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 قُدُّوسِيَّةٍ فِي كَلِمَةٍ إِدْرِيسِيَّةٍ

←→Read ¶4 in the text

4 · 65 words · shading: how many commentators stop on each word

فَلَمَّا لَمْ يَعُمَّ مَعَ اشْتِرَاكِهِمْ فِي حَدِّ المَلَكِيَّةِ عَرَفْنَا أَنَّ هَذَا عُلُوُّ المَكَانَةِ عِندَ اللَّهِ وَكَذَلكَ الخُلَفَاءُ مِنَ النَّاسِ لَوْ كَانَ عُلُوهُمْ بِالخِلَافَةِ عُلُوًّا ذَاتِيًّا لَكَانَ لِكُلِّ إِنسَانٍ فَلَمَّا لَمْ يَعُمَّ عَرَفْنَا أَنَّ ذَلكَ العُلُوَّ لِلْمَكَانَةِ ومن أسمائهِ الحسنى العَلِيُّ على مَن وَمَا ثَمَّ إِلَّا هُوَ فَهُوَ العَلِيُّ لِذَاتِهِ أَوْ عَنْ مَا ذَا وَمَا هُوَ إِلَّا هُوَ فَعُلُوهُ لِنَفْسِهِ وَهُوَ مِنْ حَيْثُ الوُجُودُ عَيْنُ المَوْجُودَاتِ

So since it does not include all of them, even though they share in the definition of angelhood, we knew that this is the highness of rank with God. Likewise the vicegerents among humankind: were their highness through vicegerency an essential highness, it would belong to every human being. So since it does not include all, we knew that that highness belongs to rank. And among His most beautiful Names is the High (al-ʿAlī). [High] over whom, when there is nothing there but He? So He is the High through His Essence. Or [high] above what, when it is nothing but He? So His highness is through Himself. And He, in respect of existence, is the very entity of the existents.

On the whole passage · 2 of 6

al-Qāshānī

﴿ومن أسمائه العلى على من وما ثم إلا هو فهو العلى لذاته ، أو عما ذا وما هو إلا هو فعلوّه لنفسه ، فهو من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات ، فالمسمى محدثات هي العلية لذاتها وليست إلا هو فهو العلى لا علو إضافة ، لأن الأعيان التي لها العدم الثابتة فيه ما شمت رائحة من الوجود فهي على حالها مع تعداد الصور في الموجودات ، والعين واحدة من المجموع في المجموع﴾

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

ولما بين أن العلو لكل ما سواه من المتعينات نسبى شرع في بيان العلو الذاتي ، وقوله على من استفهام بمعنى الإنكار لأنه ليس في الوجود غيره فلم يكن علوه نسبيا بل ذاتيا . وبعض النسخ عمن وما ثم إلا هو وهو العلى لذاته ، أو عما ذا وما هو إلا هو فعلوه لنفسه ، والعلو يعدى بعن لما فيه من معنى الارتفاع ، وبعلي لما فيه من معنى العلية . والمراد أن علوه ليس إضافيا فيدخل فيه عن وعلى ، إنما هو ذاتى وهو من حيث الحقيقة عين جميع الموجودات ، لأنها به موجودة بل وجودها وجوده ، وهي العلية لذاتها بحسب الحقيقة لأنها ليست إلا هو حقيقة . وعلل ذلك بأن الأعيان الثابتة في العدم باقية على حالها من العدم ، والوجود المتعين بالأعيان هو عين الوجود الحق ، إذ ليس لها من ذاتها إلا العدم وما هي إلا مرايا له ، كما قيل : وما الوجه إلا واحد غير أنه %~% إذا أنت أعددت المرايا تعددا فتعدد الصور في الموجودات عين واحدة في مجموعها متكثرة بحسب أسمائها ، كما ذكر في المقدمة ، فإن الأعيان من مقتضيات اسمه العليم من حيث اسمه الباطن ، وظهورها وحدوثها من حيثية اسمه الظاهر . وما العين إلا واحدة فلها العلو الذاتي باعتبار وحدتها الحقيقية ، والوجه الواحد المطلق من حيث هو مجموع الوجوه الأسمائية في صورة المجموع من حيث هو المجموع الوحدانى الذات والعلو الإضافي بنسبة بعض تلك الوجوه إلى بعض. قال رضي الله عنه

Having clarified that transcendence belongs relatively to every determinate thing other than Him, he now begins to explain essential transcendence. His saying "above whom" is an interrogative in the sense of denial, since there is nothing in existence other than Him, so His transcendence was not relative but essential. In some copies: "above whom, and there is nothing but He, and He is the Transcendent by His Essence; or above what, and He is nothing but He, so His transcendence is for Himself" — transcendence is construed with "above" (ʿan) because of the sense of elevation it contains, and with "over" (ʿalā) because of the sense of superiority it contains. The meaning is that His transcendence is not relational, so that both "above" and "over" apply to it; rather it is essential, and He, from the standpoint of reality, is identical with all existents, since they exist through Him — indeed their existence is His existence — and they are the transcendent ones in themselves according to reality, since in reality they are nothing but He. He explained this by [noting] that the fixed entities (al-aʿyān al-thābita) in nonexistence remain in their state of nonexistence, while the existence determined by the entities is identical with the Real Existence, since they have, of themselves, nothing but nonexistence, and they are nothing but mirrors for Him — as it was said: "The face is but one, except that when you multiply the mirrors, it becomes multiple." So the multiplicity of forms among the existents is a single entity in its totality, made multiple according to its names, as mentioned in the introduction. For the entities are among the requirements of His name the All-Knowing (al-ʿAlīm) from the aspect of His name the Nonmanifest (al-Bāṭin), while their manifestation and coming-to-be are from the aspect of His name the Manifest (al-Ẓāhir). The entity is nothing but one, so it has essential transcendence by virtue of its true unity, and the single absolute Face, insofar as it is the totality of the names'-faces in the form of the collectivity — insofar as it is the unitary collectivity of Essence — [has] relational transcendence by the relation of some of these faces to others. He, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Jandī

﴿ومن أسمائه الحسنى « العليّ » . عمّن وما ثمّ إلَّا هو ؟ فهو العليّ لذاته . أو عمّا ذا وما هو إلَّا هو ؟ فعلوّه لنفسه ، وهو من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات ، فالمسمّى محدثات هي العليّة لذاتها ، وليست إلَّا هو ، فهو العليّ لا علوّ إضافة ، لأنّ الأعيان التي لها العدم الثابتة فيه ما شمّت رائحة الوجود ، فهي على حالها مع تعداد الصور في الموجودات . والعين واحدة من المجموع في المجموع فوجود الكثرة في الأسماء ، وهي النسب ، وهي أمور عدمية ، وليس إلَّا العين الذي هو الذات ، فهو العليّ لذاته لا بالإضافة.﴾

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

قال العبد : لمّا فرغ رضي الله عنه من ذكر العلوّ النسبي والإضافي ، أخذ في بيان العلوّ الحقيقي الذاتي ، فقوله : " عمّن " إشارة إلى أنّ هذا الاسم ليس علوّه علوّ إضافة فيدخل فيه « عن » و " على " بل هو عليّ بالذات ، ليس علوّه بالمكان ولا بالمكانة النسبيّين ، إذ ليس في الوجود إلَّا الله وحده لا شريك له في الوجود ، فهو عليّ بهذا العلوّ الذاتي لا بالعلوّ الإضافي النسبي ، فهو عليّ بالذات لنفسه . ثم اعلم : أنّ الوجود الحقّ القيّوم للموجودات عينها ، فمن كونه عينها وكونها عينه ، هي أيضا عليّة بذاتها وهو الوجود الحقّ ، فإنّها مع قطع النظر عن الوجود الحقّ لا غيره ، فالموجودات بهذا الاعتبار عليّة بالذات لا علوّ إضافة ونسبية كما أنّها من حيث هي سوى الحقّ عليّة بالمكان أو بالمكانة علوّا نسبيا إضافيا ليس لها بهذا الاعتبار علوّ ذاتي . وقوله رضي الله عنه عن الأعيان الثابتة : « إنّها ما شمّت رائحة الوجود » إشارة إلى ما ذكرنا من العلوّ الذاتي ، من حيث إنّ أعيان الموجودات التي لم تكن وكان الله ولم يكن معه شيء هي على حالتها العدمية الأصلية ، فكما أنّ الحق كان ولم يكن معه شيء كذلك الأشياء على ما كانت ، كما هو الآن على ما عليه كان ، فما ثمّ إلَّا الله الواحد الأحد . قال رضي الله عنه : « فما في العالم من هذه الحيثية علوّ إضافة ، لكنّ الوجوه الوجودية متفاضلة ، فعلوّ الإضافة موجود في العين الواحدة من حيث الوجوه الكثيرة . لذلك يقول رضي الله عنه فيه :" هو لا هو ، أنت لا أنت" . يشير رضي الله عنه : إلى أنّ مستند العلوّ الإضافي هو العلوّ الذاتي ، فالعلوّ للحق ذاتي من حيث أحدية العين ، ثم بحسب تغاير التعيّنات والوجوه المتفاضلة في هذه العين الواحدة يظهر العلوّ النسبي ، لتفاضل الوجوه . ولهذا يقول الأشاعرة في الصفات : إنّها هؤلاء هو . ويقول أهل الحجاب في العالم : إنّه لا هو . ويقول العارفون :إنّه هو هو . ويقول المحقّقون : إنّه هو ، لا هو . أي يصدق عليه أنّه هو من حيث الوجود الحقّ الذي هو عين الكلّ ، ويصدق عليه أنّه لا هو من حيث الكثرة والعدد التعيّني ، فإنّه كلّ جزء من الكبير صورة غير الآخر ، وإذا كان غيرا فما هو عين ، فافهم . قال رضي الله عنه

The servant [i.e., the commentator] says: When he (may God be pleased with him) finished mentioning the relational and relative highness, he proceeded to explain the real, essential highness. His words "above whom" indicate that this Name's highness is not a relational highness such that "above" (ʿan) and "over" (ʿalā) would apply to it; rather, He is High by Essence—His highness is not by place nor by relational station, since there is nothing in existence except God alone, without partner in existence. So He is High by this essential highness, not by the relational, relative highness; He is High by Essence, for Himself. Then know: the Real, Self-Subsisting Existence is identical with the existent things themselves; and from His being identical with them and their being identical with Him, they too are high in themselves—and He is the Real Existence—for they, apart from consideration of the Real Existence, are nothing else. So the existent things, in this respect, are high by essence, not by relational, relative highness, just as, insofar as they are other than the Real, they are high by place or station with a relational, relative highness, having, in this respect, no essential highness. His saying (may God be pleased with him) regarding the fixed entities, "they have never smelled the scent of existence," indicates what we have mentioned of essential highness, in that the entities of the existent things which were not—"and God was, and nothing was with Him"—remain in their original state of nonexistence; for just as the Real was, and nothing was with Him, so too the things remain as they were, exactly as it is now as it was then. For there is nothing but God, the One, the Unique. He (may God be pleased with him) said: "So there is, in the cosmos, from this standpoint, no relational highness; but the existential aspects (wujūh) are of varying excellence; so relational highness exists within the one entity in respect of the many aspects." That is why he (may God be pleased with him) says of it: "He, not He; You, not You." He indicates (may God be pleased with him) that the basis of relational highness is essential highness; for highness belongs to the Real essentially, in respect of the unicity of the entity (aḥadiyyat al-ʿayn); then, according to the differentiation of the entifications (taʿayyunāt) and the varying aspects within this one entity, relational highness appears, owing to the differing excellence of the aspects. This is why the Ashʿarites say of the attributes: they are He. And the veiled say of the cosmos: it is not He. And the gnostics (ʿārifūn) say: it is He, He. And the verifying knowers (muḥaqqiqūn) say: it is He, not He. That is, it is true of it that it is He, in respect of the Real Existence which is identical with the whole; and it is true of it that it is not He, in respect of multiplicity and entificational number—for every part of the greater whole is a form other than another; and if it is other, then it is not identical. So understand. He (may God be pleased with him) said:

Ibn Turka

﴿فلمّا لم يعمّ - مع اشتراكهم في حدّ الملائكة - عرفنا أنّ هذا علوّ المكانة عند الله ، وكذلك الخلفاء من الناس﴾

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

المنسوب إليهم العلوّ في الآية المذكورة

to whom highness is ascribed in the aforementioned verse

Words 4–5 · 1 of 6

مَعَ اشْتِرَاكِهِمْ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿مع اشتراكهم﴾

وفي بعض النسخ مع اشتراكهما، أي اشتراك العالين وغير العالين (في حد الملائكة عرفنا أن) هذا العلم المذكور على المكانة عند الله لا العلم الذاتي. لما ذكر ولا العلو المكاني أيضا لتجردهم ولم يتعرض له الشيخ رضي الله عنه لظهوره . (وكذلك) ، أي مثل العالين من الملائكة

— in some manuscripts: "together with their [dual] sharing," i.e., the sharing of the elevated ones and the non-elevated ones (in the definition of the angels, we recognize that) this knowledge mentioned concerns rank/station with God, not essential knowledge. Since he mentioned [this], there is also no spatial highness for them due to their being incorporeal, and the Shaykh — may God be pleased with him — did not address this because it is self-evident. (And likewise) — i.e., like the elevated ones among the angels

Words 17–19 · 1 of 6

الخُلَفَاءُ مِنَ النَّاسِ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿الخلفاء من الناس﴾

في كون علوهم بالخلافة علو المكانة لا العلم الذاتي فإنه

in that their highness through vicegerency is a highness of standing, not essential highness, for

Ibn Turka

﴿لو كان علوّهم بالخلافة علوّا ذاتيّا لكان لكلّ إنسان ، فلمّا لم يعمّ ،عرفنا أنّ ذلك العلوّ للمكانة﴾

التي هي عند الله بأحد الوجوه الثلاثة . علوّ الحق تعالى بالذات وإذ قد تبيّن أنّ العلوّ لغير المكان والمكانة إنّما هو بالتبعيّة والإضافة ، والذي لهما مرجعه بالحقيقة إلى الحقّ - أمّا الذي للمكانة فظاهر ، وأمّا الذي للمكان فلأنّه باستواء الرحمن عليه ، وهو من أسمائه تعالى ، فعلم أنّ العلوّ بالذات إنّما هو للحقّ فقط - أخذ يحقّق العلوّ الذاتي الذي للحقّ بقوله

which is with God in one of three aspects. [Section:] The Highness of the Real, Exalted, by Essence. Now that it has become clear that highness for other than place and rank is only by subordination and relation (iḍāfa), and that the highness belonging to these two reverts in reality to the Real — as for the highness of rank, this is evident, and as for the highness of place, it is because of the All-Merciful's settling upon it, and "the All-Merciful" is one of His Names, exalted be He — it is thus known that essential highness belongs only to the Real. He then proceeds to establish the essential highness that belongs to the Real by his saying:

Jāmī

﴿لو كان علوهم بالخلافة علوا ذاتيا﴾

أي خالص لذات الطبيعة الإنسانية ونفسها من غير أن يكون لأمر خارجي دخل فيه. (لكان) ذلك العلو ثابت

i.e., purely belonging to the essence of human nature itself, without any external matter having a part in it - (then) that highness would be established

Words 24–25 · 1 of 6

عُلُوًّا ذَاتِيًّا

Only al-Qayṣarī comments here.

al-Qayṣarī

﴿علوا ذاتيا﴾

أي، للطبيعة الإنسانية. قال رضي الله عنه

i.e., due to human nature. He, may God be pleased with him, said

al-Qayṣarī

﴿لكان لكل إنسان. فلما لم يعم، عرفنا أن ذلك العلو للمكانة﴾

أي، أثبت علو المكانة للإنسان الكامل، الذي هو الخليفة الحقيقية للحق، وللخلفاء الذين يخلقونه في كل زمان إلى يوم القيامة، وأثبته للملائكة. فلو كان لكونهم إنسانا، لكان ذلك لكل إنسان، ولو كان لكونهم ملائكة، لكان ذلك العلو لكل ملك، وليس كذلك، لخروج إبليس منها مع كونه ملكا بجعل الجنة من الملائكة في قوله: (وجعلوا بينه وبين الجنة نسبا). بعد قوله: (فاستفتهم، ألربك البنات ولهم البنون؟ أم خلقنا الملائكة إناثا وهم شاهدون؟) ولا شك أن إبليس من الجنة. فلما لم يكن كذلك، علمنا أنه اختصاص من عند الله . كما قال: (يختص برحمته من يشاء) . والأملاك العالون الملائكة التي وقعت في الصف الأول من الوجود. ومنهم المهيمة الذين لا شعور لهم بأن آدم وجد أو لم يوجد، إذ لا شعور لهم بذواتهم فضلا عن غيرهم. والعقل الأول والنفس الكلية منهم، إلا أن الله تعالى لم يجعلهما مهيمين، لتدوين الوجود بهم كما نبه الشيخ رضي الله عنه في فتوحاته. فمعنى الآية: أستكبرت أم صرت من العالين، المهيمين الذين لا يسجدون لغير الله ولا يشعرون إلا بجمال الله. وهذا لا يناقض قوله: (فسجد الملائكة كلهم أجمعون إلا إبليس استكبر وكان من الكافرين) . لأن الأمرإنما يتعلق بالعقلاء العالمين، فدخل في الأمر العقل الأول ومن دونه، في الإخبار منهم. وأيضا إذا سجد فرد واحد من حقيقة كلية، فقد حصل السجود من تلك الحقيقة أيضا، فكأن جميع أفرادها سجدو قال رضي الله عنه : (ومن أسمائه الحسنى، (العلى)). واعلم، أنه اسم من أسماء الذات، وهو بهذا الاعتبار لا يستدعى من يكون عليا عليه، وأما باعتبار أن العلو نسبةإضافية يستدعى السفل، فليستدعي ذلك. لذلك قال

That is, He affirmed the loftiness of station for the Perfect Human (al-insān al-kāmil), who is the true vicegerent of the Real, and for the vicegerents who succeed him in every age until the Day of Resurrection, and He affirmed it for the angels. For if it were due to their being human, it would belong to every human; and if it were due to their being angels, that loftiness would belong to every angel — but it is not so, since Iblīs was excluded from it despite being an angel, by making the jinn [a category] among the angels, as in His saying: 'And they have made between Him and the jinn a kinship,' following His saying: 'So ask them: Does your Lord have daughters while they have sons? Or did We create the angels as females while they were witnesses?' And there is no doubt that Iblīs is of the jinn. Since it was not thus [universal], we know that it is a special distinction (ikhtiṣāṣ) from God, as He said: 'He singles out for His mercy whom He wills.' And the 'exalted angels' (al-amlāk al-ʿālūn) are the angels who occupy the first rank of existence. Among them are the 'rapt ones' (al-muhayyamūn) who have no awareness whether Adam existed or not, since they have no awareness even of their own selves, let alone of others. The First Intellect and the Universal Soul are among them, except that God, Exalted, did not make them 'rapt,' so that existence might be set in order through them, as the Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, noted in his Futūḥāt. So the meaning of the verse is: Were you arrogant, or did you become one of the exalted, rapt ones who prostrate to none but God and are aware of nothing but God's Beauty? This does not contradict His saying: 'So the angels prostrated, all of them together, except Iblīs; he was arrogant and became one of the disbelievers.' For the command pertains only to those possessed of intellect who have [such] awareness, so the First Intellect and what is beneath it are included in the command, in terms of their report [of what occurred]. Also, when a single individual of a universal reality prostrates, the prostration has occurred from that reality as well, as if all its individuals had prostrated. He, may God be pleased with him, said: (And among His Beautiful Names is 'the Most High' [al-ʿAlī]). Know that it is a Name belonging to the Names of the Essence, and in this respect it does not require something over which it is high; but insofar as loftiness is a relational attribute (nisba iḍāfiyya) requiring a 'lowness,' it does require that. Hence he said

Jāmī

﴿لكل إنسان فلما لم يعم ذلك العلو عرفنا أن ذلك العلو للمكانة﴾

الحاصلة للخلفاء عند الله أو عند الناس لا لنفس طبيعتهم الإنسانية ليكون ذاتيا ولا للعلو المكاني . إذ لا اختصاص لهم حين الخلافة المكان لا يكون للمستخلف عليهم

attained by the vicegerents with God or with people, not to their human nature itself so as to be essential, nor is it highness of place, since they have no special [spatial] claim - for at the time of vicegerency, place does not belong to those over whom one is made vicegerent

Bālī Zāde

﴿لكل إنسان﴾

ولم يعم ذلك العلو لكل إنسان

but that elevation did not apply universally to every human being.

Bālī Zāde

﴿فلما لم يعم عرفنا أن ذلك العلو للمكانة﴾

ولما فرغ عن بيان على المكان والمكانة شرع في بيان العلم الذاتي بقوله

. And when he finished explaining elevation of place and of rank, he began explaining essential knowledge (al-ʿilm al-dhātī) by saying:

Ibn Turka

﴿ومن أسمائه الحسنى « العليّ » ، على من ؟﴾

- فإنّ علوّ المكان غالبا إنّما يستعمل بـ « على » . لقوله تعالى

— for the highness of place is mostly used with "over" (ʿalā), according to His saying, exalted be He:

Jāmī

﴿ومن أسمائه الحسنى﴾

الذاتية (العلي) فعلوه

essential [names] (is) 'the Most High' - so His highness

Bālī Zāde

﴿ومن أسمائه الحسنى العلي على من ؟ وما ثمه إلا هو.﴾

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

لأنه من أسمائه الذاتية فلا يستدعي بالإضافة فإذا كان عليا وما ثمه غيره

Because it is among His essential names, so it does not require a relation (iḍāfa). So since He is high and there is nothing there other than Him,

al-Qayṣarī

﴿على من وما ثم إلاهو﴾

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

أي، علوه على من، وما ثم في الوجود شئ غيره

That is, His loftiness is over whom? — there is nothing in existence other than Him

Jāmī

﴿على من﴾

إن كان من علا عليه إذا غلب (وما ثمة) ، أي في المرتبة التي اعتبر فيها اتسام الذات بهذا الاسم وهي مرتبة الجمع

if [this is] from 'he was high over him' meaning he overcame [him] - (and there is nothing there) i.e., in the level (martaba) in which the Essence's being characterized by this name is considered, which is the level of all-comprehensiveness (jamʿ)

Ibn Turka

﴿وما ثمّ إلَّا هو ، فهو العليّ لذاته﴾

أي العليّ المطلق الذي هو أعلى من أن يكون علوّه بالقياس إلى السفل . هذا حال علوّ المكان - وكذلك أمر علوّ المكانة ، وإليه أشار بقوله : ( أو عن ماذا ؟ ) - فإنّ علوّ المكانة أكثر ما يستعمل ب « عن » كما يقال : " جناب الخليفة عال عن كذا " - فإذا لم يكن شيء يعلو عنه بالمكانة ، لا يمكن أن يكون علوّه ذلك له بالإضافة ، فإنّ كل أمر فرض فهو شيء

— that is, the Absolute Highest, who is too exalted for His highness to be in relation to what is below. This concerns the highness of place — and likewise the matter of the highness of rank, to which he alluded by saying: (or over what?) — for the highness of rank is mostly used with "from/above" (ʿan), as one says: "The excellency of the caliph is above such-and-such" — so since there is nothing above which He is high in rank, His highness in that respect cannot be relational, for whatever is posited is something,

Words 45–46 · 1 of 6

إِلَّا هُوَ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿إلا هو﴾

فكيف يتوهم نسبته إلى غيره

- so how could His being ascribed to other-than-Him be imagined?

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فهو العلي لذاته﴾

أي،فهو العلي لذاته لا بالنسبة إلى غيره، فلا يستدعي أن يكون عليا عليه كما مر. قال رضي الله عنه

That is, He is the Most High in Himself, not in relation to another, so it does not require Him to be high over something, as mentioned before. He, may God be pleased with him, said

Jāmī

﴿فهو العلي لذاته﴾

لا لغيره (أو) علوة (عماذا) ، أي عن أي شيء إن كان من علا عنه إذا ارتفع

not by other than Himself. (Or) His highness (above what) i.e., above what thing, if [this is] from 'he was high above it' meaning he rose above [it]

Bālī Zāde

﴿فهو العلي لذاته أو﴾

هو العلي (عن ماذا؟) . أي عن أي شيء اكتسب العلو

He is the High (from what?) - i.e., from what thing did He acquire elevation?

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وعن ماذا؟ وما هو إلا هو فعلوه لنفسه﴾

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

أي، عمن استفاد العلو حتى لا يكون له لذاته، والحال أن ما هو. أي، ليس ذلك الشئ أيضا إلا هو، فليس شئ آخر غيره استفاده منه العلو، فعلوه لذاته. أو يكون (العلى) متضمنا لمعنى الارتفاع. يقال: علا عليه. أي، غلب عليه. و: علا عنه. أي، ارتفع عنه. معناه: أن المرتفع عماذا، أو عمن؟ وليس في الوجود غيره. قال رضي الله عنه

That is, from whom did He derive His loftiness, such that it would not belong to Him essentially — while the fact is that whatever is, is naught but He; so there is nothing other than Him from which He derived loftiness; His loftiness is thus for His own Essence. Or, 'al-ʿAlī' may contain the sense of 'prevailing/rising above.' One says: 'ʿalā ʿalayhi,' meaning he prevailed over him; and 'ʿalā ʿanhu,' meaning he rose above it. The meaning is: that which is risen above — above what, or above whom? And there is nothing in existence other than Him. He, may God be pleased with him, said

Ibn Turka

﴿وما هو إلَّا هو فعلوّه﴾

- مطلقا ، سواء كان بالمكان أو بالمكانة - له ( لنفسه) فإذ قد تحقّق أنّ العلوّ الذي للحقّ هو العلوّ الذاتي - حيث أنه ليس في الوجود شيء يعلو عليه أو عنه ، فلا يكون في الوجود إلَّا العليّ بالذات - لا بدّ أن يحقّق أمر العلوّ الإضافي ، وأنّ العالي به من هو ؟ وإلى ذلك أشار بقوله : الموجودات علية بالذات بعلوّه تعالى قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

— absolutely, whether by place or by rank — belongs (to Himself) — Since it is thus established that the highness belonging to the Real is essential highness — there being nothing in existence over which or above which He is high, so that there is nothing in existence except the Essentially Highest — it becomes necessary to establish the matter of relational highness, and who it is that possesses highness by it. To this he alludes by saying: Existents Are High by Essence Through His Highness, Exalted. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Jāmī

﴿وما هو﴾

أي ذلك الشيء في تلك المرتبة

i.e., that thing, in that level

Bālī Zāde

﴿وما هو﴾

أي ليس ذلك الشيء

i.e., that thing is not

Words 56–57 · 2 of 6

إِلَّا هُوَ

Jāmī

﴿إلا هو﴾

أي لا شيء سواه

i.e., there is nothing besides Him

Bālī Zāde

﴿إلا هو﴾

إلا عین الحق لا غيره . فإذا كان ما استفاد الحق منه العلو عین الحق

- other than the very essence (ʿayn) of the Real, not other than it. So since what the Real derived His elevation from is the very essence of the Real,

Jāmī

﴿فعلوه لنفسه﴾

لا لغيره. ولما أثبت العلم الذاتي للحق سبحانه في مرتبة الجمع أراد أن يثبت نه في مرتبة الفرق وللخلف أيضا باعتبار أنه عین الحق بالحقيقة في هذه المرتبة فقال : (وهو) ، أي الحق الموصوف بالعلم الذاتي

not for other than Himself. And having established essential highness for the Real, glory be to Him, in the level of all-comprehensiveness, he wanted to establish it also in the level of differentiation (farq) and for creation as well, in consideration that it is in reality identical with the Real at this level, so he said: (And He), i.e., the Real described by essential highness

Bālī Zāde

﴿فعلوه لنفسه وهو … من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات﴾

وإن كان كل واحد منهما ممتازا بالوجوب والإمكان فلا يكتسب العلو عن غيره فمعنى كون الحق من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات اتحاده في حقيقة الوجود كاتحاده في العلم والقدرة وغير ذلك . فكان الاتحاد من جهة واحدة لا مطلقا وإنه محال فإذا كان الحق من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات

- even though each of the two is distinguished by necessity and possibility, so He does not acquire elevation from other than Himself. The meaning of the Real's being, from the standpoint of existence, identical with the existents is His unity in the reality of existence, just as His unity in knowledge and power and so on. So the unity is from one aspect, not absolutely - for that would be impossible. So since the Real, from the standpoint of existence, is identical with the existents,

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وهو من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات، فالمسمى محدثات هي العلية لذاتها،وليست إلا هو، فهو العلى لا علو إضافة، لأن الأعيان التي لها العدم الثابتة فيه ماشمت رائحة من الوجود، فهي على حالها مع تعداد الصور في الموجودات﴾

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

أي،الحق من حيث الوجود المضاف إلى الموجودات هو عين الموجودات الخارجية. وذلك لأن الأعيان مرايا لوجود الحق، وما يظهر في المرأة إلا عين الرائي وصورته،فالموجودات المسمى بالمحدثات صور تفاصيل الحق. فهي العلية لذاتها، لأن الحق على لذاته لا بالإضافة، فالموجودات أيضا كذلك، لأنها ليست إلا اثر من الحق. وإنما قال: (لأن الأعيان %~% ما شمت رائحة الوجود). لأن الأعيان صور علمية موجودة في العلم معدومة في العين. ولها اعتباران: اعتبار أنها مرايا لوجود الحق وأسمائه وصفاته، واعتبار أن وجود الحق يصير مرآة لها. فالاعتبار الأول، لا يظهر في الخارج إلا الوجود المتعين بحسب تلك المرايا المتعددة بتعددها، كما إذا قابلت وجهك بشئ فيه مرايا متعددة، تظهر صورتك في كل منها فتعددت. فعلى الأول، ليس شئ في الخارج إلا الوجود، والأعيان على حالها في العلم معدومة في العين، ما شمت رائحة الوجود الخارجي. هذا لسان حال الموحد الذي غلبه الحق. وبالاعتبار الثاني، ليس في الوجود إلا الأعيان ووجود الحق الذي هو مرآة لها في الغيب، ما يتجلى إلا من وراء تتق العزة وسرادقات الجمال والجلال. وهذا لسان من غلبه الخلق. وأما المحقق فلا يزال يشاهد المرآتين: مرآة الأعيان، ومرآة الحق والصور التي فيهما معا من غير انفكاك وامتياز. والشيخ رضي الله عنه لكونه بحرا مواجا، يخرج درر الحقائق ولآلئ المعاني على لسان كل طائفة من الطوائف الثلاث في كل حين ويعطى حقها. وقوله

That is, the Real, in respect of the existence attributed to the existent things, is identical with the external existent things. This is because the entities (aʿyān) are mirrors for the existence of the Real, and nothing appears in a mirror except the very form of the viewer; so the existent things, termed 'originated things,' are forms of the details of the Real. They are thus 'high' in themselves, because the Real is high in His own Essence, not relationally — and the existent things are likewise so, since they are nothing but a trace (athar) of the Real. As for his saying: 'for the entities... have never caught the whiff of existence' — this is because the entities are knowledge-forms (ṣuwar ʿilmiyya) existing in [God's] knowledge while nonexistent in concrete actuality (al-ʿayn). They have two considerations: one, that they are mirrors for the existence of the Real and His Names and Attributes; and the other, that the existence of the Real becomes a mirror for them. According to the first consideration, nothing appears externally except the existence determined according to those multiple mirrors, multiplied by their multiplicity — just as when you face your countenance toward something containing multiple mirrors, your image appears in each of them, thus becoming multiple. On this first view, nothing exists externally but Existence [itself], while the entities remain as they are in knowledge, nonexistent in concrete actuality, never having caught a whiff of external existence. This is the discourse (lisān ḥāl) of the one who affirms unity (al-muwaḥḥid) who has been overwhelmed by the Real. According to the second consideration, nothing exists but the entities and the existence of the Real, which is a mirror for them in the Unseen, never disclosing itself except from behind the veils of Might and the pavilions of Beauty and Majesty. This is the discourse of one overwhelmed by creation. As for the realized one (al-muḥaqqiq), he continuously witnesses both mirrors together — the mirror of the entities and the mirror of the Real, and the forms within both together, without separation or distinction. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, being a surging sea, brings forth the pearls of realities and the gems of meanings upon the tongue of each of these three groups at every moment, giving each its due. His saying

Ibn Turka

﴿وهو من حيث الوجود عين الموجودات ، فالمسمّى « محدثات » هي العليّة لذاتها ، وليست إلَّا هو﴾

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

أي ليست المحدثات إلَّا المسمّى نفسه

— that is, the contingent things are nothing but the Named Himself

Jāmī

﴿من حيث الوجود﴾

الذاتي هو من حيث يقيده بتعينات علمية حقيقة الأشياء ومن يقيد تقيدات عينية وجوداته

- essential [existence] is from the standpoint that the reality of things is delimited by it through cognitive determinations (taʿayyunāt ʿilmiyya), and from the standpoint that its existences are delimited by concrete delimitations (taqayyudāt ʿayniyya)

Words 64–65 · 1 of 6

عَيْنُ المَوْجُودَاتِ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿عين الموجودات﴾

حقيقة ووجود ونقول : هو من حيث الوجود التحقق دون العلم والتعقل عين الموجودات فإن أطلق عين القيد في التحقق وغيره في التعقل

in reality and in existence. And we say: He, in respect of the existence of actual realization (al-wujūd al-taḥaqquq), not of knowledge and intellection, is identical with existent things. For [the term] 'identical' is applied unrestrictedly in actual realization, and otherwise in intellection

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.