The Book of Stations
المواقف
Context: Following Ibn ʿArabī, the Emir holds that every object of worship is in reality the Real manifest in a form, yet judges worshippers of forms not named Allah to be straying unbelievers. Ibn Taymiyya held this dissolves tawḥīd and shirk; the school answers that name, command and Law decide true worship. His reading of «لا إله إلا الله» departs deliberately from the theologians' supplied predicate.AI
قَالَ تَعَالَى: «فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ»
He, exalted is He, said: “Know, then, that there is no god but Allah” (Q 47:19).
In briefAI
The Emir reads the testimony of oneness through the oneness of being. The one Reality named Allah appears in endless forms and has a face in each, yet it is never divided. No such face deserves worship except the Essence that bears the name Allah, because the other forms, though they are that Reality, are not named Allah. Idolaters worshipped stones and trees, confining the Real to forms, and so they are unbelievers and went astray. On this reading the exception in the formula is straightforward, where the well-known reading makes it problematic.
See the print: Damascus 1966, p. 69 ↗, Damascus 1966, p. 70 ↗, Cairo, vol. 1, PDF p. 79 ↗, Cairo, vol. 1, PDF p. 80 ↗ (archive.org)
الْمَعْنَى أَنَّهُ لَايَسْتَحِقُّ الْعِبَادَةَ وَالْخُضُوعَ وَالِاتِّصَافَ بِصِفَاتِ الْاِلَهِ وَجْهٌ مِنْ وُجُوهِ الْحَقِّ– تَعَالَى– الظَّاهِرَةِ بِالْمَظَاهِرِ الَّتِي هِيَ (أَيِ الْمَظَاهِرُ) اَعْدَامٌ عِنْدَ التَّحَقُّقِ؛ اِلاَّ الذَّاتُ الْمُسَّمَى بِاللَّهِ.
The meaning is that no face among the faces of the Real (exalted is He), those manifest through the loci of manifestation which (that is, the loci) are non-existents upon realization, deserves worship, submission and being qualified by the attributes of the deity, except the Essence named “Allah”.
وَذَلِكَ أَنَّ الْحَقِيقَةَ الْمُسَمَّاةَ بِاللَّهِ وَاحِدَةٌ مِنْ كُلِّ وَجْهٍ،
That is because the Reality named “Allah” is one in every respect,
وَمَعَ وَحْدَتِهَا. فَهِيَ ظَاهِرَةٌ وَتَظْهَرُ بِمَا لَانِهَايَةَ لَهُ مِنَ الصُّوَرِ.
and yet, along with its oneness, it is manifest and becomes manifest in forms without end.
وَلَهَا فِي كُلِّ صُورَةٍ وَجْهٌ خَاصٌّ بِتِلْكَ الصُّورَةِ، فَهِيَ وَاحِدَةٌ كَثِيرَةٌ.
In every form it has a face proper to that form; so it is one and many.
وَاحِدَةٌ بِحَقِيقَتِهَا، كَثِيرَةٌ بِتَعَيُّنَاتِهَا وَمَظَاهِرِهَا.
One by its reality, many by its determinations and its loci of manifestation.
فَحَقِيقَةُ اللَّهِ وَاِنْ ظَهَرَتْ بِكَمَالِهَا فِي مَظَاهِرِهَا الَّتِي لَا تَتَنَاهَى؛ فَهِيَ لَاتَتَجَزَّأُ وَلَا تَتَبَعَّضُ،
So the Reality of Allah, even though it is manifest in its entirety in its endless loci of manifestation, is not divided into parts and is not portioned out,
وَلَهَا فِي كُلِّ مَظْهَرٍ وَجْهٌ خَاصٌّ، أَيْ ذَاتٌ.
and in every locus of manifestation it has a proper face, that is, an essence.
وَلَا يَسْتَحِقُّ الْعِبَادَةَ وَجْهٌ مِنْ تِلْكَ الْوُجُوهِ الظَّاهِرَةِ بِالْمَظَاهِرِ. اِلَّا الذَّاتُ الْمُسَمَّى بِاللَّهِ،
And no face among those faces manifest through the loci deserves worship except the Essence named “Allah”,
لِأَنَّ غَيْرَهَا وَاِنْ كَانَ هُوَ هِيَ؛ فَاِنَّهُ لَايُسَمَّى اللَّهَ
because what is other than it, even if it is it, is not named “Allah”.
فَاِنَّهُ– تَعَالَى– لَمَّا ظَهَرَ بِهَذِهِ الصُّوَرِ؛ سَمَّاهَا غَيْرَ أَوْ سِوَى وَاِنْسَاناً وَمَلَكاً وَعَرْشاً وَفَلَكاً وَشَمْساً وَكَوْكَباً وَنَحْوَ ذَلِكَ.
For when He, exalted is He, became manifest in these forms, He named them “other” or “besides”, and human being, angel, Throne, sphere, sun, star and the like.
قَالَ تَعَالَى مُوَبِّخاً لِعَبَدَةِ الْأَصْنَامِ: «قُلْ سَمُّوهُمْ» يَعْنِي الْأَصْنَامَ الَّتِي عَبَدُوهَا•
He, exalted is He, said, rebuking the worshippers of idols: “Say: Name them!” (Q 13:33), meaning the idols they worshipped.
فَلَوْ سَمَّوْهُمْ مَا سَمَّوْهُمْ اِلَّا حَجَراً أَوْ شَجَراً أَوْ نَحْوَ ذَلِكَ وَمَا سَمَّوْا مَعْبُودَاتِهِمُ اللَّهَ أَبَداً•
Had they named them, they would have named them nothing but “stone” or “tree” or the like, and they never named their objects of worship “Allah”.
فَكُلُّ مَنْ عَبَدَ شَيْئاً غَيْرَ مُسَمًّى اللَّهَ فَهُوَ كَافِرٌ•
So everyone who worships a thing not named “Allah” is an unbeliever,
وَاِنْ كَانَتْ حَقِيقَةُ ذَلِكَ الْمَعْبُودِ هِيَ الْحَقِيقَةَ الْمُسَمَّاةَ بِاللَّهِ،
even if the reality of that object of worship is the Reality named “Allah”.
وَمَا أَصَابَ الْحَقَّ اِلَّا مَنْ عَبَدَ الذَّاتَ الْمُسَمَّى بِاللَّهِ الْغَيْبَ الْمُطْلَقَ الَّذِي لَا صُورَةَ لَهُ وَلَا يُعْرَفُ مِنْهُ اِلَّا وُجُودُهُ لَا غَيْرُ، مِنْ حَيْثُ اتِّصَافُ الْأُلُوهِيَّةِ•
And none has hit upon the Real except whoever worships the Essence named “Allah”, the absolute Unseen, which has no form and of which nothing is known but its existence and nothing else, with respect to its being qualified by divinity.
وَمَا سِوَى ذَلِكَ مِمَّا يَعُدُّهُ الْمُتَكَلِّمُونَ فِي الذَّاتِ مِنْ عُلَمَاءِ الرُّسُومِ مَعْرِفَةً، فَهُوَ اِلَى الْجَهْلِ أَقْرَبُ مِنْهُ اِلَى الْمَعْرِفَةِ•
Whatever goes beyond that, of what those among the formalist scholars who discourse on the Essence count as knowledge, is nearer to ignorance than to knowledge.
وَعَلَى هَذَا التَّفْسِيرِ يَكُونُ الِاسْتِثْنَاءُ ظَاهِراً، فَهُوَ بِمَثَابَةِ قَوْلِنَا: لَا رَجُلَ اِلَّا زَيْدٌ،
On this interpretation the exception is straightforward: it is like our saying, “There is no man but Zayd”:
نَفَيْنَا صِفَةَ الرُّجُولَةِ عَنْ كُلِّ رَجُلٍ، وَاِنْ كَانَتْ ثَابِتَةً لَهُ•
we have denied the quality of manhood to every man, even though it belongs to him,
وَأَثْبَتْنَاهَا لِلذَّاتِ الْمُسَمَّاةِ بِزَيْدٍ فَقَطْ•
and affirmed it of the essence named Zayd alone.
وَأَمَّا التَّفْسِيرُ الْمَشْهُورُ؛ فَالِاسْتِثْنَاءُ فِيهِ مُشْكِلٌ•
As for the well-known interpretation, the exception in it is problematic.
وَلِذَا كَثُرَ فِيهِ اللَّغَطُ وَالِاخْتِلَافُ حَتَّى قَالَ بَعْضُ الْعُلَمَاءِ: يَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَكُونَ الِاسْتِثْنَاءُ فِي الْكَلِمَةِ الْمُشَرَّفَةِ قِسْماً بِرَأْسِهِ، لَيْسَ مِنْ أَقْسَامِ الِاسْتِثْنَاءِ الْمَعْرُوفَةِ•
That is why clamour and disagreement over it have abounded, so that one scholar said: the exception in the honoured formula must be a category of its own, not one of the known categories of exception.
وَالَّذِينَ عَبَدُوا مَا عَبَدُوا مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ؛ مَا قَصَدُوا بِعِبَادَتِهِمْ اِلَّا الْمَظَاهِرَ الَّتِي حَصَرُوا الْحَقَّ فِيهَا، وَهِيَ الصُّوَرُ الْمَشْهُودَةُ لَهُمْ وَمَا عَرَفُوا الْحَقَّ الظَّاهِرَ بِتِلْكَ الصُّوَرِ وَبِغَيْرِهَا فَضَلُّوا وَأَضَلُّوا•
Those who worshipped what they worshipped apart from Allah intended by their worship only the loci of manifestation in which they confined the Real, namely the forms beheld by them; they did not know the Real manifest in those forms and in others, and so they went astray and led others astray.
Translations, word glosses and term notes are AI-generated (Claude) and marked as such; no published translation is reproduced.Word analysis is automatic (CAMeL Tools), guided by the text's vowelling. How this text was established.