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 مُهَيَّمِيَّةٍ فِي كَلِمَةٍ إِبْرَاهِيمِيَّةٍ

←→Read ¶4 in the text

4 · 78 words · shading: how many commentators stop on each word

فَإِنَّ بَعْضَ الحُكَمَاءِ وَأَبَا حَامِدٍ ادَّعَوْا إِنَّهُ يَعْرِفُ اللَّهَ مِنْ غَيْرِ نَظَرٍ فِي العَالَمِ وَهَذَا غَلَطٌ نَعَمْ تُعْرَفُ ذَاتٌ قَدِيمَةٌ أَزَلِيَّةٌ لَا يُعْرَفُ أَنَّهَا إِلٰهٌ حَتَّى يُعْرَفَ المَأْلُوهُ فَهُوَ الدَّلِيلُ عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ بَعْدَ هَذَا فِي ثَانِي حَالٍ يُعْطِيكَ الكَشْفُ أَنَّ الحَقَّ نَفْسَهُ كَانَ عَيْنَ الدَّلِيلِ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ وَعَلَى أُلُوهَتِهِ وَأَنَّ العَالَمَ لَيْسَ إِلَّا تَجَلِّيْهِ فِي صُورِ أَعْيَانِهِمْ الثَّابِتَةِ الَّتِي يَسْتَحِيلُ وُجُودُهَا بِدُونِهِ وَأَنَّهُ يَتَنَوَّعُ وَيَتَصَوَّرُ بِحَسَبِ حَقَائِقِ هَذِهِ الأَعْيَانِ وَأَحْوَالِهَا وَهَذَا بَعْدَ العِلْمِ بِهِ مِنَّا أَنَّهُ إِلٰهٌ لَنَا

For some of the sages, and Abū Ḥāmid [al-Ghazālī], claimed that God is known without reflection upon the cosmos, and this is an error. Yes, an eternal, beginningless Essence is known, [but] it is not known that it is a god until that which is god-ed over (al-maʾlūh) is known. So it [the one god-ed over] is the evidence pointing to Him. Then, after this, in a second state, unveiling gives you [to know] that the Real Himself was the very self of the evidence for Himself and for His divinity, and that the cosmos is nothing but His self-disclosure in the forms of their fixed entities, whose existence is impossible without Him, and that He diversifies and takes on forms in accordance with the realities of these entities and their states. And this [comes] after our knowledge of Him that He is a god for us.

On the whole passage · 2 of 6

al-Jandī

﴿ثمّ بعد هذا في ثاني حال يعطيك الكشف أنّ الحق نفسه كان عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته ، وأنّ العالم ليس إلَّا تجلَّيه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها بدونه وأن يتنوّع ويتصوّر بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها ، وهذا بعد العلم به منّا أنّه إله لنا﴾

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

قال العبد : يشير رضي الله عنه : إلى أنّ الواجب على كلّ أن يعرف ربّه وإلهه الذي يعبده ، وذلك لا يكون إلَّا بعد معرفة عبدانيّته ومربوبيته ، فإذا عرف نفسه عبدا مربوبا ، تأتّى له أن يعرف أنّ له إلها هو ربّه خلقه . ثم بعد هذه المعرفة الصحيحة إن عرف أنّه موجود بالحق ، أو عرف أنّ الموجود هو الحق في عينه وصورته يتنوّع ظهوره بحسب خصوصية المظهر ، عرف أنّ العالم تجلّ منه ، فهو الظاهر بالعالم وفيه بحسب خصوصية حقيقة العالم من القبول ، فهو من حيث ظهوره في العالم المحدث كان دليلا على نفسه أنّه أحدثه وأوجده ، وكان الحق حينئذ من حيث ظهوره فيك دليلا عليه أنّه ربّ ، إله ، خالق لك ، فافهم . فما أنت إذن أنت على ما كنت في زعمك ، بل تعيّن وتجلّ من تجلَّياته في مرتبة كليّة أو جزوية ، في حقيقة عين ثابتة علميّة أزلية ذاتية من جملة شؤونه الذاتية التي لم توجد ولا شمّت رائحة من الوجود العيني ، بل هي على وجودها العلمي الأزلي الأبدي ، والموجود المشهود منك في الأعيان تجلَّى لظاهر في مظهر ، وكذلك الموجود المشهود من العالم تجلّ كلَّي وتعيّن عيني ظهر في مظاهر ومجال وتراءى في مناظر ومراء كثيرة مختلفة ، فما يشهد ولا يوجد في المرآة إلَّا الحق لا المرئيّ . فإنّ متعلَّق الشهود والوجود ليس إلَّا المثال الظاهر من ناظر واحد محاذ بصورته لهذه المرائي الكثيرة ، وهي أعيان العالم وحقائقه فانظر ما ذا ترى ، فأنت يا أخي على عدميّتك الأزلية ، والمشهود هو الوجود الحق الظاهر في مظهريّتك ومرآتك ، وهو الدليل على نفسه من جهتين ومرتبتين : مطلقة ومقيّدة ، فافهم . قال رضي الله عنه

The servant says: he - may God be pleased with him - alludes to the fact that it is obligatory upon everyone to know his Lord and the deity he worships, and this cannot occur except after knowing one's own servanthood and being-lorded-over. So when one knows oneself as a servant, lorded-over, it becomes possible for one to know that one has a deity who is one's Lord, who created one. Then, after this correct knowledge, if one knows that one exists through the Real, or knows that the Existent is the Real in His own entity (ʿayn) and form, diversifying His manifestation according to the specificity of the locus of manifestation (maẕhar), one knows that the cosmos is a self-disclosure from Him - so He is the manifest one in the cosmos and within it according to the specificity of the reality of the cosmos in respect of receptivity. Thus, from the standpoint of His manifestation in the originated cosmos, He becomes a proof of Himself that He originated and brought it into existence; and the Real, at that point, from the standpoint of His manifestation in you, becomes a proof to you that He is Lord, deity, Creator of you - so understand. You, then, are not what you supposed yourself to be; rather, you are a determination (taʿayyun) and a self-disclosure from among His self-disclosures, at a universal or particular level, in the reality of a fixed entity (ʿayn thābita) that is cognitive, eternal, essential, among the totality of His essential affairs (shuʾūn dhātiyya) which have never come into existence nor caught any whiff of concrete existence, but rather remain in their eternal, everlasting cognitive existence. The existence witnessed and observed of you among the entities is a self-disclosure manifesting to a manifest locus (ẓāhir) in a locus of manifestation. Likewise, the existence witnessed and observed of the cosmos is a universal self-disclosure and a concrete determination that has appeared in loci of manifestation and theaters, and has been reflected in many different vantage points and mirrors. Nothing is witnessed or found in the mirror except the Real, not the thing seen (al-marʾī). For the object of witnessing and existence is nothing but the manifest image from a single viewer, whose form faces these many mirrors, which are the entities of the cosmos and its realities. So look at what you see! You, O brother, remain in your eternal nonexistence, while what is witnessed is the Real Existence manifest in your being-a-locus-of-manifestation and your being-a-mirror. He is the proof of Himself from two aspects and two levels: the absolute and the delimited - so understand. He - may God be pleased with him - said:

Jāmī

﴿و هذا بعد العلم به منا أنه إله لنا. ثم يأتي الكشف الآخر فيظهر لك صورنا فيه، فيظهر بعضنا لبعض في الحق، فيعرف بعضنا بعضا، و يتميز بعضنا عن بعض. فمنا من يعرف أن في الحق وقعت هذه المعرفة لنا بنا، و منا من يجهل الحضرة التي وقعت فيها هذه المعرفة بنا: أعوذ بالله أن أكون من الجاهلين. و بالكشفين معا ما يحكم علينا إلا بنا،﴾

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

(وهذا) الكشف كما نبهنا أولا إنما يحصل لن

after our knowing of Him that He is a god for us. Then the other unveiling comes, and our forms become manifest to you within Him, so some of us become manifest to others in the Real, and some of us come to know others, and some of us become distinguished from others. So among us is one who knows that this knowledge of us by us occurred in the Real, and among us is one who is ignorant of the Presence in which this knowledge of us occurred: I seek refuge in God from being among the ignorant. And by both unveilings together, nothing is decreed upon us except by us,] (and this) unveiling, as we noted at first, only occurs to

al-Qāshānī

﴿فإن بعض الحكماء وأبا حامد ادعوا أنه يعرف الله من غير نظر في العالم وهذا غلط ، نعم تعرف ذات قديمة أزلية لا تعرف أنها إله حتى يعرف المألوه ، فهو الدليل عليه﴾

أبو حامد هو الغزالي رحمه الله ، والمراد أن الذات الموصوفة بصفة الألوهية لا تعرف إلا بالمألوهية كما مر . بل العقل يعرف من نفس الوجود وجود الواجب وهو ذات قديمة أزلية ، فإن الله بالذات غنى عن العالمين لا بالأسماء ، فالمألوه هو الدليل على الإله . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

one does not know that it is a deity until that which is deified is known, for the latter is the proof of it] Abū Ḥāmid is al-Ghazālī, may God have mercy on him. What is meant is that the Essence qualified by the attribute of Divinity is not known except through being-deified, as was mentioned before. Rather, the intellect knows, from existence itself, the existence of the Necessary Being, which is a Pre-Eternal, Everlasting Essence, for God in His Essence is independent of the worlds—not through the Names. So that which is deified is the proof of the Deity. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Qayṣarī

﴿فإن بعض الحكماء وأبا حامد ادعوا أنه يعرف الله من غير نظر في العالم وهذا غلط.﴾

الضمير في (أنه) للشأن. و (يعرف) على البناء للمفعول. والمراد ب

The pronoun in "annahu" refers to the matter in general. "Known" (yuʿrafu) is in the passive form. What is meant by

﴿بعض الحكماء﴾

أبو على وأتباعه. "" مراده من بعض الحكماء هو الشيوخ الفلاسفة، كالرئيس، ابن سينا. والشيخ أثبت الحق ببرهان سماه برهان الصديقين وأن ذكر هذا البرهان في الإشارات لإثبات الواجب. وأخذ منه أبو حامد الغزالي ، كما أخذ جميع عقائده في الكلام عن الحكماء، وفهم أن عقائد الحكماء ومطالبهم في المبدأ والمعاد أتم من آراء أرباب الكلام. "" أي الإمام الغزالي وأبوعلى ومن تابعهما ادعوا أن الله يعرف من غير نظر إلى العالم. وأنهم يستدلون بالمؤثر على الأثر ، وهو أعلى مرتبة من الاستدلال بالأثر على المؤثر. وحاصل استدلالاتهم ترجع بأن الوجود الممكن لإمكانه يحتاج إلى علة موجودة غير ممكنة، وهو الحق الواجب وجوده لذاته. وهذا أيضا استدلال من الأثرإلى المؤثر، فلا يتم دعواهم. فلذلك نسبهم إلى الغلط، أو لعدم إمكان تعقل النسبة بدون المنتسبين قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

is Abū ʿAlī [ibn Sīnā] and his followers. "" What he means by "some of the philosophers" are the philosopher-shaykhs, such as the chief master (al-raʾīs), Ibn Sīnā. The Shaykh established the Real by a proof he called "the proof of the veracious" (burhān al-ṣiddīqīn), and he mentioned this proof in al-Ishārāt to establish the Necessary Being. Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī took this from him, just as he took all his doctrines in theology (kalām) from the philosophers, understanding that the doctrines of the philosophers and their positions on the Origin and the Return were more complete than the views of the theologians. "" That is, Imām al-Ghazālī and Abū ʿAlī and those who followed them claimed that God can be known without consideration of the world, and that they argue from the Efficient Cause (al-muʾaththir) to the effect (al-athar), which is a higher degree of argument than arguing from the effect to the Efficient Cause. The sum of their arguments comes down to this: that contingent existence, by virtue of its contingency, requires a cause that exists and is not contingent, namely the Real, whose existence is necessary in Himself. But this too is an argument from the effect to the Efficient Cause, so their claim does not hold. For this reason he attributes error to them—or because of the impossibility of conceptualizing the relation (nisba) without those related to it. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

Ibn Turka

﴿فإنّ بعض الحكماء﴾

المشّاءين ومن تابعهم

- the Peripatetics (mashshāʾūn) and those who followed them -

Jāmī

﴿فإن بعض الحكماء وأبا حامد … ادعوا أنه يعرف ألله من غير نظر في العالم﴾

أي من غير استدلال به عليه استدلالا بالمؤثر على الأثر. أو من غير ملاحظة له سواء كان بالاستدلال أو بغيره كما في المتضايفين. (وهذا غلط منهم) ، لأنه إن كان المراد الثاني فلا شك أن الألوهية معنی نسبي فلا يمكن تعقلها بدون المنتسبين . الذين أحدهما : العالم وإن كان المراد الأول فقيل : وجه الغلط أن طريق أهل النظر إما الاستدلال بالأثر على المؤثر أو بالمؤثر على الأثر . ولا مؤثر للحق سبحانه "لا مؤثر فى الحق سبحانه" يستدل به عليه ، فإنحصر طريق معرفته في الاستدلال بالأثر على المؤثر. والأثر هو العالم فلا يعرف من غير نظر في العالم. ونوقش فيه بأن الكلام في مرتبة الألوهية لا في الذات البحت، ويمكن الاستدلال على المرتبة بالمؤثر فيها الذي هو الذات البحت. بأن تعرف أولا الذات ثم بعض الصفات كوجوب الوجود مثلا ، وتفرع عليه سائر الصفات كما فعلوا ذلك . وعلى مجموع الذات والصفات إلا بأمر واحد كما صدرت بحسب الواقع، فتعرف مرتبة الألوهية من غير استدلال بالعالم عليها وإن كان لا بد فيه من ملاحظة العالم. ويمكن أن يجاب عنه بأن معرفة الذات البحت يستدل بها على مرتبة الألوهية من غير نظر في العالم بالاستدلال عليها غير معلومة بل عدمها معلوم عند أهل النظر. فالحكم بصحة معرفة تلك المرتبة من غیر نظر في العالم يكون غلطا غير صحيح. "لكن" نعم يصح ذلك في طريق أهل الكشف . ولذلك قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : "عرفت الأشياء بربي" حين قيل له : بم عرفت الله؟ " استشهد به ابن تيمية فى الفتاوى الكبرى و درء تعارض العقل مع النقل وفى غيرها.ونصه "عرفت الأشياء بربي وما عرفت ربي بالأشياء"" وكأنه إلى ذلك يشير الشيخ رضي الله عنه حيث قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

i.e., without inferring Him through it by way of inferring the cause from the effect, or without any consideration of Him at all — whether by inference or otherwise, as is the case with correlative terms (al-mutaḍāyifayn). (And this is an error on their part), because if the second meaning is intended, there is no doubt that divinity is a relational meaning, and it cannot be conceived without the two correlated terms, one of which is the cosmos. And if the first meaning is intended, it has been said that the source of the error is that the way of the people of rational inquiry (ahl al-naẕar) is either inferring the cause from the effect, or the effect from the cause; and there is no cause for the Real, Glorified be He — "there is no cause in the Real, Glorified be He" — by which He could be inferred. So the path to knowledge of Him is confined to inferring the cause from the effect, and the effect is the cosmos; hence He cannot be known without reflection upon the cosmos. But it has been objected that the discourse concerns the station of divinity, not the bare Essence, and it is possible to infer the station through the cause acting within it, which is the bare Essence — by first knowing the Essence, then some attributes, such as the necessity of existence, for example, and deriving the rest of the attributes from it, as they have done — and concerning the totality of Essence and attributes except by a single matter, as they issued according to actual fact, so the station of divinity is known without inferring it through the cosmos, even though reflection upon the cosmos is unavoidable in it. It may be answered that knowledge of the bare Essence, by which the station of divinity is inferred without reflection upon the cosmos, through inferring it, is not known — rather its absence is known among the people of rational inquiry. So judging the validity of knowing that station without reflection upon the cosmos is an invalid error. "However" — yes, this is valid on the path of the people of unveiling (ahl al-kashf). And it is to this that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, alluded when asked: 'By what did you know God?' and he said: 'I knew things through my Lord' — Ibn Taymiyya cited this in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā, Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql maʿa al-Naql, and elsewhere, and its text is: 'I knew things through my Lord, and I did not know my Lord through things.' And it is as though the Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, alludes to this, where the Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

Bālī Zāde

﴿فإن بعض الحكماء﴾

وهو أبو علي "الرئيس ابن سيناء الفيلسوف الطبيب"ومن تابعه

— namely Abū ʿAlī, "the chief Ibn Sīnā, the physician-philosopher," and those who followed him

Ibn Turka

﴿وأبا حامد ادّعوا أنّه يعرف الله من غير نظر في العالم﴾

فإنّ لهم في طريقهم الاستدلاليّ مسلكين : أحدهم إنّيّ ، يتدرّجون فيه من الأثر إلى المؤثّر ، والآخر لمّيّ ، يتنزّلون به من المؤثّر إلى الأثر . وبيّن أن من وقع مواطئ سلوكه على الثاني منهما في معرفة الحقّ لا يحتاج فيه إلى النظر في العالم - على ما تفطَّن لذلك صاحب الإشارات من قوله تعالى : " سَنُرِيهِمْ آياتِنا في الآفاقِ وَفي أَنْفُسِهِمْ " [ 41 / 53 ] . ومن قوله تعالى : " أَوَلَمْ يَكْفِ بِرَبِّكَ أَنَّه ُ عَلى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدٌ " [ 41 / 53 ] حيث جعل الأوّل إشارة إلى أوّل المسلكين ، والثاني إلى الآخر . ولكن ذلك المعرفة له من حيث أنّه ذات ، لا من حيث أنّه إله ، والمبحث إنّما هو هذا ، ولذلك قال

- for they have, in their inferential path, two approaches: one is the 'inni' (demonstration of existence), in which they proceed by degrees from the effect to the cause; and the other is the 'limmi' (demonstration of cause), in which they descend from the cause to the effect. And he made clear that whoever's footsteps in traversing fall upon the second of these two paths in the knowledge of the Real has no need therein of reflection upon the world - as the author of al-Ishārāt perceived from His saying, exalted is He: 'We shall show them Our signs in the horizons and in themselves' [41:53], and from His saying, exalted is He: 'Does it not suffice as regards your Lord that He is witness over all things?' [41:53] - where he made the first a reference to the first of the two paths, and the second to the other. But that knowledge is of Him insofar as He is an Essence (dhāt), not insofar as He is a god (ilāh); and the subject under discussion here is precisely this. For this reason he said:

Bālī Zāde

﴿وأبا حامد﴾

وهو الإمام الغزالي ومن تابعه

— namely Imam al-Ghazālī, and those who followed him

Words 6–7 · 1 of 6

ادَّعَوْا إِنَّهُ

Only Bālī Zāde comments here.

Bālī Zāde

﴿ادعوا أنه﴾

والضمير للشأن

— the pronoun refers to the matter/affair

Bālī Zāde

﴿بعرف الله من غير نظر إلى العالم وهذا غلط نعم نعرف ذات قديمة أزلية﴾

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

لا كلام ولا نزاع فيه وإنما كلامنا في أنه

— there is no dispute or disagreement about this; rather, our discussion concerns the fact that it

Ibn Turka

﴿وهذا غلط نعم ، تعرف ذات قديمة أزليّة لا يعرف أنّها إله ، حتّى يعرف المألوه﴾

الذي هو معطي تلك النسبة من العبد القابل

it is not known that it is a god, until the one for whom [the Essence is] a god (al-maʾlūh) is known'] - [the maʾlūh] being the one who bestows that relation (nisba), [namely] the receptive servant.

al-Qayṣarī

﴿نعم، تعرف ذات قديمة أزلية لا تعرف أنها إله حتى يعرف المألوه، فهو الدليل عليه﴾

أي، إذا أمعن النظر صاحب الفطانة والذهن المستقيم في نفس الوجود،يمكن أن يعرف أن ذاته قديمة أزلية واجبة، هي لها بذاتها لا بحسب الاستدلال،بل بوجدان الأمر على ما هو عليه على سبيل الذوق. ثم يتمكن من التنبيه لغيره أيضا، ليجد هو أيضا كذلك. كما بينا في فصل الوجود في أول الكتاب. أما المعرفة بأنها إله صاحب أسماء وصفات، فلا يمكن حتى ينظر إلى العالم، فيستدل بالعبودية على المعبودية، وبالمربوبية على الربوبية. ف (العالم) هو الدليل على الإله من حيث إنه إله، لذلك قيل إنه مأخوذ من (العلامة) وهي الدليل. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

That is, if the possessor of discernment and sound mind reflects deeply upon existence itself, he can know that his essence is pre-eternal (azaliyya) and necessary, belonging to him by himself, not by way of inferential reasoning, but by finding the matter as it is, by way of direct tasting (dhawq). Then he becomes able to alert others as well, so that they too may find it thus, as we explained in the chapter on existence at the beginning of the book. As for knowledge that He is a God possessing names and attributes, that is not possible until one looks at the world (al-ʿālam), inferring from servanthood (ʿubūdiyya) to being-served (maʿbūdiyya), and from being-lorded-over (marbūbiyya) to lordship (rubūbiyya). So "the world" (al-ʿālam) is the proof (dalīl) of the God insofar as He is a God; for this reason it is said that it is derived from "al-ʿalāma" (the sign), which is the proof. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Jāmī

﴿نعم تعرف ذات قديمة أزلية لا يعرف أنها إله حتى يعرف المألوه. فهو الدليل عليه. ثم بعد هذا في ثاني حال يعطيك الكشف أن الحق نفسه كان عين الدليل على نفسه و على ألوهيته، و أن العالم ليس إلا تجليه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها بدونه ، وأنه يتنوع و يتصور بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان و أحوالها، … نعم تعرف﴾

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

من غير نظر في العالم

without reflection upon the cosmos

Jāmī

﴿ذات قديمة أزلية لكن لا يعرف أنها إله حتى يعرف المألوه﴾

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

ويستدل به على ألوهيته (فهو) أي المألوه

and through it inference is made to His divinity. (For it), i.e., the deified one

Words 22–23 · 1 of 6

لَا يُعْرَفُ

Only Bālī Zāde comments here.

Bālī Zāde

﴿لا يعرف انها إله حتى يعرف المألوه فهو … الدليل عليه﴾

أي على الإله فمن لم يعرف الدليل لم يعرف المدلول وأبو حامد نفي بذلك بقوله : يعرف الله من غير نظر إلى العالم . وأما معرفة ذات قديمة أزلية فثابت عند الشيخ بدون النظر إلى العالم

— that is, of the deity. Whoever does not know the proof does not know that which is proven (al-madlūl). Abū Ḥāmid denied this by his statement: God is known without regard to the world. As for knowledge of an eternal, everlasting Essence, that is established for the Shaykh without regard to the world.

Ibn Turka

﴿فهو الدليل عليه﴾

أولا في مسالك البعد والتفرقة

- first, in the paths of distance and differentiation -

Jāmī

﴿الدليل عليه﴾

أي على الإله من حيث هو إله ولذلك سمي عالما من العلامة التي هي الدليل. (ثم بعدها في ثاني الحال) وفي بعض النسخ في ثاني حال بدون اللام أي بعد أن عرفت بمألوهيتك الإله وتوجهت إليه بكليتك تنفتح عين بصيرتك، بنور الكشف. (يعطيك) هذا الكشف الواقع في مقام الجمع بعد الفرق

i.e., of the deity qua deity. That is why it (the cosmos) is called 'ʿālam' (world), from 'ʿalāma' (sign/mark), which is the proof. (Then after it, in the second state) — and in some copies 'in second state' without the definite article — i.e., after you have known, through your being-deified, the deity, and have turned to Him with your whole self, the eye of your inner insight opens by the light of unveiling. (It grants you) — this unveiling occurring at the station of union after separation

al-Qāshānī

﴿ثم بعد هذ في ثاني حال يعطيك الكشف ، وأن الحق نفسه كان عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته ،﴾

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

"" من حاشية تعليقات بالى أفندي

that the Real Himself was the very proof of Himself and of His Divinity] "" From the marginal notes/commentary of Bālī Afandī

﴿ثم بعد هذا﴾

أي بعد معرفتك الحق بالعالم ، وهو أول مرتبة في العلم باللَّه لأنه استدلال من الأثر إلى المؤثر ، ولا توقف له على الكشف ، فإن الاستدلال المذكور يوصل إلى هذا الكشف ، على معنى أنه استدللنا بوجودنا الخارجي إلى أعياننا الثابتة لأنه أثرها ، واستدللنا بأعياننا على ألوهيته وهي صفات الله وأسماؤه ، واستدللنا بأسمائه وصفاته على ذاته تمت مرتبة الاستدلال ( ثم يعطيك الكشف ) أن أعياننا الثابتة عين الصفات وأنها عين الذات ، فكان الحق نفسه عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته ، فإذا كان الحق عين ( الدليل ) كان نفس الحق دليل

i.e., after your knowledge of the Real through the cosmos—which is the first rank in the knowledge of God, since it is an inference from the effect to the Effector, and it is not dependent upon disclosure (kashf); rather, the aforementioned inference leads to this disclosure. The meaning is that we inferred, from our external existence, our fixed entities (aʿyān thābita), since it is their effect; and we inferred, from our entities, His Divinity, which consists of God's Attributes and Names; and we inferred, from His Names and Attributes, His Essence—thus the rank of inference is completed. (Then disclosure grants you) that our fixed entities are identical with the Attributes, and that these are identical with the Essence. Thus the Real Himself was the very proof of Himself and of His Divinity. So when the Real is identical with (the proof), then the Real Himself is the proof

al-Qayṣarī

﴿ثم، بعد هذا في ثاني الحال، يعطيك الكشف أن الحق نفسه كان عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته﴾

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

هذا كشف مقام الجمع. أي، بعد معرفة الإله بالمألوه، ومعرفة الذات القديمة الأزلية صاحب المرتبة الإلهية والتوجه إليه توجها تاما، تنفتح عين بصيرتك. فيكشف لك أن الحق هو الدليل على نفسه بتجليه الذاتي الإفاضة أعيننا بالفيض الأقدس. وهو الدليل على ألوهيته بالتجلي الأسمائي والصفاتي لحقائقنا، لا غيره المسمى ب (العالم). وبهذا المعنى قال رسول الله، صلى الله عليه وسلم، حين سئل: (بم عرفت الله تعالى؟) قال: (بالله عرفت الأشياء.) فإن السؤال كان عن الذات الإلهية، أي بم عرفت ذات الحق. فأجاب: بالحق عرفت الأشياء، وبنوره، لا عن المرتبة، فإن العلم بالمرتبة الإلهية لا يكون إلابعد العلم والمعرفة بالذات، وأين المحجوب من هذه المعرفة؟ "" يقول الإمام علي بن أبي طالب : " إذا تم العقل نقص الكلام ". ويقول : " كل عقل لم يحط بالدين فليس بعقل ، وكل دين لم يحط بالعقل فليس بدين " . " قيل للنوري : بما عرفت الله ؟ فقال : بالله . فقيل : فما بال العقل ؟ قال : العقل عاجز لا يدل إلا على عاجز مثله . يقول الشيخ إبن مرزوق : " قال بعضهم : سألت ألف شيخ عن أربع مسائل فلم أر منهم شفاء لمرادي ، فرأيت النبي في المنام ، فقلت : يا رسول الله ... ما العقل ؟ فقال : أدناه ترك الدنيا وأعلاه ترك التفكر في ذات الله. "" ومن لسان هذين المعنيين قيل: فلولاكم ما عرفنا الهوى %~% ولو لا الهوى ما عرفناكم وسر أن الشيخ أورد هذه المباحث في هذا الفص، كون إبراهيم، صلوات الله عليه، طالبا للحق، مستدلا عليه بالمظاهر الكوكبية، فإنه، عليه السلام، عرف أولا أن له ربا خلقه، ثم غلب عليه العشق، فطلبه إلى أنهداه الله وتجلى له. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

This is the disclosure of the station of gathering (jamʿ). That is, after knowledge of the God through the one who is godded-over, and knowledge of the pre-eternal Essence possessing the divine level and total orientation toward Him, the eye of your insight opens. It is disclosed to you that the Real is the proof of Himself through His essential self-disclosure (tajallī dhātī), the effusion (ifāḍa) of our entities by the Most Holy Effusion (al-fayḍ al-aqdas). And He is the proof of His divinity through the self-disclosure of names and attributes upon our realities, not anything else named "the world." In this sense the Messenger of God, peace and blessings upon him, said when asked: "By what did you know God Most High?" He said: "By God I knew things." For the question was about the divine Essence, i.e., by what did you know the Essence of the Real. So he answered: by the Real I knew things, and by His light—not about the level (al-martaba), for knowledge of the divine level cannot occur except after knowledge and cognizance of the Essence. And where is the veiled one from this knowledge? \"\" The Imam ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib says: \"When the intellect is complete, speech diminishes.\" And he says: \"Every intellect that does not encompass religion is not intellect, and every religion that does not encompass the intellect is not religion.\" \"Al-Nūrī was asked: By what did you know God? He said: By God. It was said: Then what is the matter with the intellect? He said: The intellect is incapable; it only points to one incapable like itself.\" Shaykh Ibn Marzūq says: \"Someone said: I asked a thousand shaykhs about four questions and found no satisfaction of my desire among them, so I saw the Prophet in a dream and said: O Messenger of God... what is the intellect? He said: Its lowest degree is abandoning the world, and its highest degree is abandoning reflection upon the Essence of God.\"\" And from the tongue of these two meanings it was said: \"Were it not for you we would not have known passion, and were it not for passion we would not have known you.\" And the secret of the Shaykh's bringing up these discussions in this chapter (faṣṣ) is that Abraham, peace be upon him, was a seeker of the Real, inferring Him from the stellar manifestations (al-maẕāhir al-kawkabiyya), for he, peace be upon him, first knew that he had a Lord who created him, then passionate love (ʿishq) overcame him, and he sought Him until God guided him and disclosed Himself to him. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Ibn Turka

﴿ثمّ بعد هذا ، في ثاني الحال﴾

عند مواطن القرب والجمعيّة

- at the stations of proximity and comprehensive unity (jamʿiyya) -

Bālī Zāde

﴿ثم بعد هذا﴾

أي بعد معرفتك الحق بالعالم وهذا أول مرتبة في العلم بالله لأنه استدلال من الأثر إلى المؤثر ولا توقف له على الكشف. لذلك قال

— that is, after your knowledge of the Real through the world. This is the first level in the knowledge of God, because it is an inference from the effect to the one who effects it (al-muʾaththir), and it has no basis in disclosure (kashf). Therefore he said:

Bālī Zāde

﴿في ثاني حال يعطيك الكشف أن الحق نفسه كل عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته﴾

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

فإن الاستدلال من الأثر إلى المؤثر يوصل إلى هذا الكشف على معنى أنه استدللنا بوجودنا الخارجي إلى أعياننا الثابتة. لأنه أثرها و استدللنا بأعياننا على ألوهيته وهي صفات الله وأسمائه و استدللنا بأسمائه وصفاته على ذاته تمت مرتبة الاستدلال ثم يعطيك الكشف أن أعياننا الثابتة عين الصفات. وأن الصفات عين الذات فكان الحق نفسه عین الدليل على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته . فإذا كان الحق عين الدليل على نفسه كأن نفس الحق دليلا على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته لا العالم . بل العالم مرآة لفيضانه الوجود فيه بالتجلي الاسمائی كالمرآة . فإن المرآة ليست دليلا على وجود الرائي بان الدليل هو الصورة الحاصلة فيها من الرائي التي هي عين الرائي.فكان الرائي عين الدليل على نفسه. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : (و) يعطيك

that the Real Himself is the very proof of Himself and of His divinity] — for inference from the effect to the one who effects it leads to this disclosure, in the sense that we infer from our external existence to our fixed entities (aʿyān thābita), since it is their effect; and we infer from our entities to His divinity, which is God's attributes and names; and we infer from His names and attributes to His Essence. Thus the degree of inference is completed. Then disclosure gives you [the knowledge] that our fixed entities are identical with the attributes, and that the attributes are identical with the Essence. Thus the Real Himself becomes the very proof of Himself and of His divinity. For if the Real is the very proof of Himself, it is as though the Real's own self is a proof of Himself and of His divinity, not the world. Rather, the world is a mirror for the overflowing (fayḍ) of existence into it through the self-disclosure of the names (al-tajallī al-asmāʾī), like a mirror. For the mirror is not proof of the existence of the one who sees; rather, the proof is the image produced within it from the one who sees, which is identical with the one who sees. Thus the one who sees is the very proof of himself. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said: (and) it gives you

Ibn Turka

﴿يعطيك الكشف : أنّ الحقّ - نفسه - كان عين الدليل على نفسه وعلى الوهيّته ، وأنّ العالم ليس إلَّا تجلَّيه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها بدونه﴾

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

- تجلَّى الشبح المقابل في السطح القابل . ( وإنّه ) أي ذلك التجلَّي ( يتنوّع ) كليّا في العقل ( ويتصوّر ) جزئيّا في الخارج

that the Real - Himself - is identical with the proof of Himself and of His divinity (ulūhiyya), and that the world is nothing but His self-disclosure (tajallī) in the forms of their fixed entities (aʿyān thābita), whose existence is impossible without Him] - like the self-disclosure of a phantom-form reflected onto a receptive surface. (And it) - that is, that self-disclosure - (is diversified) universally in the intellect (and takes particular form) individually in the external [world].

Words 40–42 · 1 of 6

أَنَّ الحَقَّ نَفْسَهُ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿أن الحق نفسه﴾

باعتبار صور تعیناته و تقيداته

by consideration of the forms of His entifications (taʿayyunāt) and determinations

Words 43–47 · 1 of 6

كَانَ عَيْنَ الدَّلِيلِ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿كان عين الدليل على نفسه﴾

باعتبار مرتبة إطلاقه فإن كل تعين بالضرورة مسبوق باللاتعين . كذلك هو بخصوصياته التعينية عين الدليل على نسب (ألوهيته) . فإن خصوص كل تعين يقتضي نسبة خاصة وصفة معينة

by consideration of the station of His absoluteness (iṭlāq); for every entification is necessarily preceded by non-entification (lā-taʿayyun). Likewise, He, by His entifying particulars, is the very proof of the relations of (His divinity). For the particularity of each entification necessitates a specific relation (nisba) and a determinate attribute

Words 46–49 · 1 of 6

عَلَى نَفْسِهِ وَعَلَى أُلُوهَتِهِ

Only al-Qāshānī comments here.

al-Qāshānī

﴿على نفسه وعلى ألوهيته﴾

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

لا العالم بل العالم مرآة لفيضانه الوجود فيه بالتجلي الأسمائى كالمرآة ، فإن المرآة ليست دليلا على وجود الرائي . بل الدليل هو الصورة الحاصلة فيها من الرائي التي هي عين الرائي ، فكان الرائي عين الدليل على نفسه ، فلا تحصل له هذه المعرفة لأن المعرفة في الحضرة فرع المعرفة بنفس الحضرة ، ومن لم يعرف الحضرة لم تكن الحضرة مرآة له ، ولم تظهر له الصور فيها حتى تحصل المعرفة اهـ بالى . "" قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

—not the cosmos; rather, the cosmos is a mirror for the overflow (fayḍān) of existence into it through the Name-disclosure (al-tajallī al-asmāʾī), like a mirror, for the mirror is not itself the proof of the existence of the one who sees [in it]; rather, the proof is the image that occurs within it from the viewer, which is identical with the viewer. Thus the viewer himself is the very proof of himself, and this knowledge is not attained [by one who lacks it], for knowledge within the [divine] Presence is a branch of knowledge of the Presence itself; and whoever does not know the Presence, the Presence is not a mirror for him, nor do the forms appear to him within it, so that this knowledge might be attained. End, Bālī. "" The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Qāshānī

﴿وأن العالم ليس إلا تجليه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها بدونه ، وأنه يتنوع ويتصور بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها ، وهذا بعد العلم به منا أنه إلهنا﴾

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

يعنى أنه لما هداه العقل أنه لا بد من وجود واجب بذاته غنى عن العالمين انكشف عليه إن ساعده التوفيق ، أن ذلك الوجود الحق الواجب هو المتجلى في صور أعيان العالم بذاته . وأن أول ظهوره هو تجليه في الجوهر الواحد والعين الواحدة المرتسمة بصور الأعيان الثابتة العلمية كلها ولا وجود لها إلا به ، فهي به موجودة أزلا وأبدا ، وينسبه إليها بنسب أسمائه ، بل التعينات العينية كلها صفاته وبها تتميز أسماؤه وتظهر الإلهية بظهورها به في صور العالم ، فهو الظاهر في صورة العالم والباطن في صور أعيانه والعين واحدة في ظهورها . فذلك عين الدليل على نفسه ، وبعد علمنا به منا أنه إله لنا ، علمنا أنه يتنوع ويتصور بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها فإنها هو لا غيره ، وقوله : إنه إله لنا بدل من الضمير في به ، أي بعد العلم بأنه إله لنا . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه : ( ثم تأتي الكشف الآخر فتظهر لك صورنا فيه ، فيظهر بعضنا لبعض في الحق ،فيعرف بعضنا بعضا ويتميز بعضنا عن بعض) . الكشف الأول : هو الفناء في الحق ، لأن الشاهد والمشهود في ذلك الكشف ليس إلا الحق وحده ويسمى الجمع . والكشف الثاني : هو البقاء بعد الفناء ، فيظهر في هذا المقام صور الخلق ، ويظهر بعض الخلق للبعض في الحق ، فيكون الحق مرآة للخلق ، على أن الوجود الواحد قد تكثر بهذه الصور الكثيرة . فالحقيقة حق والصور خلق ، فيعرف بعض الخلق بعضا ويتميز البعض عن بعض في هذا الشهود. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

meaning: when the intellect guided him to the necessity of a Being necessary in itself, independent of the worlds, it was disclosed to him—if success assisted him—that that Real, Necessary Existence is the very one self-disclosing in the forms of the entities of the cosmos through His own Essence. And that the first instance of His manifestation is His self-disclosure in the single Substance and single Entity inscribed with the forms of all the fixed cognitive entities (al-aʿyān al-thābita al-ʿilmiyya), which have no existence except through Him; they exist through Him eternally and everlastingly, and He ascribes Himself to them through the relations (nisab) of His Names. Indeed, all the entitative determinations (al-taʿayyunāt al-ʿayniyya) are His Attributes, and through them His Names are distinguished, and Divinity becomes manifest through its manifestation through them in the forms of the cosmos. So He is the Manifest in the form of the cosmos and the Nonmanifest in the forms of its entities, while the Entity is one in its manifestation. That is the very proof of Himself. And after our knowledge of Him, [we know] that He is a deity for us; [then] we knew that He diversifies and takes form according to the realities of these entities and their states, for they are He, not other than He. And his saying "that He is a deity for us" substitutes for the pronoun in "through Him," i.e., after the knowledge that He is a deity for us. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said: (Then comes another disclosure, in which our forms appear to you within Him, so some of us become manifest to others in the Real, and thus some of us know others and some are distinguished from others). The first disclosure is annihilation (fanāʾ) in the Real, for the witness and the witnessed in that disclosure are nothing but the Real alone, and it is called the Gathering (al-jamʿ). The second disclosure is subsistence (baqāʾ) after annihilation, in which station the forms of creation appear, and some of creation becomes manifest to others within the Real, so that the Real becomes a mirror for creation—on the understanding that the One Existence has become multiplied through these many forms. So the Reality is the Real, and the forms are creation; thus some of creation knows others, and some are distinguished from others, in this witnessing. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وأن العالم ليس إلا تجليه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها بدونه﴾

أي، يعطيك الكشف أيضا أن وجود العالم ليس إلا التجلي الوجودي الحقاني الظاهر في مرايا صور الأعيان الثابتة التي يستحيل وجود تلك الأعيان في الخارج بدون ذلك التجلي الوجودي، فالعالم من حيث الوجود عين الحق الظاهر في مرايا الأعيان لا غيره. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

That is, disclosure also gives you that the existence of the world is nothing but the existential, Real-engendered self-disclosure (tajallī wujūdī ḥaqqānī) appearing in the mirrors of the forms of the fixed entities, whose existence externally is impossible without that existential self-disclosure. So the world, in respect of existence, is identical with the Real appearing in the mirrors of the entities, and nothing else. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Jāmī

﴿وإن العالم﴾

عطف على قوله : وأن الحق عطف تفسير يعني ويعطيك الكشف أن العالم بجميع حقائقه الموجودة فيه

— connected to his statement 'and that the Real,' a connective of explanation, meaning: and unveiling grants you that the cosmos, with all the realities existing within it

Bālī Zāde

﴿أن العالم ليس إلا تجليه في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها﴾

في الخارج (بدونه). أي بدون ذلك التجلي (و) بعطيله، الكشف (أنه) أي الحق (متنوع ويتصور) على البناء للفاعل

in the external realm (without it) — that is, without that self-disclosure — (and) it gives you, through disclosure, (that He) — that is, the Real — (is diversified and takes form) in the passive-active construction

Words 52–54 · 1 of 6

لَيْسَ إِلَّا تَجَلِّيْهِ

Only Jāmī comments here.

Jāmī

﴿ليس إلا تجليه﴾

الوجودي بالفيض المقدس

the existential self-disclosure through the Holy Effusion (al-fayḍ al-muqaddas)

Jāmī

﴿في صور أعيانهم الثابتة التي يستحيل وجودها﴾

أي وجود تلك الأعيان . (بدونه) أي بدون ذلك التجلي الوجودي. فالأعيان الموجودة ليست إلا تجلياته سبحانه فيها. ولا فرق بينها وبين الحق إلا بالتقييد والإطلاق والمقید عین المطلق من وجه فهو سبحانه عین الدليل على نفسه . (و) كذلك يعطيك الكشف (أنه) يعني العالم (بتنوع) أنواعا مختلفة (ويتصور) بفتح الياء يقبل صورة متباينة . (بحسب) تنوعات

i.e., the existence of those entities. (without it) i.e., without that existential self-disclosure (tajallī). So the existent entities are nothing but His self-disclosures, glory be to Him, within them. There is no difference between them and the Real except by restriction (taqyīd) and absoluteness (iṭlāq), and the restricted is identical with the absolute from one respect, so He, glory be to Him, is Himself the proof of Himself. (And) likewise the unveiling (kashf) grants you (that it) meaning the world, (diversifies) into various kinds (and takes on form) — qabūl of a form — differing forms, (according to) the diversifications of

Words 63–65 · 1 of 6

وَأَنَّهُ يَتَنَوَّعُ وَيَتَصَوَّرُ

Only al-Qayṣarī comments here.

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وأنه يتنوع ويتصور﴾

- بفتح الياء، على البناء للفاعل -

— with fatḥa on the yāʾ, in the active voice —

al-Qayṣarī

﴿بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها﴾

أي، يعطيك الكشف أن الحق هو الذي ظهر في صور العالم وتنوع بحسب أنواع الأعيان وتصور بصور هذه الحقائق وأحوالها. فالأعيان باقية على عدمها، والمشهود هو الوجود الحق لا غير. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

That is, disclosure gives you that the Real is the one who appeared in the forms of the world, and diversified according to the kinds of entities, and took form according to the forms of these realities and their states. So the entities remain fixed in their nonexistence, and what is witnessed is the existence of the Real alone, nothing else. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Ibn Turka

﴿بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها﴾

- على ترتيب اللفّ والنشر -

- in the order of enfolding and unfolding (al-laff wa'l-nashr) -

Jāmī

﴿حقائق هذه الأعيان﴾

الثابتة المتنوعة بحسب تنوعات النسب الألوهية. (و) بحسب تنوعات (أحوالها) فهو سبحانه باعتبار تنوعات ظهوره في صور العالم دليل على نسبة ألوهيته كما كان من حيث نفس تجليه فيها دليلا على نفسه . اعلم أن المشهود في هذا انكشف ليس إلا الحق سبحانه بتجلياته المختلفة المتنوعة بحسب اختلافات المجالي وتنوعات المراني . فيشهد الوجود الحق الواحد بسبب انصباغه بأحكام المجالي والمرائي متعدد متكثرة. وهذا الشهود على نوعين : أحدهما : أن يشهد المشاهد الوجود الحق في أعيان الوجودات الخارجية وهي مظاهر للحق موجودة في أعيانها ظهر الحي فيها بحسبها نحوا من الظهور وضربا من التجلي، وثانيهما : أن يشهد المشاهد الوجود الحق في مجالي الأعيان الثابتة ومراتبها وهي غير موجودة في أعيانها بل هي على عدمها الأصلى ووجودها العلمي ظهر الوجود الحق بها مختلف الصور. فعلی هذا : يكون المراد بوجودها في قوله : يستحيل وجودها بدون ظهور أحكامها وآثارها في الوجود الحق لا وجودها في نفسها . فإنها ما شمت رائحة الوجود في كشف هذه المشاهد . قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

the fixed entities, diversified according to the diversifications of the divine relations (nisab). (And) according to the diversifications (of their states), for He, glory be to Him, considered in respect of the diversifications of His manifestation in the forms of the world, is a proof of the relation of His divinity, just as from the aspect of His very self-disclosure within them He was a proof of Himself. Know that what is witnessed in this unveiling is nothing but the Real, glory be to Him, in His differing, diversified self-disclosures according to the differences of the loci of manifestation (majālī) and the diversifications of the mirrors (marāʾī). Thus the one true Existence is witnessed, by virtue of its being colored by the determinations of the loci of manifestation and the mirrors, as multiple and manifold. This witnessing is of two kinds: One is that the witness witnesses the true Existence in the entities of external existents, which are loci of manifestation for the Real, existent in their own entities — the Living (al-Ḥayy) manifested within them, according to them, a measure of manifestation and a kind of self-disclosure. The second is that the witness witnesses the true Existence in the loci of manifestation of the fixed entities and their ranks, which are not existent in their own entities but remain upon their original nonexistence and their cognitive (ʿilmī) existence — the true Existence manifested through them in differing forms. According to this, what is meant by their existence in his statement, "whose existence is impossible," is without the manifestation of their determinations and effects in the true Existence, not their existence in themselves. For they have not caught a whiff of existence in the unveiling of these witnessings. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said

Bālī Zāde

﴿بحسب حقائق هذه الأعيان وأحوالها وهذا﴾

الكشف والذوق

— disclosure and direct tasting (dhawq)

al-Qayṣarī

﴿وهذا بعد العلم به منا أنه إله لنا﴾

أي، وهذا الكشف والشهود بعد العلم بالحق وذاته بأنه إله لنا بحسب أسمائه وصفاته، إذ لو لم نعلم أن لنا إلها وله تعالى أسماء وصفات يقتضى أعيانا ثابتة يكون محل سلطانها ومجلى ظهوراتها، ما كنا نعلم أن المتجلي في مرايا هذه الصور هو الحق، ولا يحصل لنا الكشف، ولا للمرتبة الإلهية الظهور أصلا. قال الشيخ رضي الله عنه

That is, this disclosure and witnessing comes after knowledge of the Real and His Essence, that He is a God for us according to His names and attributes. For if we did not know that we have a God, and that He, Most High, has names and attributes that necessitate fixed entities which serve as the locus of their dominion and the loci of manifestation of their appearances, we would not know that the One self-disclosing in the mirrors of these forms is the Real, and disclosure would not occur for us, nor would the divine level have any manifestation at all. The Shaykh, may God be pleased with him, said:

Ibn Turka

﴿وهذا بعد العلم به منّا : أنّه إله لنا﴾

ضرورة أنّه ما لم يعلم نسبة بين الذات القديمة والعالم ، لم يعلم أمر الظاهريّة والمظهريّة المذكورتين أصلا . مشهد الجامع بين الجمع والتفرقة ثمّ إنّ ذلك النسبة تتفاوت بحسب قوّة الأذواق وصفاء المشارب ، فمن المكاشفين من وقف في موطن المغايرة بين الظاهر والمظهر ، والنور والظلّ ، والوجوب والإمكان ، والجمع والتفرقة - إلى غير ذلك - فهو الذي لضعف ذوقه وشوب مشرب إدراكه غوائل أحكام المدارك الجزئيّة ، قد انحجب بأحد المتقابلين عن الآخر ، ومنهم من جاوز ذلك وبلغ حريم الإطلاق ، وفاز بالدخول في حرم الاتّصال والاتحاد . وإلى ذلك أشار بقوله

necessarily, for as long as a relation between the Eternal Essence and the world is not known, the matter of the manifest (ẓāhir) and the locus of manifestation (maẕhar) mentioned is not known at all. The witnessing that comprehends both gathering (jamʿ) and differentiation (tafriqa) — then this relation varies according to the strength of the tastes (adhwāq) and the purity of the wellsprings (mashārib). Among those granted unveiling (mukāshifūn), some stop at the station of mutual difference between the manifest and the locus of manifestation, light and shadow, necessity and possibility, gathering and differentiation, and so on — such a one, due to the weakness of his taste and the admixture in his perceptive wellspring with the pitfalls of the rulings of partial faculties of perception, has been veiled by one of the two correlatives from the other. Others have passed beyond this and reached the sacred precinct of absoluteness, and have won entry into the sanctuary of connection and union. To this he alluded in his saying

Jāmī

﴿بعد العلم به سبحانه منا أنه إله لنا﴾

مؤثر فينا بأسمائه الوجودية و نحن عبید به متأثرون عن تلك الأسماء محتاجون إليها وجودة وبقاء. فإنه لو لم نعلمه بالألوهية كيف يتيسر لنا التوجه إليه بالكلية المفضي إلى ذلك الكشف والاطلاع. ثم يأتي بعد هذا الكشف

exerting influence upon us through His existential names, while we are servants affected, through Him, by those names, needing them for our existence and subsistence. For if we did not know Him through divinity, how would it be possible for us to turn to Him wholly, which leads to that unveiling and disclosure. Then after this unveiling comes

Bālī Zāde

﴿بعد العلم به﴾

أي بعد العلم والحكم منا أنه إله لنا. ونحن تحت حكومته هذا نتيجة قرب الفرائض ويسمى مقام الجمع وفي هذا المقام يكون الحق ظاهرا والعبد مخفيا

— that is, after our knowledge and judgment that He is a deity for us, and that we are under His governance. This is the result of the proximity attained through the obligatory acts (qurb al-farāʾiḍ), and it is called the station of gathering (jamʿ). In this station the Real is manifest (ẓāhir) and the servant is hidden (makhfī/concealed).

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.