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 ¶3 in the text

3 · 75 words · shading: how many commentators stop on each word

فَنِسْبَتُهُ لِمَا ظَهَرَ مِنْ صُورِ العَالَمِ نِسْبَةُ الرُّوحِ المُدَبِّرِ لِلصُّورَةِ فَيُؤْخَذُ فِي حَدِّ الإِنْسَانِ مثلًا بَاطِنَهُ وَظَاهِرَهُ وَكَذَلكَ كُلُّ محدود فَالْحَقُّ محدود بِكُلِّ حَدٍّ وَصُوَرُ العَالَمِ لَا تَنْضَبِطُ وَلَا يُحَاطُ بِهَا وَلَا تُعْلَمُ حُدُودُ كُلِّ صُورَةٍ مِّنْهَا إِلَّا عَلَى قَدْرِ مَا حَصَلَ لِكُلِّ عَالِمٍ مِنْ صُوَرٍ فَكَذٰلِكَ يُجْهَلُ حَدُّ الحَقِّ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُعْلَمُ حَدُّهُ إِلَّا بِعِلْمِ حَدِّ كُلِّ صُورَةٍ وَهَذَا مُحالٌ حُصُولُهُ فَحَدُّ الحَقِّ مُحالٌ وَكَذَلكَ مَنْ شَبَّهَهُ وَمَا نَزَّهَهُ فَقَدْ قَيَّدَهُ وَحَدَّدَهُ وَمَا عَرَفَهُ

So His relation to the forms of the cosmos that have become manifest is the relation of the governing spirit to the form. Thus in the definition of the human being, for example, both his nonmanifest and his manifest [dimensions] are taken [into account], and likewise with every defined thing. So the Real is defined by every definition. Yet the forms of the cosmos cannot be fixed within bounds or encompassed, nor are the definitions of each of its forms known except to the measure of the forms that each knower has obtained. In the same way, the definition of the Real remains unknown, for His definition is known only through knowing the definition of every form, and attaining that is impossible; so the definition of the Real is impossible. Likewise, whoever declares His similarity and does not declare His incomparability has delimited Him and defined Him, and has not known Him.

On the whole passage · 4 of 7

al-Qāshānī

﴿فالحق محدود بكل حد وصور العالم لا تنضبط ولا يحاط بها ولا يعلم حدود كل صورة منها إلا على قدر ما حصل ، أي لكل عالم من صورته . فلذلك يجهل حد الحق فإنه لا يعلم حده إلا على قدر ما حصل ، أي لكل عالم من صورته . فلذلك يجهل حد الحق فإنه لا يعلم حده إلا بعلم حد كل صورة ، وهذا محال حصوله فحد الحق محال﴾

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

أي لا يمكن لأحد الإحاطة بكل الظواهر والبواطن حتى يحيط بكل الحدود لأنها لا تنضبط ، فلا يعلم عالم حد الحق ومحال أن يعلم ، فلا يزال حده مجهولا محالا علمه ووجوده ، لأن مجموع الظواهر والبواطن ممكنات ليس بالمطلق ، فمجموع الحدود أيضا ليس بحده . قوله

] — i.e., it is not possible for anyone to encompass all manifest and nonmanifest [aspects] so as to comprehend all limits, because they cannot be delimited exhaustively. So no knower knows the limit of the Real, and it is impossible for him to know it. Thus His limit remains ever unknown, its knowledge and its [determinate] existence being impossible—because the sum total of manifest and nonmanifest [aspects] are contingent things (mumkināt), not the Absolute; so the sum total of limits, too, is not His limit. His saying:

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وكذلك من شبهه وما نزهه فقد قيده وحدده وما عرفه. ومن جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه والتشبيه ووصفه بالوجهين على الإجمال - لأنه يستحيل ذلك على التفصيل لعدم الإحاطة بما في العالم من الصور - فقد عرفه مجملا لا على التفصيل، كما عرف نفسه مجملا لا على التفصيل﴾

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

أي، من شبهه مطلقا وما نزهه في مقام التنزيه،فقد قيده أيضا وحده في تشبيه وما عرفه، كالمجسمة. ومن جمع في معرفته بين التشبيه والتنزيه ونزل كلا منزلته ومرتبته ووصف الحق بهما على الإجمال - لأنه يستحيل ذلك على التفصيل إذ كل منهما مراتب غير متناهية لا يمكن الإحاطة بها- فقد عرف ربه مجملا، كما عرف نفسه مجملا. لأن المرتبة الإنسانية محيطة بجميع مراتب العالم، والإنسان لا يقدر أن يعرف تلك المراتب على التفصيل، بل إذا علمأن مرتبته مشتملة بمراتب العالم كلها، علما اجماليا، فهو عارف بنفسه معرفة اجمالية، إلا من له مقام القطبية، فإنه من حيث سريانه في الحقائق بالحق يطلع على المراتب كلها تفصيلا، وإن كان هو أيضا من حيث تعينه وبشريته لا يقدر) عليها دائما

That is, whoever declares Him similar absolutely without declaring Him incomparable in the station of tanzīh has thereby also delimited and defined Him within tashbīh and has not known Him — like the anthropomorphists (al-mujassima). And whoever combines in his knowledge both tashbīh and tanzīh, giving each its due rank and station, and describes the Real by both in summary — for this is impossible in detail, since each of the two comprises infinite ranks that cannot be comprehended — has known his Lord in summary, just as he has known himself in summary. For the human rank encompasses all the ranks of the world, and the human being is not able to know those ranks in detail; rather, if he knows that his rank comprises all the ranks of the world with a summary knowledge, then he knows himself with a summary knowledge — except for the one who holds the station of the Pole (quṭbiyya), for he, insofar as he pervades the realities through the Real, perceives all the ranks in detail, even though he too, in respect of his determination (taʿayyun) and his humanity, is not always able to do so.

al-Tilimsānī

﴿وصور العالم لا تنضبط ولا يحاط بها ولا تعلم حدود كل صورة منها إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم من صورته. فلذلك يجهل حد الحق، فإنه لا يعلم حده إلا بعلم حد كل صورة، وهذا محال حصوله: فحد الحق محال. وكذلك من شبهه وما نزهه فقد قيده وحدده وما عرفه. ومن جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه والتشبيه بالوصفين على الإجمال- لأنه يستحيل ذلك على التفصيل لعدم الإحاطة بما في العالم من الصور- فقد عرفه مجملا لا على التفصيل كما عرف نفسه مجملا لا على التفصيل.﴾

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

قلت: هذا الكلام ظاهر مما سلف، وليفهم أنه يعني أن من حصره في الصفات كالحنابلة وغيرهم فيما ينقل عنهم أنه جاهل وذلك معروف. قال: ومن جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه والتشبيه ووصفه بالوصفين على الإجمال فقد عرفه، ثم أجاب عن سؤال مقدر. كأن قائلا قال له: فلم لا يعلم على التفصيل؟ فقال: لأنه يستحيل ذلك لعدم الاحاطة بما في العالم من الصور وأقحم في الكلام أن الانسان أيضا إنما عرف نفسه على الاجمال لا على التفصيل. قوله رضي الله عنه : ولذلك ربط النبي، صلى الله عليه وسلم، معرفة الحق بمعرفة النفس فقال: « من عرف نفسه عرف ربه » وقال تعالى: " سنريهم آياتنا في الآفاق " وهو ما خرج عنك

I say: this discourse is clear from what preceded, and let it be understood that he means that whoever confines Him to the [literal] attributes, such as the Ḥanābila and others as reported of them, is ignorant, and that is well known. He said: whoever combines, in his knowledge of Him, tanzīh and tashbīh, describing Him with both descriptions in a general manner, has known Him. Then he answered an implied question, as though someone had said to him: why is He not known in detail? So he said: because that is impossible owing to the lack of comprehension of the forms contained in the world; and he inserted into the discourse that man likewise knows himself only in a summary way, not in detail. His saying, may God be pleased with him: and therefore the Prophet, God's blessings and peace upon him, linked knowledge of the Real to knowledge of the self, saying: "Whoever knows himself knows his Lord," and God, exalted, said: "We shall show them Our signs in the horizons" (Fuṣṣilat: 53)—that is, what is outside of you

Jāmī

﴿فيؤخذ في حد الإنسان مثلا ظاهره و باطنه، و كذلك كل محدود. فالحق محدود بكل حد و صور العالم لا تنضبط و لا يحاط بها و لا تعلم حدود كل صورة منها إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم من صورته. فلذلك يجهل حد الحق، فإنه لا يعلم حده إلا بعلم حد كل صورة، و هذا محال حصوله: فحد الحق محال. و كذلك من شبهه و ما نزهه فقد قيده و حدده و ما عرفه. و من جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه و التشبيه بالوصفين على الإجمال- لأنه يستحيل ذلك على التفصيل لعدم الإحاطة بما في العالم من الصور- فقد عرفه مجملا لا على التفصيل كما عرف﴾

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

فالحق سبحانه له ظاهر و باطن وكل ما له ظاهر وباطن يجب أن يؤخذ في حده ظاهرة وباطنه

known Him. And whoever combines in his knowledge of Him both tanzīh and tashbīh, describing Him with both attributes summarily — since this is impossible in detail, given the impossibility of encompassing all the forms in the cosmos — has known Him summarily, not in detail, just as] the Real, glory be to Him, has a manifest and a nonmanifest, and whatever has a manifest and a nonmanifest must have both its manifest and nonmanifest aspects included in its definition

al-Qāshānī

﴿فنسبته لما ظهر من صور العالم ، نسبة الروح المدبر للصورة﴾

لما أثبت للحقيقة الإلهية هوية باعتبار اسمه الظاهر وهوية باعتبار اسمه الباطن شبه نسبة باطنيته إلى ظاهريته من صور العالم بنسبة الروح الإنسانى المدبر لصورته إلى صورته . واللام في لما ظهر بمعنى إلى أي نسبته مع قيد البطون إلى نفسه مع قيد الظهور ( فيؤخذ ) أي فكما يؤخذ

the relation of the spirit that governs the form] — Since he [the author] had established for the divine reality a selfhood (huwiyya) with respect to His Name the Manifest, and a selfhood with respect to His Name the Nonmanifest, he likened the relation of His nonmanifest aspect to His manifest aspect in the forms of the cosmos to the relation of the human spirit, which governs its form, to that form. The lām in "li-mā ẓahara" [to what has become manifest] has the sense of "ilā" [to], i.e., His relation, under the restriction of nonmanifestation, to Himself under the restriction of manifestation. ["So it is taken"] i.e., just as it is taken...

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فنسبته لما ظهر من صور العالم نسبة الروح المدبر للصورة﴾

أي، إذا كان العالم صورة الحق وهو روحه، فنسبة الحق إلى كل ما ظهر من صور العالم نسبة الروح الجزئي المدبر للصورة المعينة إليها في كونه مدبرا، كما قال: (يدبر الأمر من السماء إلى الأرض). و (اللام) في

That is: since the cosmos is the form of the Real and He is its spirit, the relation of the Real to everything that has become manifest of the forms of the cosmos is the relation of the particular spirit that governs a given form to that form, in that it governs it—just as He said: 'He governs the affair from the heaven to the earth.' And the 'lām' in

﴿لما ظهر﴾

بمعنى (إلى). وقوله: (للصورة) متعلق ب (المدبر). وصلة (النسبة) محذوفة، أي إلى الصورة

—has the sense of 'ilā' (to/toward). And His statement 'to the form' is connected to 'the governor.' And the object of 'the relation' is elided, that is, [the relation] to the form.

Ibn Turka

﴿فنسبته لما ظهر من صور العالم﴾

( نسبة المدبّر للصورة ) ، في عدم تحدّده بها ودوام تصرّفه فيها ، وامتيازه بحقيقته عنها . إذا تقرّر هذا فنقول : إذا أريد تمييز شيء من تلك الصور وتحديد حقيقتها لا بدّ وأن يجمع بين طرفيها

(is the relation of the governor to the form), in that He is not delimited by them, and His governance of them continues perpetually, and He is distinguished by His reality from them. Once this is established, we say: if one wishes to distinguish something among these forms and to delimit its reality, one must combine both of its two sides,

Bālī Zāde

﴿فنسبته لما ظهر﴾

أي نسبة الحق إلى كل ما ظهر

i.e., the Real's relation to everything manifest

Jāmī

﴿من صور العالم﴾

في التدبير والتصرف

in governance and disposal

Bālī Zāde

﴿من صور العالم نسبة الروح المدبر للصورة﴾

فحذفت صلة النسبة وهي إلى الصورة لدلالة الصورة عليها فإذا كانت نسبة الحي إلى صورة العالم نسبة الروح إلى صورته فيؤخذ الحق

the connective of relation—namely, "to the form"—has been elided, since the form indicates it. So since the relation of the Living to the form of the world is [analogous to] the relation of the spirit to its form, the Real is taken

Jāmī

﴿نسبة الروح المدبر للصورة﴾

أي إلى الصورة التي تدبرها الروح فاللام في الموضعين بمعنى إلى. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

that is, to the form which the spirit governs; the lām in both instances carries the meaning of "to." The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

al-Qāshānī

﴿في حد الإنسان مثلا باطنه وظاهره وكذلك كل محدود﴾

فكذلك يجب أن يؤخذ في حد الحق جميع الظواهر وجميع البواطن ، حتى يكون محدودا بكل الحدود. كما قال

his nonmanifest and manifest [aspects]; and likewise every delimited thing] — so likewise, all manifest and all nonmanifest [aspects] must be taken in the definition of the Real, so that He is delimited by every limit (ḥadd). As he [the author] said...

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فيؤخذ في حد الإنسان، مثلا، باطنه وظاهره وكذلك كل محدود﴾

(الفاء) للسببية. ولما كان ظاهر العالم ظاهر الحق وباطنه باطن الحق، والباطن مأخوذ فيتعريف الإنسان وتحديده لأنه معرف بالحيوان الناطق، والناطق باطنه والحيوان ظاهره. أو الهيئة الاجتماعية الحاصلة من الجنس والفصل ظاهره الذي به سر الأحدية فيه وحقائقهما المشتركة والمميزة باطنه، فالحق مأخوذ في حده وكذلك فيكل محدود، إذ لا بد في كل من المحدودات من أمر عام مشترك وأمر خاص مميز، وكلاهما ينتهيان إلى الحق الذي هو باطن كل شئ

His nonmanifest aspect (bāṭin) and His manifest aspect (ẓāhir) are taken into the definition (ḥadd) of the human being, for instance; and likewise for everything delimited/defined (maḥdūd).] The 'fāʾ' indicates causation. Since the manifest aspect of the cosmos is the manifest aspect of the Real, and its nonmanifest aspect is the nonmanifest aspect of the Real, and the nonmanifest aspect is taken up in the definition and delimitation of the human being—for the human being is defined as 'the rational animal,' and 'rational' is his nonmanifest aspect while 'animal' is his manifest aspect; or [alternatively], the composite constitution resulting from genus and differentia is his manifest aspect, in which the secret of oneness (aḥadiyya) resides, while their shared and distinguishing realities are his nonmanifest aspect—so the Real is taken up in his definition, and likewise in every delimited/defined thing, since every delimited thing necessarily has both a general shared element and a particular distinguishing element, and both of these ultimately lead back to the Real, who is the nonmanifest aspect of everything.

Ibn Turka

﴿فيؤخذ في حدّ الإنسان - مثلا - ظاهره وباطنه﴾

كما يقال في حدّه : « إنّه الحيوان الناطق » معربا عنهما بالترتيب ، أمّا الأوّل فإنّ ظاهره ليس إلَّا الجسم الناميّ المتحرّك الحسّاس ، وأمّا الثاني فإنّ باطنه ليس إلَّا « مدرك المعقولات » وما يحذو حذوه (وكذلك في كلّ محدود) حتّى يتمّ تحديد تلك الحقيقة وتحصيل صورة تطابقها . ( فالحقّ ) لما كان له أحديّة جمع الصور بمعانيه

just as one says in his definition: "He is the rational animal," expressing both aspects respectively. As for the first, his manifest aspect is nothing but the growing, moving, sentient body; as for the second, his nonmanifest aspect is nothing but "that which apprehends intelligibles" and what follows suit — (and likewise in every delimited thing) — until the delimitation of that reality is completed and a form corresponding to it is attained. As for the Real, since He possesses the oneness that gathers all forms in His meanings —

Jāmī

﴿فيؤخذ في حد الإنسان مثلا باطنه﴾

الذي هو وجه المجرد (وظاهره) الذي هو بدنه العنصري فإن الإنسان عبارة عن أحدية جمعهما . فلو اقتصر على أحدهما لم يحصل حد الصور

which is his abstract spiritual face (and his manifest aspect) which is his elemental body; for man is an expression for the unitary combination of the two. Were one to restrict oneself to only one of them, the definition of the form would not be attained

Bālī Zāde

﴿في حد الإنسان مثلا باطنه وظاهره﴾

فإن حذ الإنسان مركب من الحيوان الناطق فكان بروحه مظهرة لاسمه الباطن وبصورة جسده مظهرة لاسمه الظاهر فعلم أن الحق هو الظاهر والباطن بدلالة حد الإنسان. (وكذلك) يومئذ في حد

for the definition of the human being is composed of "rational animal," so [the human being] is, by his spirit, the locus of manifestation of the [divine] Nonmanifest Name, and by the form of his body, the locus of manifestation of the [divine] Manifest Name. Thus it is known that the Real is the Manifest and the Nonmanifest, as indicated by the definition of the human being. (And likewise) at that point, in the definition of

Jāmī

﴿وكذلك كل محدود﴾

غير الإنسان إذا كان له ظاهر وباطن ينبغي أن يؤخذ في حده ليتم التحديد. (فالحق سبحانه) إذن

other than man, if it has a manifest and a nonmanifest, both should be included in its definition for the definition to be complete. (The Real, glory be to Him,) therefore

Bālī Zāde

﴿كل محدود﴾

إذ ما من شيء إلا وله ظاهر و باطن

for there is nothing but that it has a manifest and a nonmanifest aspect

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فالحق محدود بكل حد﴾

لأن كل ما هو محدود بحد مظهر من مظاهره: ظاهره من اسمه الظاهر وباطنه من اسمه الباطن، والمظهر عين الظاهر باعتبار الأحذية، فالحق هو المحدود. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

Because everything that is delimited by a definition is a locus of manifestation among His loci of manifestation: its manifest aspect derives from His Name 'the Manifest,' and its nonmanifest aspect from His Name 'the Nonmanifest'; and the locus of manifestation is identical with the Manifest, from the standpoint of oneness (aḥadiyya). So the Real is the one who is delimited/defined. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Ibn Turka

﴿محدود بكل حدّ﴾

فحدّ جميع صور العالم من حدّه ، قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

for the delimitation of all the forms of the world derives from His delimitation. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Jāmī

﴿محدود بكل حد﴾

يعني كل مأخوذ في حده فما لم يسمع جميع الحدود لم يتم حده لأن كل ما هو محدود بحد صورة من صوره وحد كل صورة من تفاصيل جزا، حدود الصورة

meaning by everything that is included in His definition; for so long as not all delimitations have been comprehended, His definition is not complete, since everything that is delimited is delimited by the delimitation of one of His forms, and the delimitation of each form is part of the details of the delimitations of the Form

Bālī Zāde

﴿فالحق محدود﴾

أي معلوم (بكل حذ) وهو على طريق الاستدلال من الأثر إلى المؤثر قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

i.e., known (by every delimitation)—this being by the method of inferring from the effect to the [efficient] cause. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وصور العالم لا ينضبط ولا يحاط بها، ولا يعلم حدود كل صورة منها إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم من صورة، فلذلك يجهل حد الحق. فإنه لا يعلم حده إلا ويعلم حد كل صورة، وهذا محال حصوله، فحد الحق محال﴾

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

أي، صور العالم وجزئياته مفصلا غير منضبطة ولا منحصر، والحدود لا تعلم إلا بعد الإحاطة بصور الأشياء وحقائقها، فالعلم بحدودها محال، فحد الحق من حيث مظاهره أيضا محال. وفي قوله

That is, the forms of the world and its particulars, in detail, are neither delimited nor finite, and limits are not known except after comprehending the forms of things and their realities; so knowledge of their limits is impossible, and thus the limit of the Real, from the perspective of His manifestations (maẓāhir), is also impossible. And in his saying,

Ibn Turka

﴿وصور العالم لا تنضبط ولا يحاط بها﴾

لعدم تناهيها ، ( و ) على تقدير ضبطه

due to their infinitude — and (even) supposing they could be enumerated,

Jāmī

﴿وصور العالم لا تنضبط﴾

تحت حد و حصر

under any delimitation or enumeration

Bālī Zāde

﴿وصور العالم لا تنضبط ولا يحاط بها ولا يعلم حدود كل صورة منها﴾

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

أي من صور العالم حد الحق

i.e., of the forms of the world, the limit of the Real [in each]

Jāmī

﴿ولا يحاط بها ولا بعلم حدود كل صورة منها﴾

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

أي من صور العالم

that is, of the forms of the cosmos

Ibn Turka

﴿لا تعلم حدود كلّ صورة منها إلَّا على قدر ما حصل لكلّ عالم من صورة﴾

المناسبة لاستعداده

suitable to his preparedness (istiʿdād),

al-Qayṣarī

﴿إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم من صورة﴾

إشارة إلى أن كلواحد من الموجودات أيضا لا يعلم من حيث حقيقته، لأن حقيقته راجعة إلى عين الحق وحقيقته، وهي غير معلومة للعالم. قال رضى الله عنه: (ولست أدرك من شئ حقيقته وكيف أدركه وأنتم فيه)

there is an indication that each one of the existents likewise cannot be known in respect of its reality, because its reality goes back to the very entity (ʿayn) of the Real and His reality, and this is not known to the knower. He, may God be pleased with him, said: (I do not perceive the reality of anything — and how could I perceive it while you are within it?)

Jāmī

﴿إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم من صوره فلذلك يجهل حد الحق فإنه لا يعلم حده﴾

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

أي حد الحق (إلا) و

that is, the delimitation of the Real (cannot be known) except

Bālī Zāde

﴿إلا على قدر ما حصل لكل عالم﴾

بالحد (من صوره) أي من صور العالم (فلذلك) أي فلأجل عدم انضباط صور العالم لأنها جزئيات غير متناهية

through delimitation, (of its forms) i.e., of the forms of the world (hence) i.e., because of the non-enumerability of the forms of the world, they being non-finite particulars

Ibn Turka

﴿فلذلك يجهل حدّ الحقّ ، فإنّه لا يعلم حدّه إلَّا بعلم حدّ كلّ صورة﴾

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

من الصور المشتمل عليه العالم بطرفيها الروحاني والجسماني

among the forms which the world comprises, in both its spiritual and corporeal aspects,

Bālī Zāde

﴿بجهل حد الحق فإنه لا يعلم حده﴾

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

من حيث مظاهره

from the aspect of His loci of manifestation

Jāmī

﴿یعلم حد كل صورة﴾

من صور العالم

of the forms of the cosmos

Bālī Zāde

﴿إلا بعلم حد كل صورة وهذا﴾

أي العلم بحد كل صورة

i.e., knowledge of the limit of every form

Ibn Turka

﴿وهذا محال حصوله ، فحدّ الحقّ محال﴾

التنزيه في عين التشبيه فعلم من هذا أنّ من نزّه الحقّ مطلقا وما شبّهه - فقد حدّد ما لا يحدّ فما عرفه

— tanzīh within the very heart of tashbīh. From this it is known that whoever declares the Real's incomparability absolutely and does not liken Him has thereby delimited what cannot be delimited, and so has not truly known Him,

Jāmī

﴿وهذا محال حصوله﴾

لعدم تناهي تلك الصور

due to the non-finitude of those forms

Bālī Zāde

﴿محال حصوله فحد الحق﴾

الموقوف على المحال (محال) حصوله وليس المراد بالحد هو المصطلح عند علماء الرسول وهو المركب من ذاتيات المحدود تعالی عن ذلك . وإنما المراد آثار أسمائه وصفاته يستدل بها على صفات الله تعالى وأسمائه على وجه التحديد والتعيين وإنما خصر عدم الانضباط إلى الصور دون المعاني لأن معاني المعالم أمور كلية منضبطة عند العقل لكن الصور أجزاء للحد فلا يحصل الحد بدون انضباطها

which is contingent upon what is impossible, is impossible to attain. What is meant by "limit" here is not the technical term used by the scholars of [formal] discourse—namely, that which is composed of the essential constituents (dhātiyyāt) of the thing delimited, God being exalted above that—but rather what is meant is the traces of His Names and Attributes, by which one infers the Attributes and Names of God, Exalted, in a manner of delimitation and specification. The non-enumerability was restricted to the forms rather than the meanings, because the meanings of the loci of manifestation are universal matters, enumerable by the intellect, whereas the forms are the parts of the definition (ḥadd), and the definition cannot be attained without their being enumerated

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فحد الحق محال﴾

لأن الحد، هنا،للمرتبة باعتبار الحق والعالم، لا للحق من حيث ذاته قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

because the definition, here, is for the rank considered in respect of both the Real and the world, not for the Real in respect of His Essence. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

Jāmī

﴿فحد الحق محال﴾

وما تقدم القول في المنزه بالتنزيه العقلي أنه ناقص المعرفة لكونه مقيدا للمطلق أراد أن يشير إلى أن المشبه أيضا كذلك. فقال

Having previously stated that the one who declares tanzīh through rational tanzīh has deficient knowledge because he restricts the Absolute, he now wishes to indicate that the one who declares tashbīh is likewise [deficient]. He said

al-Qāshānī

﴿وكذلك من شبهه وما نزهه فقد قيده وحدده وما عرفه﴾

ظاهر ، لأن من شبههه حصره في تعين ، وكل ما كان محصورا في حد فهو بهذا الاعتبار خلق . ومن هذا يعلم أن مجموع الحدود وإن لم يكن غيره ليس عينه ، لأن الحقيقة الواحدة الظاهرة في جميع التعينات غير مجموع التعينات

— [This is] clear, because whoever likens Him confines Him within a single determination (taʿayyun), and everything confined within a limit is, in this respect, a created thing (khalq). From this it is known that the sum total of limits, even though it is not other than Him, is not identical with Him—for the one reality that is manifest in all determinations is not [identical with] the sum total of the determinations.

al-Jandī

﴿وكذلك من شبّهه وما نزّهه ، فقد قيّده وحدّده وما عرفه ، ومن جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه والتشبيه ، ووصفه بالوصفين على الإجمال ، لأنّه يستحيل ذلك على التفصيل لعدم الإحاطة بما في العالم من الصور ، فقد عرفه مجملا لا على التفصيل﴾

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

قال العبد : وكما تقدّم القول في المنزّه بالتنزيه العقلي أنّه ناقص المعرفة ، لكونه مقيّدا للمطلق ومحدّدا لما لا حدّ له بما يخرجه ويميّزه عن جميع ما ينزّهه عنه ، فكذلك المشبّه من غير تنزيه غالط ، لأنّ التشبيه تقييد وتحديد أيضا للمطلق الذي لا حدّ له بقيده وحصره ، وهو المطلق بالذات والوجود ، لأنّه وصفه بوصف ذي حدّ ، وحدّه بحدّ ذي وصف معيّن ، وقيّده بذلك ، ذاهلا عن ضدّ ما قال به أو نقيضه وهو التنزيه ، ولقبوله تعالى الوصفين معا على الوجه الأكمل الأجمع . وذلك لأنّ المشبّه يشبّهه تعالى بالجسمانيات ، ويحصره في ذلك المنزّه بنزهه عنها كذلك ، فكل واحد منهما يقيّده إذن بمفهومه ، ويحدّده بمعلومه ، وحقيقته تعالى تقتضي الإطلاق والحصر . ثم إنّ التشبيه يقتضي : مشبّها ، ومشبّها به ، ومشبّها ، وفيه اشتراك للحق بما يشبّه فيه بما يشبّهه به فيما يشبّهه به شبهه ، وحيث ورد التنزيه والتشبيه معا في إخباره تعالى عن نفسه في مفهوم العموم وفي معلوم أهل الخصوص ، أخبر عن نفسه في التشبيه في عين التنزيه والتنزيه في عين التشبيه ، وذلك في كتبه المنزلة ، وعلى ألسنة رسله المرسلة . فالأخذ بأحدهما دون الآخر كفر به وبما أخبر عن نفسه من حيث أحد الوجهين ، وجنوح عن حق الإيمان ، ولكنّا آمنّا بما جاء عن الحق وشبّهنا كما أخبرنا به تعالى عن نفسه على الوجه الذي أراده من غير تحكَّم عقلي ولا تأويل فكري وعلى مقتضى المفهوم الأوّل من اللفظ والعبارة ، ونزّهنا أيضا من حيث ما ورد التنزيه في القرآن المجيد من غير تحكَّم عقلي ولا تسلَّط فكري ولا تأويل تقييدي بأمر دون أمر ، فقد وفّينا الحقيقة مقتضاها وأعطينا من الله في حق كل مرتبة ما أتاها ، ومن جمع بين المعرفتين منّا ، ولم يحصر الأمر وأطلق ، فهو الإمام العلام ، حسنة الليالي والأيّام . ثمّ إنّ الواصف للحق بالوصفين إمّا أن يصف بهما إجمالا وهو الممكن في حق العارفين ، ولكن منهم من يصفه بهما امتثالا واتّباعا لما جاء به الشرع المطهّر ، وذلك ، المؤمن بكل ما ورد من الله على مراد الله ولم يحصر في أمر دون أمر ، إنّما هو عبد الله لا شائبة فيه للفضول . ولا شانئة التحكَّم بمقتضى العقول ، ومن وصفه منّا بهما معا محقّقا بأنّ كل ذلك مقتضى الحقيقة وأنّ الهويّة تقبل الأضداد والأمثال لكونها محيطة بالكلّ ، وشاملة للجميع ، حاصرة غير محصورة . كان كامل المعرفة تامّ الكشف ، عامّ الشهود ، أستاد الطريقة ، كأبي سعيد الخرّاز ، حين سئل : بم عرفت الله ؟ قال : بجمعه بين الأضداد : " أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلى رَبِّكَ كَيْفَ مَدَّ الظِّلَّ " وصف هويته الأحدية الجمعية بالأوليّة والآخرية والباطنية والظاهرية مع ما بين هذه النسب من التضادّ والتنافي ، بقوله تعالى : "هُوَ الأَوَّلُ وَالآخِرُ وَالظَّاهِرُ وَالْباطِنُ " فجعل هويّته الأحدية موضوعة ، وحمل عليها هذه النسب بلا تقييد ، فهو الوصف بهما إجمالا . وأمّا وصفه تعالى بالكلّ على التفصيل فليس إلَّا لله إلى ذلك سبيل ، لامتناع تفصيل ما لا يتناهى دفعة واحدة بطريق التوصيل ، ولكنّ الحق يفصّل ويوصل أبد الدهر من غير تناه ولا انقطاع . ولو فرضنا الإحاطة بكلّ ما حصل في الوجود من الحدود . فوصفه بكل ذلك على الإجمال أو على التفصيل تعريف وتحديد أيضا بالمتناهي المحدود ، لكون الحاصل في الوجود ، إذ ذاك وعنده من الشهود مجملا أو مفصّلا محصورا بانتهائه إلى ما لم يدخل بعد في الوجود ممّا لم يوجد في مرتبة من المراتب . فالحصول على المعرفة والتعريف ، والوصول إلى التحديد والتوصيف على التفصيل ممتنع مستحيل ، وإن عرف بكل ما دخل في الوجود ما لم يدخل كان مجملا أيضا ، وإن عرف بالتفصيل في الأوّل مفصّلا وفي الثاني الباقي مجملا ، كان مركَّبا من المجمل والمفصّل ، وما في التحصيل حينئذ تفصيل لتوصيل من كل وجه ، والجمع أكمل وأشمل ، فتحقّقه . قال رضي الله عنه : « ولذلك ربط النبيّ صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم معرفة الحق بمعرفة النفس. فقال : « من عرف نفسه ، فقد عرف ربّه » . وقال تعالى : " سَنُرِيهِمْ آياتِنا في الآفاقِ " وهو ما خرج عنك

The servant [i.e., the commentator] said: As was stated earlier concerning the one who declares Him incomparable by rational tanzīh — that he has imperfect knowledge, since he has restricted the Absolute and delimited that which has no limit by something that excludes and distinguishes it from everything he declares Him incomparable of — likewise the one who declares Him similar without also declaring Him incomparable errs, for tashbīh is likewise a restriction and delimitation of the Absolute that has no limit, confining it by its own restriction and limitation — namely the One who is absolute in Essence (dhāt) and existence — since he has described Him with a delimited description and delimited Him with a determinate limit bearing a specific attribute, and has thereby restricted Him, heedless of the opposite of what he has affirmed, or its contrary, namely tanzīh — and heedless of the fact that the Exalted accepts both descriptions together, in the most perfect and most comprehensive way. This is because the one who declares similarity likens Him, the Exalted, to corporeal things and confines Him to that, while the one who declares incomparability declares Him incomparable of those very things likewise; so each of the two thereby restricts Him by his own concept and delimits Him by his own known notion, whereas His Reality, the Exalted, demands absoluteness and yet also confinement. Furthermore, tashbīh requires: a thing likened (mushabbah), a thing to which it is likened (mushabbah bihi), and an act of likening (mushabbih); and in it there is a sharing of the Real, in that respect wherein He is likened, with that to which He is likened, in the very respect in which He resembles it. Now since both tanzīh and tashbīh occur together in His report about Himself, the Exalted — in the general understanding (mafhūm al-ʿumūm) and in the specialized knowledge of the elect (maʿlūm ahl al-khuṣūṣ) — He reported about Himself in tashbīh within the very reality of tanzīh, and in tanzīh within the very reality of tashbīh; and this occurs in His revealed Books and on the tongues of His sent Messengers. So to adopt one of the two without the other is disbelief (kufr) in Him and in what He has reported of Himself from one of the two aspects, and a deviation from true faith (ḥaqq al-īmān). But we have believed in what has come from the Real, and we have declared Him similar just as He, the Exalted, reported of Himself, in the manner He intended, without rational imposition or intellectual interpretation (taʾwīl), and according to the primary sense of the wording and expression; and we have likewise declared Him incomparable wherever tanzīh occurs in the Glorious Qur'an, without rational imposition, intellectual domination, or restrictive interpretation favoring one matter over another. Thus we have rendered to the Reality its due, and we have received from God, concerning each level, what He has granted it. Whoever among us combines the two knowledges and does not confine the matter but leaves it absolute — he is the learned guide (al-imām al-ʿallām), the excellence of nights and days. Now, one who describes the Real with both descriptions does so either summarily — which is the possible course for the knowers (ʿārifūn) — though among them are those who describe Him thus only in compliance with and following what the pure Law has brought; such a one, believing in everything that has come from God according to God's own intent, without confining it to one matter rather than another, is simply a servant of God, with no admixture of presumption in him, nor any inclination to impose the dictates of the intellect. But whoever among us describes Him with both together, verifying that all of this is required by the Reality, and that the Ipseity (huwiyya) admits of opposites and likenesses because it encompasses the totality and comprehends everything — confining without being confined — such a one possesses perfect knowledge, complete unveiling (kashf), universal witnessing (shuhūd), a master of the Path, like Abū Saʿīd al-Kharrāz, who, when asked: 'By what did you know God?' replied: 'By His combining of opposites' — "Have you not seen how your Lord extends the shadow?" He described His Unitary, All-Comprehensive Ipseity (huwiyyatuhu al-aḥadiyya al-jamʿiyya) with firstness (awwaliyya) and lastness (ākhiriyya), nonmanifestness (bāṭiniyya) and manifestness (ẓāhiriyya), despite the opposition and mutual exclusion among these relations (nisab), in His saying, the Exalted: "He is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Nonmanifest" — thus making His Unitary Ipseity the subject, and predicating of it these relations without restriction; and this is the description of Him by both together in summary fashion. As for describing Him, the Exalted, with the totality in detail — there is no way to that except for God Himself, since it is impossible to set forth in detail, all at once and by way of conveyance, that which has no end. Yet the Real does set forth and convey in detail throughout the ages, endlessly and without cessation. And even if we supposed the encompassing of every limit (ḥadd) that has occurred in existence — describing Him with all of that, whether summarily or in detail, would still be a defining and delimiting by the finite and the delimited, since whatever has occurred in existence at that point, and whatever is present in witnessing then, whether summary or detailed, is confined by its termination at what has not yet entered into existence — what has not yet come to be at any level among the levels. So the attainment of complete knowledge and definition, and the arrival at complete delimitation and description in full detail, is impossible and precluded. And even if one knows Him by everything that has entered into existence, that which has not yet entered remains, so the knowledge is still summary. And if one knows in detail with respect to the first [what has entered] and summarily with respect to what remains of the second [what has not], it would be composite of the summary and the detailed, and in that case there is, in the attainment, a detailing of the conveyance from every aspect; yet the combination [of both approaches] is the most perfect and the most comprehensive — so realize it. He, may God be pleased with him, said: 'And for this reason the Prophet, God bless him and grant him peace, linked knowledge of the Real to knowledge of the self, saying: "Whoever knows himself knows his Lord." And the Exalted said: "We shall show them Our signs in the horizons" — that is, what is external to you

Ibn Turka

﴿وكذلك من شبّهه وما نزّهه فقد قيّده وحدّده وما عرفه ، ومن جمع في معرفته بين التنزيه والتشبيه﴾

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

وقال بوجوده في كلّ عين ، منزّها عنه ، وشاهد بطونه في عين الظهور ووصفه

and affirms His existence in every entity while declaring His incomparability from it, witnessing His hiddenness within the very essence of His manifestation, and describes Him

Jāmī

﴿وكذلك من شبهه مطلقة وما نزهه﴾

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

في مقام التنزيه

and does not declare Him incomparable] in the station of tanzīh

Bālī Zāde

﴿وكذلك من شبهه وما نزهه فقد قيده وحده وما عرفه﴾

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

حق معرفته وهو كمن آمن ببعض وكفر ببعض كالمنزه الواقف عند تنزيهه

with true knowledge of Him—he is like one who believes in part and disbelieves in part, like the one who declares [only] incomparability and stops at his tanzīh

Words 71–72 · 1 of 7

فَقَدْ قَيَّدَهُ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿فقد قيده﴾

بما عدا صور التنزيه (وحدده) به

by [confining Him to] other than the forms of tanzīh (and delimited Him) thereby

Words 74–75 · 1 of 7

وَمَا عَرَفَهُ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿وما عرفه﴾

على ما هو عليه في نفس التنزيه

known Him] as He is in Himself in respect of tanzīh proper

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.