجنسه . فما جاءت في حقهم الدعية من عبادة الأرباب الجزئية إلى الاسم الجامع. وجاء ذلك

that is, [does not know] the Real. They knew neither the Real nor the face, but said this by way of contrivance in guile against him. He said 'in every object of worship' and not 'in every existent' — even though the face of the Real is not restricted to what is worshipped — to indicate that every existent is worshipped, whether in its individual self, its species, or its genus. Thus the call in their case did not extend from the worship of the particular lords to the comprehensive Name. That instead came

al-Qayṣarī

﴿في المحمديين: "وقضى ربك ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه". أي، حكم﴾

وجاء في حق المحمديين

And it has come with regard to the Muhammadans

Ibn Turka

﴿في المحمّديين "وَقَضى رَبُّكَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاه ُ " [ 17 / 23 ] أي حكم﴾

بما مؤدّاه تلك الجمعيّة التي لا يشذّ منها شيء من تلك الصور أصلا ، فأظهر تفرقة التشبيه في صورة جمعيّة التنزيه ، يعني ضمير الغائب في الوصيّة ، كما أظهر جمعيّة التنزيه في صورة تفرقة التشبيه في الدعوة ، يعني الدعوة المقيدة . وقضى ربك ألَّا تعبدوا إلا إيّاه ثمّ إذا تقرّر أنّ المعبود في أيّ صورة كان إنّما هو الحقّ

, i.e., He decreed] something whose import is that comprehensiveness from which none of those forms is excluded at all. Thus he manifested the differentiation of similarity (tashbīh) in the form of the comprehensiveness of incomparability (tanzīh)—meaning the pronoun of the absent one in the counsel—just as he manifested the comprehensiveness of incomparability in the form of the differentiation of similarity in the call—meaning the restricted call. "And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him." Then, once it is established that the worshipped object, in whatever form it may be, is only the Real

Bālī Zāde

﴿في المحمديين "وقضى ربك"﴾

[الإسراء: 23] . فإن رب محمد هو الاسم الجامع

[al-Isrāʾ: 23]. For Muhammad's Lord is the comprehensive Name,

al-Jandī

﴿وَقَضى رَبُّكَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاه ُ﴾

أي حكم فالعالم يعلم من عبد ؟ وفي أيّ صورة ظهر حتى عبد ؟ وأنّ التفريق والكثرة في الأعضاء كالصورة المحسوسة والقوى المعنويّة في الصورة الروحانيّة ، فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود . قال العبد : جلّ جناب المعبود الحقّ أن يعبد سواه في كلّ معبود ، أو يوجد إلَّا إيّاه في كل موجود ، لأنّ الحقيقة تقتضي لذاتها أن تتفرّد بالوجود على الإطلاق ، وتقتضي بحقيقتها المعبودية بالاستحقاق ، فحيث وجدت الإلهة والعبادة ، فهي له والحقّ لها . ولكنّ الكثرة المعهودة والتفرقة المشهودة تحجب العقول المنصبغة بأحكام العرف والعادة عن شهود الوجود الحقّ الواحد الأحد في الغيب والشهادة ، وتكون أحديّته الخصيصة بذاته المطلقة أحدية جمع لا تنافيها الكثرة ، والسلطان هو الواحد الحقّ المستوي ، والوحدة والإطلاق والتقيّد والكثرة هي المظاهر والعروش والأسرّة . وكما أنّ صورتك المحسوسة واحدة ، لا شكّ في وحدتها جملة واحدة ، ولا تقدح في أحدية جملتك كثرة الأعضاء من حيث الاعتبار النسبي والتعقّل الإضافي المعهود ، لا في الوجود ، ولا في الأمر ، وليست في نفس الأمر كثرة إلَّا بالاعتبار ، عند ذوي العقول الرجيحة والاستبصار. وكذلك صورتك الروحانية ولطيفتك الإنسانية جوهرة واحدة وحدة حقيقية ما فيها ما ينافيها ، ومع ذلك فوحدتها أحدية جمع أرواح وقوى كثيرة ، ولا تقدح كثرة قواها في أحدية هذه الجوهرة اللطيفة النورانية ،. فكذلك لا تقدح كثرة مظاهر الأسماء وهم الأرباب في أحدية جمع الإله الربّ المعبود في الكلّ عند ذوي الألباب ، فهو المعبود في كل ما عبد ، والعابد في كل من عبد ، فأقرّ وما عند ، وهو الجاحد العاند فيمن جحد وعند ، فالكلّ منه وفيه وله ، وبه ومنه له ، وله فتنبّه أيّها الأنبل الأنبه ، فأنت المؤمّل المكمّل ، والمعروف المعرّف والمجهول المجهّل. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : « فالأدنى من تخيّل فيه الألوهيّة ، فلو لا هذا التخيّل ما عبد الحجر ولا غيره . ولهذا قال

i.e., He has ordained [this]. Does the cosmos know whom it worshipped? And in what form did He manifest that He was worshipped? And [know] that differentiation and multiplicity among the organs are like the sensory form, while the immaterial faculties are like the spiritual form — so none but God was worshipped in every object of worship. The servant [the author] said: too exalted is the precinct of the True Object of Worship for other than Him to be worshipped in any object of worship, or for anything but Him to exist in any existent, since the [divine] Reality necessitates by its very Essence that it alone possess Existence absolutely, and necessitates by its reality the [exclusive] entitlement to being worshipped by right. So wherever divinity and worship are found, they belong to Him, and the Real belongs to them. But the customary multiplicity and the witnessed differentiation veil intellects colored by the judgments of convention and habit from witnessing the one true Existence, the One, the Unique, in both the Unseen and the visible; and His Oneness, peculiar to His absolute Essence, is a Oneness-of-Multiplicity (aḥadiyyat jamʿ) which multiplicity does not contradict. The [true] Sovereign is the One Real who is firmly established, while unity, absoluteness, restriction, and multiplicity are but loci of manifestation, thrones, and seats. Just as your sensory form is one — its oneness as a totality being beyond doubt — nor does the multiplicity of its organs impugn the oneness of your totality, from the standpoint of relational consideration and customary relative conceptualization — neither in existence nor in [divine] Command; there is, in the reality of the matter, no multiplicity except by way of consideration, according to those of sound intellect and insight. Likewise your spiritual form and human subtle reality (laṭīfa) is a single substance, a true unity, containing nothing to contradict it; yet its unity is a Oneness-of-Multiplicity of many spirits and faculties, and the multiplicity of its faculties does not impugn the oneness of this subtle, luminous substance. So too the multiplicity of the loci of manifestation of the Names — which are the [various] lords — does not impugn the Oneness-of-Multiplicity of the [one] God, the Lord worshipped in all things, according to those possessed of understanding. For He is the Worshipped in everything worshipped, and the Worshipper in everyone who worships; so whoever acknowledges [this] is not deprived, while the denier and the obstinate one is [found] among those who deny and are obstinate. So all is from Him, in Him, and for Him, by Him, from Him, and for Him — so take heed, O most noble, most alert one! For you are the one hoped for and perfected, the known made known, and the unknown made unknown. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said: 'The lowest is he who imagines divinity in it; were it not for this imagining, the stone or anything else would not have been worshipped. For this reason He said,'

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وقضى ربك ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه﴾

أي، حكم أزلا رب محمد، صلى الله عليه وسلم، وهو الاسم (الله) الجامع، أن لا تعبدوا إلا الله الجامع للأرباب، ولا تعبدوا الأرباب المتفرقة

That is, the Lord of Muḥammad, God bless him and grant him peace, decreed from eternity - and He is the all-comprehensive Name (Allāh) - that you worship none but the all-comprehensive God (Allāh) who comprehends all the [particular] lords, and that you not worship the separate lords.

Jāmī

﴿"ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه" أي حكم﴾

وقدر في الأزل فلم يكن لله سبحانه في كل معبود وجه خاص يعيد هذا المعبود لأجله لم يصح هذا الحصر ولا يطابق هذا الحكم الواقع، فإنه قد تعبد آلهة متكثرة متعددة في الواقع

and decreed in pre-eternity. For if the Real, Glory be to Him, did not have in every worshiped thing a specific aspect (wajh) for the sake of which this worshiped thing was worshiped, this restriction (ḥaṣr) would not be valid, nor would this decree correspond to what actually occurs — for indeed multiple and numerous deities have in fact been worshiped

Bālī Zāde

﴿"ألا تعبدوا إلا إياه"﴾

[الإسراء: 23] . أي حكم بالعلم الأزلي أن العبادة في أي معبود ?انت لا يكون إلا إياه إلى غيره في الحقيقة . وإن كان إلى غيره صورة فكانت العبادة في صورة الأصنام إلى الله تعالى حقيقة وإلى الأصنام صورة بالنص الإلهي. لكن مثل هذه العبادة غير مقبولة عند الله بالنص الإلهي كما إن العبادة لا تكون إلا لوجه الله تعالى بالنص "فأينما تولوا فثم وجه الله" البقرة : 115. لكن الصلاة لا يجوز بالنص إلا بالتولي إلى الكعبة فما جاء نوح عليه السلام بمثل هذا الحكم حتى لا يعبد قرمه الأسماء الجزئية فإن ربوبية الرب بحسب مربوبه (فالعالم بالله) أي بالاسم الجامع

[al-Isrāʾ: 23], that is, He decreed, through eternal knowledge, that worship, in whatever object it may be directed toward, is in reality directed to none but Him — even if it be, in form, directed toward another. Thus worship, in the form of idols, is in reality directed to God Most High, and in form to the idols, by divine text. But such worship is unacceptable to God by divine text, just as worship must be for the Face of God Most High alone, by the text 'Wherever you turn, there is the Face of God' (al-Baqara: 115). Yet the prayer is not permitted, by the text, except by turning toward the Kaʿba. Noah, peace be upon him, did not bring such a ruling, so that his people would not worship the particular Names, for the lordship of a lord is in accordance with what it lords over. (So one who knows God), that is, [who knows] the comprehensive Name,

al-Qāshānī

﴿فالعالم يعلم من عبد وفي أيّ صورة ظهر حتى عبد ، وإن التفريق والكثرة كالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة وكالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية ،فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود فالأدنى﴾

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

قال رضي الله عنه

he, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فالعالم يعلم من عبد، وفي أي صورة ظهر حتى عبد، وأن التفريق والكثرة كالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة، وكالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية﴾

فالعالم بالله ومظاهره يعلم أن المعبود هو الحق في أي صورة كانت، سواء كانت حسية كالأصنام، أو خيالية كالجن، أو عقلية كالملائكة. ويعلم أن التفريق والكثرة مظاهر لأسمائه وصفاته، وهي كالأعضاء في الصورة الإنسانية: فإن العين مظهر للإبصار، والأذن للسمع، والأنف للشم، واليد للبطش، وكالقوى الروحانية، كالعقل والوهم والذاكرة والحافظة والمفكرة والمتخيلة، فإنها كلها مظاهر لصفات الروح

The knower of God and His manifestations knows that the one worshipped is the Real in whatever form it may be, whether sensory like idols, or imaginal like jinn, or intelligible like angels. And he knows that differentiation and multiplicity are manifestations of His names and attributes, and they are like the organs in the human form: for the eye is a manifestation of sight, the ear of hearing, the nose of smell, the hand of grasping; and like the spiritual faculties, such as intellect, estimation, memory, retention, reflection, and imagination, for they are all manifestations of the attributes of the spirit.

Ibn Turka

﴿فالعالم يعلم من عبد﴾

في تلك الصور

in those forms

Jāmī

﴿فالعالم يعلم من﴾

الذي (عبد) في صور المعبودين

was worshiped in the forms of the worshiped objects

Bālī Zāde

﴿يعلم من عبد … وفي أي صورة ظهر حتی عبد﴾

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

فإنه يرى الوجه المطلق أي الاسم الجامع في الوجه الخاص يعبده فيه. وأما الجاهل فعبادته عن جهله ولا يعلم أي شيء يعيده (و) يعلم (أن التفريق والكثرة) الأسمائية بالنسبة إلى الاسم الجامع وهو قوله : "قل ادعوا الله أو ادعوا الرحمن أيا ما تدعوا فله الأسماء الحسنى " [الإسراء: 110]

For he sees the absolute face, that is, the comprehensive Name, in the particular face he worships it in. As for the ignorant one, his worship stems from his ignorance and he does not know what he worships. (And) he knows (that the differentiation and multiplicity) of the Names, relative to the comprehensive Name, is as His saying: 'Say: Call upon God, or call upon the All-Merciful; whichever you call upon, to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names' [al-Isrāʾ: 110]

Ibn Turka

﴿وفي أيّ صورة ظهر حتّى عبد﴾

فإنّ الصور مختلفة في الحيطة والكمال وقبول ظهور الوحدة الجمعيّة وعدمه

For the forms differ in their comprehensiveness (ḥayṭa) and perfection and in their receptivity, or lack thereof, to the manifestation of the comprehensive unity

Jāmī

﴿وفي أي صورة ظهر حتى عبد﴾

فإنه لم يعبد في كل صورة

— for he was not worshiped in every form

Ibn Turka

﴿وأنّ التفريق والكثرة﴾

في أحديّة الجمعيّة الإلهيّة

within the oneness of the divine comprehensiveness

Jāmī

﴿وأن التفريق والكثرة﴾

في صور المعبودين (كالأعضاء) ، أي كتفريق الأعضاء وكثرتها مثل اليد، والرجل والعين والأذن والأنف وغيره (في الصور المحسوسة) الإنسانية (وكالقوی) ، أي كتفريق القوى (المعنوية مثل العقل والوهم والذاكرة والحافظة والمفكرة والمتخيلة وغيرها في الصورة الروحانية الإنسانية أيضا. فكما أن كثرة الأعضاء والقوى لا تقدح في وحدة الحقيقة الإنسانية كذلك كثرة الصور والمظاهر لا يقدح في وحدة المعبود الحق

in the forms of the worshiped objects (are like the bodily members), i.e., like the differentiation and multiplicity of the members such as the hand, foot, eye, ear, nose, and others (in the sensory) human (forms, and like the faculties), i.e., like the differentiation of the (intelligible) faculties such as reason, imagination (wahm), memory, retention, cogitation, imagination (mutakhayyila), and others, in the human spiritual form as well. Just as the multiplicity of members and faculties does not impugn the unity of the human reality, likewise the multiplicity of forms and loci of manifestation does not impugn the unity of the true Worshiped [Object].

Ibn Turka

﴿كالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة﴾

من الشخص الواحد ، فإنّ له صورة محسوسة ظاهرة ومعنويّة باطنة ، كلّ منهما ذات كثرة ، ولا يقدح ذلك في وحدة الشخص بوجه ، على تخالف مراتب تلك الكثرة في كلّ من تينك الصورتين . فإنّ الأعضاء المحسوسة : منها ما هي بمنزلة الرؤساء في إنفاذ الأمر ، ومنها ما هي بمنزلة الخدّام في إعداد ما ينبغي لها ، ومنها ما هي بمنزلة الأساس والأعمدة ، ومنها ما هي بمنزلة الزوائد والفضلات

of a single person; for he has a sensible, manifest form and an intelligible, nonmanifest form, each of which possesses multiplicity, yet this does not detract in any way from the unity of the person, notwithstanding the disparity of the ranks of that multiplicity in each of those two forms. For among the sensible members there are those that stand as leaders in executing command, and those that stand as servants preparing what is required of them, and those that stand as foundation and pillars, and those that stand as excess and superfluity

Bālī Zāde

﴿كالأعضاء في الصورة المحسوسة وكالقوى المعنوية في الصورة الروحانية﴾

يعني أن جميع الأسماء والصفات أمور مجتمعة في حضرة الذات الإلهية ?إجتماع أجزائنا في صورنا المحسوسة و كاجتماع قوى أرواحنا في صورنا من العقل والوهم والمفكرة وغير ذلك فمن شاهد حضرة الجمع فقد شاهد فيها جميع الأسماء مجتمعة وعبد جميعها من حيث الجمعية لا من حيث الانفراد . فإنه لا يصلح أن يكون معبودة فإن كان كثرة الأسماء بالنسبة إلى حضرة الجمع متصلة كأعضائنا لا أمورا منفصلة

That is, all the Names and Attributes are matters gathered in the Presence of the Divine Essence, like the gathering of our members in our sensible forms, and like the gathering of the faculties of our spirits — intellect, imagination, cogitative faculty, and so on — in our [inner] form. Whoever witnesses the Presence of the All-Gathering (jamʿ) has witnessed within it all the Names gathered together, and worships all of them from the standpoint of their being gathered, not from the standpoint of separation — for it is not fitting that [a Name taken separately] be an object of worship. If the multiplicity of the Names, relative to the Presence of gathering, is connected as our organs are, not [as] separate matters,

Ibn Turka

﴿وكالقوى المعنويّة في الصورة الروحانيّة﴾

فإنّ منها ما هو رئيس الكلّ ، إنّما يقوم أمر الوحدة الشخصيّة به ، ولا يشذّ من محيط حكمه شيء منها وهو القلب فإنّ له أمر أحديّة جمع الأعضاء كلَّها ، بحيث لا يمكن بقاء شيء منها إلَّا بوصول المدد الوجودي منه إليه ، ولا ينتهض أحد من الجوارح لإقامة العبادة إلَّا بأمره - أيّة عبادة كانت ، لأيّ معبود كان فهو المعبود حقيقة

For among them is one that is leader of them all, by which the affair of personal unity is sustained, and none of them escapes the compass of its rule—namely the heart. For it holds the office of the oneness that comprehends all the members, such that none of them can persist except through the arrival to it of the existential support (madad) proceeding from the heart, nor can any organ rise up to perform worship except by its command—whatever the worship may be, and to whatever worshipped object it may be directed—so it is the one truly worshipped

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود﴾

إذ لا غير في الوجود

since there is no "other" in existence.

Ibn Turka

﴿فما عبد غير الله في كلّ معبود﴾

إلَّا أنّ العبّاد على اختلاف طبقاتهم فرقتان : منهم من جاوز أسافل الصور ومهابط كثائفها وما وصل إلى أعالي المعاني ومطالع لطائفها ، فهم المسخّرون تحت سلطان الخيال ، ممتثلين أوامره ، عابدين إيّاه ، فمعبودهم لا يكون إلَّا متعيّنا بالتعيّن التقابلي ، وواحدا بالوحدة المقابلة للكثرة ضرورة ، سواء كان ذلك من الأصنام الصوريّة المحسوسة ، أو العقائد المعنويّة المعقولة . ومنهم من جاوز ذلك ووصل إلى أعالي المعاني ، وبلغ المرتبة الجمعيّة القلبيّة ، وتحقّق بأحديّة جمعيّتها فمعبودهم لا يكون إلَّا المتعيّن بالتعيّن الإحاطيّ ، والواحد بالوحدة الإطلاقيّة الجمعيّة ، سواء كان قبلة توجّهه الصورة المحسوسة أو المعاني والهيئات المعنويّة المعقولة . وأشار إليهما بقوله رضي الله عنه

except that worshippers, according to their differing ranks, fall into two groups: those who did not pass beyond the lowest of the forms and the descents of their densities, and did not reach the highest of the meanings and the risings of their subtleties—these are the ones subjugated beneath the dominion of the imagination, obeying its commands, worshipping it; so their worshipped object cannot but be entified by the entification of opposition, and one by the unity that necessarily stands opposed to multiplicity, whether that be among the sensible, formal idols or the intelligible, meaningful beliefs. And there are those who passed beyond that and reached the highest of meanings and attained the comprehensive rank of the heart, and became realized in the oneness of its comprehensiveness—so their worshipped object can only be that which is entified by the encompassing entification, and the One by the unrestricted, comprehensive unity, whether the qibla of their orientation be the sensible form or the intelligible meanings and forms. He alluded to these two groups by his saying, may God be pleased with him:

Jāmī

﴿فما عبد غير الله﴾

المعبود الحق

— the true Worshiped [Object]

Bālī Zāde

﴿فما عبد غير الله في كل معبود﴾

لأن الأسماء حينئذ عين المسمى من وجه ولا يعرف هذا إلا من عرف الحق بالمشاهدة فإذا كان العبادة في كل معبود إلى الله لا إلى غير الله تعالى . قال رضي الله عنه : (فالأدني) كانت مرتبة العابدین متفاوتة أي فأدني العابدین مرتبة

For the Names are then, in one respect, identical with the Named — and none knows this except one who has known the Real through witnessing. Since worship, in every object of worship, is directed to God and not to other than God Most High — he, may God be pleased with him, said: (So the lowest) — for the ranks of worshippers vary, that is, the lowest in rank among worshippers is

Words 77–79 · 1 of 7

فِي كُلِّ مَعْبُودٍ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿في كل معبود﴾

أي المعبود هو الظاهر في كل معبود بل في كل موجود وإن لم يشعر العابدون بذلك في هذه النشأة. قال رضي الله عنه في الفتوحات : عبد المخلوق ههنا من عبده وما عبد إلا الله من حيث لا يدري ويسمى معبوده منات واللات والعزى، فإذا مات وانكشف الغطاء علم أنه ما عبد إلا الله . فالناظرون إلى المعبودين صنفان : أعلى وأدنى

— i.e., the Worshiped [Object] is the one manifest in every worshiped thing, indeed in every existent, even if the worshipers were not conscious of this in this present configuration (nashʾa). He, may God be pleased with him, said in the Futūḥāt: "The one who worships the created thing here is worshiping Him, and none is worshiped but God, though he [the worshiper] does not know it; and his worshiped object is called Manāt, al-Lāt, and al-ʿUzzā. But when he dies and the veil is lifted, he knows that he has worshiped none but God." So those who look at the worshiped objects are of two kinds: higher and lower

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.

Dāwūd al-Qayṣarī (d. 751/1350), Maṭlaʿ khuṣūṣ al-kilam fī maʿānī Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam

Digital text: OpenITI barzakh, 0751DawudQaysari.MatlacKhususKalam.IAC00085-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/qaysari.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.

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.