Dimensions of Islam 0042970210, 9780042970219

Citation preview

FRITHJOF SCHUON.

DIMENSIONS OF ISLAM |

__

Translated from the French by Peter Townsend _ Frithjof Schuon’s earlier work Understanding Islam has been widely acclaimed for its unique insight into what is perhaps the least understood of the great Religions. As Professor Hossein Nasr declares in his preface to the present book, it would not be an exaggeration to say that, in the writing of Schuon, Islam has for the first

time been presented in all its amplitude and depth as a religion to be studied in its own right. This book brings to light some important but lesser known aspects of Islam and, like Understanding Islam, is written from a predominantly Sufi point of view. But as a reviewer

has said: ‘Again and again one is made to feel

that a religion is like a living organism in which all the parts, both inward and outward are intimately related . . . there is a continual movement from inward truth to outward or “concrete” symbol, from centre to circumference

and back again to the centre.’ A striking example of this is to be found in the chapter on the Sufi doctrine of the five Divine Presences. Of particular interest to Western readers will be the chapters on Christ and on the Virgin Mary, who for Moslems as well as for Christians is the summit of the hierarchy of women. There are also important chapters on

the interpretation of the Qoran, and on the Prophet Muhammad and his place in the _ Monotheistic Tradition as a whole. As usual in the author’s writings, the book is rich in references to other religions, to

Hinduism and Buddhism and particularly to Christianity. Frithjof Schuon, a Swiss national, is internationally celebrated for his studies in

comparative religion. Several of his works have Deen translated into RU including Underni 1 In the T of Buddhism.

: 5

pr so he hi blished two collections of German poems, and is also a ©). painter. Css ;

! ts

a

3

Dimensions of Islam

|

_ Frithjof Schuon George Allen and Unwin Ltd

.

PRICE NET

RASE

CR ae

Te

iB35s= 2175

ET

DIMENSIONS OF ISLAM; TRANSLATE

RIVERSIDE CITY COLLEGE LIBRARY Riverside, California

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/dimensionsofisla0000schu

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

BY

THE

SAME

AUTHOR

Understanding Islam In the Tracks of Buddhism

Dimensions of Islam by FRITHJOF

SCHUON

translated by

P. N. TOWNSEND

London

GEORGE RUSKIN

ALLEN

HOUSE

MUSEUM

AND

UNWIN

LTD

STREET

Riverside Community College Library 4800 Magnolia Avenue Riverside, California 92506

FIRST PUBLISHED IN 1970 This book is copyright under the Berne Convention. All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, 1956, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, electrical, chemical,

mechanical, optical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be addressed to the Publishers. © George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1969

SBN 04 297021 O

PRINTED

IN GREAT

BRITAIN

im II on 12 point Old Style type

BY C. TINLING

& CO. LTD, LONDON

AND

PRESCOT

Preface

Books on Islam in European languages which are both factually reliable and profound on their interpretative side are still comparatively rare today. When approached in a purely academic spirit, the Islamic religion only too often becomes reduced to its socio-political aspect, and even this element is frequently misconstrued and distorted. As for all that comprises Islamic spirituality and intellectuality, this is often regarded as a tissue of foreign borrowings of Neoplatonic, Christian, Manichaean or Indian origin, therefore as alien to Islam and lacking a direct link with the original Prophetic impulse. This unfortunate tendency is, moreover, reinforced by certain sects bearing a Moslem label in the West, which preach a rationalistic and pseudo-scientific «interpretation of Islam devoid of the spiritual message that is the heart of the Qoranic revelation. As a result Islam is hardly considered seriously as a spiritual and metaphysical tradition by many whose search for a spiritual way is genuine enough, but who believe that such is only to be found in the traditions of India and the Far East. As for those Moslems who only study Islam from prevalent Western sources, they too are cut off from the integral message of their own tradition wherein alone they might hope to find the key to the solution of so many problems posed for them by the modern world. Against this background of frustration, the writings of Frithjof Schuon, and especially his recent work Understanding Islam (London, Allen & Unwin, 1963), have served as light and guidance in an otherwise confusing and bewildering situation. By expounding and elucidating the spiritual treasures of Islam with the clearest evidence, his books have placed before the Western public the most inward aspect of the Islamic message and have explained the deeper reasons whereby millions of men are compelled to accept the Qoranic revelation, making of it their rule of life.

PREFACE

The works of Schuon have no less significance in the field of comparative religion, as showing, among other things, Islam’s position vis-a-vis the other great religious traditions of humanity. Although

all of his works,

such

as Gnosis,

Divine

Wisdom

(London, Murray, 1959), Stations of Wisdom (London, Murray, 1961), Spiritual Perspectives and Human Facts (London, Faber, 1954), and Light on the Ancient Worlds (London, Perennial Books, 1965) have dealt with the different religious traditions of man, illustrating the unity of their inner content across the diversity of their outward forms, it is especially in his earliest book published in English, namely, The Transcendent Unity of Religions (London, Faber, 1953), that he gave the most detailed treatment of this subject, which by now has become an urgent question for the contemporary world. In this book Islam is dealt with in its relation to other religions with the deepest insight, in marked contrast to many other well-known works on comparative religion where even though a fairly satisfactory account is given of the Indian and Far Eastern traditions, Islam is almost brushed aside as an uninteresting late comer on the religious scene. Frithjof Schuon has rendered an invaluable service in this field by making transparent the religious forms and practices of the most diverse traditions, thereby revealing the transcendent unity that lies behind their forms, and what is more, he has

accomplished this feat without recourse to that sentimental reduction to an amorphous ‘common religion’ so prevalent today in pseudo-Vedantic and ‘theosophical’ circles. He has shown the significance and value of every revealed form as well as the necessity to follow and accept a religious tradition in its totality, this alone enabling man to reach that Unity which in itself is formless. More specifically for Islam, he has shown its ‘intermediate position’ between Judaism and Christianity and the traditions of Asia, by indicating its role and situation in

the family of Abrahamic religions on the one hand and its relation to Hinduism and other Oriental traditions on the other. It would not be an exaggeration to say that in the writings of Schuon Islam has for the first time been presented in all its amplitude and depth as a religion to be studied in its own right, as well as ‘compared’ with those other religious traditions which

8

PREFACE

until now have received the greater attention from Western historians and commentators. In his Understanding Islam, Schuon was concerned with the fundamental tenets of the Islamic tradition, with Islam itself,

the Qoran, the Prophet, and the Spiritual Way or, in other words, Sufism. In the present work he turns to some of the lesser known but none the less universal aspects of Islamic metaphysics and spirituality as embodied in the Qoran, the ahddith (sayings of the Prophet) and in various traditional Sufi texts. The eleven chapters of the present book deal among other things with the use of hyperole in Arab rhetoric; a commentary upon the Qoranic verse that God is both the First and the Last, the Inward and the Outward;

the relation between man as the

servant (abd) and God as his Lord (add) and the unity (tawhid) which transcends this polarity; a commentary on the specific difficulties attaching to the interpretation of the Qoran and other Scriptures from the human point of view; the phenomenon of Muhammad and his place in the Monotheistic Tradition as a

whole; the view of Christ in the Qoran; the universal message of the Virgin Mary and her significance as a link between Islam and Christianity; the Islamic doctrine of angels and angelology; the earthly manifestations which accompany the love of God; an explanation of some of the most difficult aspects of Islamic eschatology; and finally the five Divine Presences (hadarät) of Sufism, a doctrine first formulated by Ibn ‘Arabi, upon which nearly all later formulations of Sufi metaphysics and cosmology rest. In expounding these subjects Schuon also refers to other religious traditions and makes known doctrines which, being rooted in the very nature of things, are both perennial and universal. This work is therefore addressed both to those specifically interested in Islamic studies and to those who search in a more general way for that satisfaction of the spirit which is so often avidly sought and yet so rarely found. For the large number of people now studying the different aspects of Islam in the West and also for the many Moslems who have lost touch with their own tradition to the point of relying on works in European languages for knowledge of the religion they profess, this book is of the greatest import. It expounds aspects of Islamic doctrine

9

PREFACE

little known and difficult to unveil, yet of the most urgent actuality for those who feel bewildered by the intellectual confusion of modern times. Moreover, in this as in many of his other works, Frithjof Schuon through the teachings of Islam reveals truths which are of universal (hanif in the Qoranic sense) concern to all mankind, truths which alone can give meaning to human existence. Seyyed Hossein Nasr Tehran, April 1967

Contents PREFACE

page 7 13

1. The use of hyperbole in Arab rhetoric 2. Dimensions of the Universe in the Qoranic doctrine of the Divine Names

30

3. The Servant and Union

46

4. Some difficulties in the Qoran and other Scriptures

54

5. Concerning the phenomenon of Muhammad

68

6. The Qoranic message of Sayyidna ‘Isa

77

7. The Wisdom of Sayyidatna Maryam

88

8. An-Nür

102

g. Earthly concomitances of the Love of God

121

10. Some observations on a problem of the Afterlife 11. The five Divine Presences INDEX

136 PA

142 159

Le

q el ï

= 4

g

4

,

?

*

f

=

Di

k (

(1,2 la

6

mx

#6,

a

.

it

DS

F te

se

jal

;

}

tut

a) ot)

ap

ET

wi

le

tidy él

def:

BA At 4

le

'y

Tey

f 1. an

|

1

2e

OBA

of

0

at)

A PL CES

tuse

nil

'

y

es

tu

iy Aras bi aad

ree:

;

ee

vo

aro

1 og is unitpiremky et

eae

ne

AAS -

Sew

Wor Qu

1

d

VE

Vee

At

»

PORN

EL

ESS a 7 wh CM

Le 4

f

CHAPTER

1

The use of hyperbole in Arab rhetoric THE Arab style has a predilection for synthetic and indirect figures of speech: ellipsis, synecdoche and metonymy are common, as are also metaphor, hyperbole and tautology. The Semite has a propensity always to distinguish between ‘essence’ and ‘form’ and does not hesitate to sacrifice formal homogeneity to essential veracity, so that in Semitic texts of a religious or poetic nature one must always perceive the intention behind the expression, and not be blinded to it by some incoherence

in the form; and it is not only the spiritual intention that must be discovered, but also the emotion which determines its burst-

ing forth and its verbal crystallization. Thus hyperbole often expresses an emotion caused by a direct perception of the spiritual reality to be defined; more important here, however,

is the use of hyperbole to indicate a precise, but implicit, relationship, which confers on the proposition all its meaning, and by this very fact compensates or abolishes any appearance of absurdity in the literal wording. It is true that Arab stylists demand both logical clarity and dialectic efficacy in accordance, respectively, with their sense of formal correctness (fasähah) and of rhetoric (baläghah) bent on soundness of content. But this in no wise conflicts with the Semitic tendency towards indirect expression, since for the Arabs a thing is clear if in their opinion it is well said; the frequent use of metonymy (kin&yah) shows on the contrary that for the Arab it is natural to ‘embellish’ an expression by making it less direct and, from his point of view, all the richer.1 Never1 Spiritual truth, a Moroccan

shaikh has said, is more beautiful when it is

veiled like a fiancée. This opinion suggests—apart from a solicitude for dialectic breadth—an almost liturgical attitude of respectful distance, or even reverential

awe, with regard to the truth.

13

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

theless in the Arab style there are so to speak two poles: one exhibiting all the features just described,

and the other of a

more abstract and logical character; these two poles are crystallized respectively in the schools of Kufa and Basra, the first being based on scriptural models and thus possessing a pictorial and empirical character, and the second inspired by a more principial or theoretical conception of language; this second form of rhetoric predominates in theological, scientific and philosophical writings including the strictly doctrinal treatises of the Sufis. But what concerns us here is the Arabic language in its most spontaneous form, with its metaphorical and deliberately hyperbolic style, a style which takes its inspiration from the Traditions of the Prophet and, consciously or otherwise, from

the ancient poetry. As it is impossible not to take account of the ethnic and psychological conditioning of a language, apart from its strictly spiritual basis, it is essential here not to pass over in silence the noble impulsiveness, and the veneer of unreflectingness resulting therefrom, which was characteristic of the ancient Arabs, who would draw the sword ‘for a yea or a nay’; this is true to the point that the Qoran had to state specifically that God did not hold believers responsible for their unconsidered oaths. At the level of language, the vice of impulsive hyperbole—especially in a spiritual context—would be seriously disconcerting if allowance were not made for the temperament concerned, a temperament which is explosive, but noble in its very sincerity. Reference has been made to the deliberately indirect character of Arab rhetoric, and it would be fitting to dwell on this a little longer. The Gospel injunction not to cast pearls before swine nor to give what is sacred to dogs, apart from its obvious and universal significance, reveals at the same time—and as if by accident—a _ specifically Semitic characteristic: direct and naked truth is both too precious and too dangerous, it intoxicates and it kills, and it runs the risk of being profaned and of giving rise to revolt; it is like wine which must be put under seal, and which in fact is prohibited by Islam, or like woman who must be covered, and who in fact is veiled in Islam. The

spiritual style of the Semites is deliberately full of reticences

14

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

and indirect figures of speech; it is like a subtle play of veiling and unveiling; the inspired word is an inviolable fiancée, and the aspirant must be worthy of it even at the simple level of language.! An esoteric precaution thus impregnates all Arab rhetoric, and has established a kind of modesty and discretion at the level of verbal expression, as well as a particular aesthetic code: for there is also present an element of performance or of art, of musical calligraphy, as it were. Language appears to the Arab almost as an end in itself, as an autonomous

substance

which pre-exists in relation to its contents; like Universal Existence, which is its prototype, language encloses us ontologically in the truth, whether we wish it or not: before all words, its all-embracing meaning is ‘Be!’ (Kun); it is Divine in its essence. ‘In the beginning was the Word.’ Veiling and overflowing are as it were the two complementary poles of the Arab mentality in particular and of the Moslem mentality in general. The Moslem outlook is rooted in the certainty of the Absolute and orientated towards this certainty and its object; but this awareness of the highest and most intransigent Truth has as its human complement an emotivity which it invests with something of its own ‘thunder and lightning’; and this emotivity is compensated by a profound generosity; here we have in mind not so much the Bedouin temperament in itself as its enhancement through Islam; in other words, the two opposite and complementary characteristics just mentioned relate as much—and even more profoundly—to the genius of Islam as to the positive mentality of the Arab race. This triad, “Truth—Victory—Generosity’, describes the very soul of the Prophet, in which the genius of Islam and that of the Arab race converge?: awareness of the Absolute has 1This mentality, or this principle, evokes the initiatory symbolism of Perseus and Andromeda, and thus of the victory over Medusa. The truthfiancée symbolism is also found in the Song of Solomon, and again, from an iconographic point of view, in the Black Virgins: ‘I am black but beautiful’ as the Shulamite likewise says. Black represents the secret and supra-formal character of gnosis, although in certain cases—as applied to Jerusalem, for example—it may have the negative meaning of distress. 2 The triad in question evokes the

Tvimurti:

Brahma,

Shiva, Vishnu.

We

are here far beyond any question of racial psychology; there nevertheless exists a certain connection between the Revelation and the ethnic genius which is its vehicle, for the human support of a Divine Manifestation must lend itself to the Divine image which is to be manifested.

15

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

as its dynamic repercussion the holy war, for the Absolute excludes everything that is not itself, being in this respect like a devouring fire; but at the same time it is the Infinite, which is maternal and enfolds everything, and in this context awareness of the One will engender appeasing and charitable attitudes, such as almsgiving and forgiveness. Arab hyperbole, as indicated above, has the function of indirectly highlighting a particular relationship, one which is not expressed but which must be perceived by means of the apparent absurdity of the image. For example, a hadith relates that a woman entered Paradise in advance of the elect for the simple reason that she had brought up her children well; this means that the fact of having brought up her children with perfect abnegation and with the best possible result manifests the sanctity of the mother. As for being in advance of the elect—on the face of it a contradictory idea—this is simply a metaphor; spatial ‘advancement’ here represents an advantage of facility, not of distance or of movement; the meaning is that there are simple souls who enter Paradise at relatively little cost, or in other words, without having to undergo the great trials of the heroes of spirituality. Needless to say the hadith makes no allusion to the degrees of Paradise; it has no other intention than to emphasise the facility accorded to humble but constant merits, which presuppose moreover a totally religious environment. Its message is as follows: the believer who accomplishes the duty of his state to perfection, without concerning himself with anything else except religion and this duty, however humble it may be, will go to Paradise if he perseveres to the end; but here is no recipe of facility, for each has his own nature, vocation, duty and destiny.1 In an analogous manner,

the Prophet said that ‘those who

receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection will be those who imitate what

God has created’, or ‘who make

representations of (living) things’, and that God will then order them to give life to the images, which they will be incapable of doing. Here the fact of making the images implies the intention 1 This is one of the meanings of the verse which appears several times in the Qoran: ‘No soul can bear the burden of another.’

16

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

of equalling the Creator, and thus of denying His uniqueness and transcendence; if the punishment is the severest possible— which in this case seems exaggerated and even absurd—this is because the plastic arts are identified in the psychology of the nomadic and monotheistic Semites with a kind of luciferianism or idolatry, and thus with the greatest of sins, or with sin as such. When certain ahddith speak of a woman who was damned because she allowed her cat to die of hunger, or of a prostitute who was saved because she gave a drink of water to a dog, the meaning is that man is saved or damned by virtue of his essence, even if this is overlaid by characteristics opposed to it, but which are nevertheless peripheral, and so accidental. Here the action is not the efficient cause, but the sign of a fundamental cause which resides in the very nature of the individual; the action is the criterion, in manifested mode, of a fundamental and decisive

quality, so that there is no reason to be surprised by the fact that an apparently trifling action should have an almost absolute effect, one incommensurate

with its cause.

An example of a use of hyperbole in order both to veil and reveal a hidden relationship—and apart from which the saying in question would be unintelligible, to say the least—is provided by this saying of Al-Junayd: ‘A moment of forgetfulness of the Lord ruins a thousand years of service (of God).’ Here again, the forgetfulness of God is identified with sin as such; and it is precisely the almost insane exaggeration of the image which proves it. Here virtue or merit—the only virtue or the only merit—is the remembrance of God; Al-Junayd wishes to underline that this remembrance is the quintessence of every virtue and by this very fact constitutes the whole point of the human state. The same remark can be applied to this other saying of the same saint: ‘A thousand years of obedience cannot annul a moment of disobedience towards God,’ ? with the sole difference 1 The builders of the Alhambra were not afraid to ornament the famous fountain with statues representing lions; and the Iranian miniaturists go so far as to paint the Prophet, but their style is so thoroughly decorative as to appear almost as a prolongation of calligraphy. 2‘T am a slave and have no liberty; I shall go wherever God may order me to go, be this to Paradise or to hell.’ This saying of Al-Junayd shows that he looks on obedience as the most perfect conformity to the Will—or the Nature—

B

17

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

that here it is obedience that is identified with virtue as such;

and the same also applies mutatis mutandis, to the following passage from As-Samarqandi: ‘Even if a man has performed the prayer of the inhabitants of Heaven and earth... If I (Aah) were to find that in his heart there still remains an atom of love for the world, be this a desire to please the eyes or ears of someone else, or a worldly ambition . . . I would remove his love for Me from his heart . . . until he forgot Me. . .’1 Here again, the exaggeration serves to indicate a particular relationship which gives the whole meaning to the saying, namely, that hypocrisy, like the Christian notion of pride, sums up every possible vice of the spirit; being the very quality of evil, no quantity of good can annul it.? It is true that its opposite, sincerity, inasmuch as it represents the fundamental quality of goodness, can similarly overcome every quantitative evil; but, as the presence of sincerity by definition excludes hypocrisy this remedy is not available to the hypocrite. Taken literally, all these sayings are contrary to Qoranic doctrine, according to which Divine punishment is in proportion to human transgression, while Divine reward immensely surpasses our merit; the legitimacy of these sayings thus lies uniquely in their intention, that is, in the stress which they put on the ‘sin against the Holy Ghost’, whatever be the angle of vision; this stress is clearly their sole justification and the sole point of their existence. In view of the sanctity of Al-Junayd and As-Samargandi, it is possible to deduce from their verbal excesses, if one may call them such, what was their ‘station’ (maqam): a reduction of all temporal awareness to an instant of eternity made of pure of God, or that he envisages perfection under the aspect of obedience; but here again, a sublime spiritual saying contains a logical or rhetorical defect, for, apart from the fact that the Qoran does not ordain that any believer should go to hell, a pious man who thinks like Al-Junayd cannot go there. 1 Quite apart from the literal meaning, one might wonder whether it is permissible, or opportune, to express oneself as if God were speaking .. . 2 The reference to the ‘heart’ shows that the essence of the individual is involved, although the later reference to an ‘atom’ weakens this meaning; here we find two ideas expressed as ‘absolutes’ which contradict one another in the flood of the spiritual emotion, which in short mixes together two different propositions. What is only an ‘atom’ cannot be situated in the heart, and what is situated in our very essence cannot be reduced to an infinitesimal quantity, morally or spiritually speaking.

18

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

adequation to the Real, and thus free from every ‘association’ (shirk), every ‘covering up’ (or ‘stifling’ of the Truth: æufr), and every hypocrisy (#ifag); this is in fact the meaning of the expression ‘son of the present moment’ (ibn al-wayt) which is applied to the Sufis. The effort to depict the aspects of plenitude and boundlessness possessed by Paradise has given rise to quantitative metaphors which can only be accepted without question if one is either naive, or on the contrary perspicacious, or else simply resigned to the feebleness of human understanding and of earthly language. The first key to this symbolism is that in it quantity assumes a qualitative role, and that the very excessiveness of the image invites us to go to the root of things; but side by side with the quantitative images, one also finds other hyperboles, whose intention may be divined by examining the nature of things. For example: according to tradition, the houris wear seventy dresses, but at the same time these are transparent and one can see the marrow flowing in their bones, ‘like liquid and luminous honey’, we are told; the dresses symbolize the beauties of veiling, and thus of the formal or ‘liturgical’ aspects of beauty, while the marrow represents the uncreated essence, which is none other than an aspect of the Divine Substance, or a sort of emanation from a beatific Divine Quality. This means to say that God can be perceived through everything that is in Paradise;

but

the

connection

between

the relativity

of the

created and the absoluteness of the Essence requires an endless play of veiling and unveiling, of formal coagulation and compensatory transparence.

When one reads that in Paradise the least of the blessed enjoys such and such marvels or delights, that he has so many wives, servants, and so on, one may wonder what those who would

appreciate such an oppressive luxury are doing in Paradise; the point is that Islam, as a matter of principle, always includes in its framework the most earthly of possibilities—this is a ‘card in its hand’ that it never neglects—and thus places itself at the standpoint, not of grossness but of mercy, at the risk of appearing ‘earthy’ and trivial. Islam demands a priori neither detachment from the world nor refinement of taste, but only faith in God and

19

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

the putting into practice of the Divine Laws, a practice which always implies the fundamental virtues; and it is faith and practice which will transmute the soul of the believer, detach him from the world and refine his tastes.

On the one hand,

Islam takes account of the most naive and grossest of mentalities; but it takes account also—in the ahadith—of the wide differences in man’s mental make-up,

to the extent

that there are

sayings which are addressed to one type of person and not to another. In a word, Islam takes into consideration the diversity of men, as well as their impotence, and both attitudes are merciful; moreover the Prophet is called a ‘mercy for the universe’

(vahmatun li’l-‘dlamin), that is, for all.

What has been said about the hyperbolic descriptions of Paradise may be said equally, but in the opposite direction, about the imagery of Hell: the historical experience of both East and West proves abundantly that a great deal is necessary to dissuade the sinner from sinning; it is true that the most terrible descriptions of Hellmay remain ineffective for the most hardened criminals, but when they are effective they too are a part of mercy, since they prevent some souls from being lost. But in the eschatological metaphors we are not merely concerned with baits and threats: the delights and torments are respectively the cosmic equivalents of virtues and vices, merits and demerits,

and uncover the true nature of the latter in the light of Divine criteria. Although we are now straying a little from questions of rhetoric, the opportunity may be taken to add the following: the images of Paradise or Hell are always symbolical of realities which are indescribable in sensory terms, whence their excessiveness; it would thus be idle to complain of the fact that images of Paradise, for example, contain what humanly is unimaginable, unintelligible, or even absurd. The fact that earthly man, enclosed in the prison of his five senses, cannot imagine anything other than what these offer him, in no wise means that he would

not be infinitely happier outside this happy prison, and within other perceptions infinitely vaster and more profound. Moreover, to speak as if Paradise adapted itself to every humour of the believer is a way of saying that the believer adapts himself perfectly to the possibilities of Paradise; to use excessive images is thus to say, in earthly terms, that the blessed 20

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

possess, not five senses only, but innumerable senses opening on to Felicity, analogically and metaphorically speaking; it tells us also that the blessed are by nature infinitely satisfied with everything that the paradisal state offers them. When the Prophet promises a Bedouin who loves horses a winged horse in Paradise, that does not mean that the paradisal possibilities will gratify every possible desire, but that they will realize every possibility of happiness of the believing man; this latter epithet is essential, for true faith—especially before God—is by its nature incompatible with indiscriminate desires. Without faith, no Paradise; with faith, no senseless or harmful desires; and let

us recall that every pleasure we can describe as ‘normal’ is a kind of reverberation and consequently anticipation—however imperfect—of a celestial joy, as the Qoran itself declares: ‘As often as they are offered a fruit (of Paradise) they will say: “this is what was offered us before (on earth)”: for it is something similar which will be given them . . .” (s#rah ‘The Cow,’ II, 25). There is also another aspect to be considered: the Oriental starts from the idea that in this world below man is easily deprived of what he desires, and separated from what he loves; to conclude from this that in Paradise we obtain at once whatever we desire is but a short step, and this step has in fact been crossed with an impeccable if somewhat expeditious logic;+ the minimization by the Sufis of what might seem like a ‘celestial nightmare’ is the result of this two-edged logic; moreover the Qoran itself teaches that the ‘Satisfaction of God with the believer’ (Ridwan) is ‘greater’ than the ‘Garden’. Before going any further, let us return for a moment to the question of emotivity or impulsiveness, which is inseparable from the psychological aspect of the use of hyperbole. When reading traditional writings—not forgetting profane literature such as the ‘Thousand and one Nights’ and poetry—one is struck by the facility with which ancient Orientals wept, tore their garments, uttered a great cry, fell down in a swoon or fell down dead— all as a result of some visual, auditive or mental emotion;

this

1 On the basis of the Qoranic promise that the blessed ‘will have whatever they want’; this leaves open the question as to what desires are still possible in Paradise, and also what is the nature of the blessed themselves.

21

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

temperament forces us to recognize the timeliness of an exoteric religion in some respects pedantic and formalistic, but well fitted to put a brake on thoughtless exuberances. Metaphorically speaking, the Bedouin is a man who, with a great blow, will kill a fly on his wife’s cheek, forgetting that in so doing he is striking his wife; this image, despite its aspect of popular humour, has the advantage of illustrating in a simple and direct manner the point in question. An example: according to a certain holy man, it is better to be seated in a miserable spot on earth remembering God, than to be seated under a tree in Paradise without remembering Him; the intention of this saying is impeccable and transparent, but the literal sense nevertheless does violence to the Qoranic idea of Paradise and the elect. A further example: Al-Ghazali, in his book on marriage, mentions a bachelor who, dying of the plague, cries for a wife in order to appear before God according to the Sunnah, that is, married; or again: according to As-Samarqandi, the ordinary man only dies once, whereas the ascetic (za@hi1d) dies forty times each day; the excessive, or even the absurd, here serves to create the sublime, whatever may be, in each case, the

symbolic intention of the image. If it is true that such and such a religion creates or predisposes to such and such sentimental tendencies, it is even more true that Revelation must take account of pre-existing tendencies of this kind and must more or less come to meet them: to offer to souls images at their own level and to transmute these souls without their being aware of it is the very definition of an upaya, the ‘provisional means’ or the ‘salvation-bringing mirage’ of Buddhism. The Bedouin is so made that in his heart of hearts he wants to be chief, governor, or king; he is violent,

generous and insatiable, his imagination opens not only on to riches but also on to power and glory;! it is thus essential to offer him a Paradise that is capable of captivating him. Be that as it may, pious exaggeration, or even pious absurdity, does not belong exclusively to any one race or religion: for ‘It is noteworthy how frequently in Arab texts one finds allusions which recall a society at once patriarchal, chivalrous and mercantile: the notions of ‘ransom’ and ‘redemption’, of ‘debt’, ‘hostage’ and ‘intercession’, and others

of the kind, seem to be landmarks of Arab psychology. 22

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

example, it is also to be found in the Christian sphere—always as an inevitable excess or ‘lesser evil’—as when a devout man,

for the sake of ‘humility’ or ‘charity’, accuses himself of sins he has not committed, or accuses himself of being the greatest sinner or the vilest of men, or when he acts foolishly in order to be despised, without concerning himself with the effects of his attitudes on the souls of others, and so on.

From another point of view, it is important to recall that the Arabs—like most peoples in the contemporary world—have now largely lost their original characteristics, which, moreover, they had transmitted in differing degrees to other Moslem peoples; this phenomenon, whatever positive results it may seem to have had at first sight, is in reality an enfeeblement. It is to no avail that contemporary man is marked by certain experiences due to the senescence of humanity; spiritually he is soft and ineffective and intellectually ready to commit every possible betrayal, which will seem to him like the peak of intelligence, when in reality these betrayals are far more absurd than the excess of simplicity and emotivity of ancient man. In a general way, the man of the ‘last days’ is a blunted creature, and the best proof of this is that the only ‘dynamism’ of which he is still capable is that which tends downwards, and which is no more than a passivity taking advantage of cosmic gravity; it is the agitation of a man who lets himself be carried away by a torrent and who imagines that he is creating this torrent himself by his agitation.

This discussion of hyperbole and incongruity calls for a few words on Arab tautology. As a first example the following passage from the Qoran may be cited: ‘Shall I take other gods apart from Him? If the All-Merciful should wish me harm, their intercession will avail me naught. Truly I should then be in manifest error’ (siéivah Ya Sin, XXXVI, 23 and 24). The last sentence serves, not to explain what is already obvious, namely that one must not admit false gods, but to underline that this

error is not a subtle or occult one as might be given the benefit of extenuating circumstances, but on the contrary unpardonable, because the truth of the One God imposes itself—as St Thomas would say—by the superabundance of its clarity; here 23

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

it is basically a question of the metaphysical evidence of the Absolute, evidence which subjectively is innate and prerational, and objectively is to be found in the profound nature of things.? Another example is provided by the following verse from the same sévah: ‘And when it is said to them: give in alms a part of what God has provided for you, those who disbelieve will say: shall we feed someone whom God would feed, if He willed? You

are in manifest error.’ (46). Here again the final proposition emphasizes the evident nature of the idea expressed in what went before: it means that the state of obscuration of unbelievers is such that charity, which nevertheless is in human nature and thus pertains to the primordial norm (/fifrah), appears to them as an obvious error, which precisely establishes the measure of their perversion. Unbelievers cannot reconcile the Divine Omnipotence with human freedom, and in this they are ‘hypocrites’ (munäfiqün) since everyday experience proves that man is free; and what proves it above all is the distinction that every man makes between the state of a creature who is free and that of one who is not, a spontaneous distinction which constitutes the very notion of freedom: the fact that the freedom of creatures is determined by ‘Divine choice’, or that it merely reflects in the contingent realm Divine Freedom or All-Possibility, in no wise invalidates the concrete reality of our free will, without which there could be no question of the moral notions of merit and demerit. An attribute of Islam which particularly disconcerts Westerners is what might be called its ‘belittling of the human’; this attribute is explained by the concern to relate every greatness to God alone,’ and to forestall the development of ‘humanism’, that is, to forestall a way of looking at things which will lead to the cult of Titanesque and Luciferian man. The apparent tautologies in the Qoran which seem to belittle the Prophets + In the present day there is much talk of ‘sincere’ atheism; however, apart from the fact that sincerity neither prevents error from being error nor adds any value to it whatsoever, there is always in this system of sincerity—or pseudo-sincere narcissism—a point which constitutes total sin, and which seals off entry to Truth and Mercy.

* As is declared in one of the most celebrated ahadith: ‘There is no strength and no power but in God.’

24

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

must be interpreted in the light of this concern: if such and such a ‘Messenger’ is called ‘one of the just’! this is because no other aspect is of interest in the Islamic perspective. Whatever goes beyond ‘justice’ and ‘piety —and which for this reason cannot be an example for simple believers—is on the one hand a mystery with which the common religion does not have to concern itself, and on the other hand a quality whose glory pertains to God alone. A factor that must not be lost sight of is that in the Qoran it is God and not man who speaks, and one of the main purposes of the Qoranic message is precisely to recall the smallness of the human, not for its own sake, but in

the interest of man, and in connection with the doctrine of Unity.? Examples of doctrinal expression by means of contradiction are provided by the following passages from the Qoran: ‘He punishes whomsoever, He will and He pardons whomsoever He will’ (a recurring idea expressed in different ways), and: ‘I take refuge in the Lord of the dawn, from the evil of that which He has created’ (sé#vah ‘the Dawn’, CXIII, 2), or those passages which declare that God ‘causes to go astray whomsoever He will’; certain of these phrases seem to imply that God is arbitrary because He apparently acts without motive, and others that He is bad because He causes evil.’ The key to the correct interpretation is provided by the very definition of God, as it results from 1 The word

‘sdlih’, translated

here as ‘just’, comprises

the ideas of norm,

equilibrium, betterment, appeasement and return to original perfection: this is everything that Islam ‘officially’ requires of ‘Messengers’. 2 The Islamic morality of smallness, obedience and servitude, has not much

chance of being understood in one has every right to rebel contingent question apart, one other than to resign oneself to

an age of false liberty and of revolt. Certainly against purely human oppressions; but, this does not have the choice of wishing for anything the Divine mould, which is Origin, Archetype,

Norm and Goal, and alone gives peace of heart, by allowing us to be truly what

we are. It is in this acceptance of our absolute destiny that true freedom is realized,

but

this can

only be ‘in Him’

and

‘through

Him’,

and

over

and

above all our worldly options. 3 Theologians have sometimes dodged this rational difficulty with a somewhat

massive piety—or a sentimental blind obedience, if one prefers—by alleging, for example, that God is free to ‘do what He wants’ because He has no one above Him, and that good is good, not by virtue of an intrinsic quality which reflects directly—not indirectly—such and such an aspect of Divine Perfection, but for the sole reason that God willed it so; the error here is, on the one hand

to confuse Omnipotence or All-Possibility with the arbitrary, and on the other to forget that the basis of good is not a decree of God, but the intrinsic goodness

25

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

the ‘most beautiful Names’ (Al-Asma’ al-husnä), and above all from the Names of Mercy which appear at the head of every Surah; the question which arises is thus the following: how can God punish since ‘He does what He wishes’, and how can He cause or create evil when He is the All-merciful (Rahman, Rahim), the Holy (Quddüs), and the Just (‘Adl)? The answer is as follows: to assert that God punishes and forgives according to His good pleasure means, not that He is arbitrary, but that this ‘good pleasure’ represents motives which escape our limited understanding;! and to say that God causes evil means, not that He wills it gua evil, but that He produces it indirectly as a fragment—or as an infinitesimal constitutive element—of a ‘greater good’, whose extent compensates and absorbs that of the evil. This truth perhaps requires some further explanation although this will take us a little outside the subject-matter of the present chapter. By definition, every evil is a ‘part’ and never a ‘whole’; and these negations or fragmentary privations which are the various forms of evil are inevitable owing to the fact that the world, not being God and being unable to be God,

is of necessity situated outside God. But from the point of view of their cosmic function of being necessary elements of a total good, the various evils are in a certain way integrated into this good, and it is this point of view that makes it possible to say that metaphysically there is no evil; the notion of evil presupposes in fact a fragmentary vision of things, characteristic of creatures, who are themselves fragments; man is a ‘fragmentary totality’.* ( Evil, as we have seen, is in the world because the world is not of the Divine Nature. If two and two are four this is true because God is Truth,

and not because He is either Omnipotence or arbitrariness. 1 The story of Moses accompanying a mysterious and paradoxical master (Qoran, surah ‘The Cave’, XVIII, 65-82) furnishes the classical example of this problem, at least on the human level; and what is true as regards the master in question is true a fortiori as regards God. ® To solve the rational problem of the incompatibility between the existence of evil and the goodness of God, curiously feeble arguments have sometimes been used: maintaining for example that evil arises, as a simple contrast and in a completely extrinsic manner, from the stipulations of some law—just as a shadow is cast by an object—or that it is such purely by contrast with our conventional attitudes and so on, as if God would condemn the entire man for so basically unreal transgressions. Only too often good is confused with social morality, which is outward, while virtues, which are inward, and independent

26

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

{ God; now from a certain point of view—one of which the Vedantists are especially aware—the world is ‘none other than God’: Maya is Atma, Samsara is Nirvana; from this point of view evil does not exist, and this is precisely the point of view of the macrocosmic totality } This is suggested in the Qoran by means of the following antinomy: on the one hand it declares that good ‘comes from God’ and that evil ‘comes from yourselves’, and on the other hand it says that ‘everything comes from God’ (s#rah ‘Women’, IV, 78 and 79), the first idea having to be understood on the basis of the second, which is more universal and therefore more real; it is the difference between

fragmentary vision and total truth. The fact that the two verses almost follow one another—the more universal coming first—proves moreover the unconcern of sacred dialectic with surface contradictions, and the importance that it attaches to penetration and synthesis.? A classic example of Qoranic antinomy is found in the following verse: ‘There is nothing that resembles (God), and He it is who hears, who sees’ (s#rah ‘Counsel’, XLII,

11). The flagrant

contradiction between the first assertion and the second (which, of course, makes a comparison and thereby proves that an analogy between things and God exists) has the function of showing that this obvious analogy, without which no single thing would be possible, in no wise implies any imaginable resemblance nor abolishes the absolute transcendence of the Divine Principle. The Westerner frequently balks at the juxtaposition of terms with no obvious connection between them, for example when the Prophet ‘seeks refuge in God from hunger and treachery’ ; of any formal system, are forgotten; pride is an inward evil of man and is bad even if it never shows itself as anything outwardly illegal. Existentially speaking, evil is the distortion of a good; the fact that the substance is ontologically good does not prevent the distortion from being an evil which is completely real at its own level. 1 This is also the legitimate aspect of pantheism; pantheism is illegitimate when it is given an exclusive and unconditional application, valid from every point of view and making things appear as ‘parts’ of God, quod absit; the error is in the philosophy, not in the term. 2 Cf. likewise this antinomy: ‘This is naught but a reminder unto creation, for whomsoever amongst you would follow the straight path. But this ye will not,

unless

LXXXI,

God

wills,

the

Lord

of Creation.’

(stéivah

‘The

Overthrowing’

27-29).

27

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

now in both cases—hunger and treachery—it is a question of earthly insecurity, purely physical in the first instance, social and moral in the second. This way of suggesting something that is precise by means of certain of its aspects—which appear incongruous in the absence of their common denominator—is not exclusively Arab, and is also found in the Bible and in the majority of Sacred Books, perhaps indeed in all; at all events language contains the possibility of indirect suggestion which runs parallel to the purely descriptive role of the words and gives rise to the most diverse modalities and combinations. Antimony is doubtless not of the same order as hyperbole; it is nevertheless related to hyperbolic exaggeration in the sense that like the latter it indicates an implicit relationship which gives the surface contradiction all its meaning.* In both of these cases, as also in that of tautology, it is a question of a language which is both abrupt and indirect, manifesting on the one hand sacred emotion and modesty with regard to precious truths, and on the other the dazzling supra-rationality of the Divine order. If the logical coherence of the literal wording of a passage is neither a criterion nor a guarantee of truth or sanctity, neither is the obscure and more or less paradoxical nature of a given style of language a sign of error or weakness; apart from the fact that sacred language may in some respects be a ‘shock treatment’ rather than a neutral communication,’ it inevitably contains infinitely more than ordinary language, whence a rhetoric of key words which does not necessarily tally with logic pure and simple; and what is true of sacred language in the strict sense of the term may also be so for the spiritual language inspired by it. Certainly logical expression, or the homogeneous and coherent surface of language, may be the vehicle of the highest truth and thus also of sanctity, and it would be absurd to maintain the contrary;* but awareness of the Absolute may equally well 1 It goes without saying that antimony is not a means of ordinary dialectic as used by logicians: moreover, rhetoric and dialectic merge into one another at the level of sacred or sapiential expression. 2 In the formulas of Zen, the ‘element of shock’

has

precedence

over

the

‘informative’ element which is proper to language. This is possible because the shock informs in its turn and after its fashion. * Witness the Bhagavadgitä, whose language appears as a perfectly simple and homogeneous surface.

28

HYPERBOLE

IN

ARAB

RHETORIC

fracture, so to speak, the outward form of language, and in this case, it must be admitted that the truth justifies its expression,

and that the spiritual value of men excuses the outward appearance of their language. Not unconnected with the foregoing—but independent of this particular subject—is the fact that Moslems like to present metaphysical truths as far as possible in connection with subjective experience, while Hindus for example present these truths in pure objectivity and as if the subject did not exist, which seems paradoxical when one thinks of the transcendent subjectivism of Vedanta; it is true that Moslems do the same in treatises of a more or less Neo-Platonic character—their foundation nevertheless remaining always Qoranic or Muhammadan—but the most general expression of Sufism has unquestionably the subjectivist character just referred to; that is to say, the stages towards transcendent Reality are presented not so much under the aspect of objective and immutable “envelopes of the Self’ as under their aspect of ‘moral stations’, in the widest and most profound sense that can be given to this term. The states (ahwal) and stations (magämät) of Sufism are almost numberless and their description depends on the way followed by the Sufi author; but this does not prevent these experiences from clearly possessing a perfect objectivity as points of reference—otherwise it would be pointless to speak of them—nor on the other hand (and this must again be stressed) does it prevent Islam from possessing a metaphysical and cosmological doctrine expressed in objective terms, founded on the Qoran and the Sunnah and sometimes influenced, in its formulation, by the categories of Hellenic esoterism. But in Islam, true spirituality always remains bound up with the ‘objective subjectivism’ of faith—and so with the sincerity of faith and of the inward virtues determined by unitary Truth —of which the Qoran and the example of the Prophet afford the models; the originality of Sufism is that it presents itself as a metaphysic of human virtue, of virtues inherent in faith or in the awareness of the Absolute and made ultimately supernatural by this very inherence.

29

CHAPRDLE.

R2

Dimensions of the Universe in the Qoranic Doctrine

of the Divine Names ‘HE is the First (Al-Awwal) and the last (Al-Akhir) and the Outward (4z-Zähir) and the Inward (A/-Batin) and He knows infinitely all things’ (Qoran, LVII, 3). This verse of the s#rah ‘Iron’! is among those that contain—like the Shahadah—a doctrine that is at once both metaphysical and cosmological, and by the same token a spiritual alchemy as well; in it a temporal symbolism is ‘crossed’ by a spatial symbolism; the result is a synthesis which embraces all fundamental aspects of the Universe. ‘The First’ is the Principle inasmuch as It precedes Manifestation; ‘The Last’ is the Principle inasmuch as It follows it. The Principle ‘externalizes’ Itself through Manifestation or Existence, but It is also ‘the Inward’ or ‘the Hidden’ in so far as It is veiled thereby like an invisible centre, although in reality It contains Manifestation. Universal Manifestation is the wave that ‘comes forth’ from the Principle and ‘returns’ into It, if such a manner of speaking may be permitted despite its apparent emanationism.? At the same time Universal Manifestation ‘is’ the Principle in its aspect of ‘outwardness’, while in another relationship this same Principle remains transcendent and ‘inward’ with respect to its illusory ‘crystallization’.* ‘Anteriority’, ‘Posteriority’, ‘Exteriority’, ‘Interiority’: these four aspects of the Principle express the Principle-Manifestation relationship in terms of succession and 1 Thus named because it mentions iron as a gift of Heaven ‘in which there is immense calamity but also utility for men’. 2 It would only amount to emanationism or pantheism if Manifestation were conceived as a part of the Principle, and if the Principle were deemed to be modified by Manifestation. 3 It must not be forgotten that the illusory is also the ‘relatively real’.

30

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

of simultaneity, or in other words, from the point of view of

‘becoming’ and of ‘being’; in the first case the perspective is that of the Cycle or Cycles, and then that of Existence as such.1 There is an evident analogy between ‘the First’ and ‘He who is without beginning’ (4/-Azal) on the one hand, and between ‘the Last’ and ‘He who is without end’ (4/-Abad) on the other. It is the same in the case of the following Names: ‘the Primordial’ (Al-Qadim) and ‘the Perpetual’ (Ad-Da’im); ‘the Initiator of all things’ (Al-Mubdi’) and ‘He who brings all things back to Himself” (Al-Mu‘id);? ‘He who brings forward’ (Al-Mugaddim) and ‘He who retards’ (Al-Mu’akhkhir); ‘He who creates out of naught’ (Al-Badi‘) and ‘He who subsists’ (A7-Bagi). The Names Al-Azal and Al-Abad denote, not the ‘position’ or the ‘function’ of the Principle in relation to Manifestation considered as a cycle, but two aspects of the very ‘nature’ of the Principle, aspects which are themselves considered in relation to Existence: the Divine Principle is not merely ‘the First’ because It ‘existentiates’ or creates and ‘the Last’ because It judges and finally ‘reabsorbs’, but It is also in Itself without origin and without end. It is Itself eternally its own ‘origin’ and also its own ‘goal’, its own cause and its own effect, its own absoluteness and its

own infinity. God is ‘the First’ and ‘the Last’ in relation to the things He has ‘created’; but He is ‘the Primordial’ (Al-Qadim) in relation to the world taken in its entirety, and ‘the Perpetual’ or ‘He who endures’ (Ad-Da@’im) in the sense that He ‘survives’ the world. All these Names denote in various ways the transcendence of the Divine Principle; each one presupposes the others: 1

‘Before this universe was, I alone was...

After manifestation I continued

to be, in Myself as well as in the form of the world of phenomena;

and when

the universe has ceased to exist, I will be... Just as one may say of the sensible elements that they have entered into all living beings (since these beings live by them) ... or that they have not entered into them (since they constitute them a priori), so also one can say that I entered into these living beings (as such), or that I did not enter into them (since there is no reality other than I)’ (Shrimad Bhagavata Mahäpurana, IT, IX, 32 and 34). 2 It is in this connection that God is ‘the Inheritor’ (Al-Wdrith) as well as ‘King of the Day of Last Judgment’ (Maliku yawmi ’d-Din). 3 ‘Verily we belong to Allah, and verily to Him we shall return’ (Qoran, II, 156). ‘What Thou has created returns to Thee’ says a prayer of the Iroquois, in reference to the smoke of the Calumet which symbolically carries all creatures back to heaven, these creatures being represented by the portions of tobacco which have been consecrated to them. 31

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

thus, God is named ‘the First’ because He is ‘without beginning” and because He is ‘eternally anterior’ to every consequence of His Infinity, and He is named ‘the Last’ because He is ‘without end’ and ‘eternally beyond’ all duration. Universal Manifestation is a path that leads from God to God, a ‘moving away’ (bu‘ 4) which contributes to the ‘revelation’ (tajalli) of ‘proximity’ (qurb).1 We have seen that the Principle is not only ‘the First’ in relation to the world, but that It is so also in Itself; this is

equivalent to saying that the Essence (Dhät) is ‘first’ in relation to the Qualities (Sifat), which for their part pertain to Being, and thus to the inward determination effected by the Principle with a view to Manifestation. In Vedantine language, the Qualities, without ‘emerging’ from Aimd, belong already to the domain of Maya; this is to say that relativity is already affirmed in the principial order, and that this order accordingly contains the Divine prefiguration both of Creation and—at the heart of Creation—of Revelation. In metaphysics one may either put the accent on the Self alone and envisage Being solely with reference to Mdyd,? or on the other hand one may envisage Being solely in its character of pure Principle, and thus with reference to its Divinity; one may even envisage relativity exclusively as an ‘internal dimension’ of the Absolute and thus reduce Manifestation to its Principle, with all the precautions and reservations necessitated by such a formulation according to certain mental contingencies. Relativity, while it brings about a first polarization 7m divinis, does not encroach upon the intrinsic Divine nature; one may even extend this affirmation to cover the whole domain of Mäy& and therefore of universal 1 It is opportune to point out here that ninety-nine, the number of the Divine Names, is symbolical and by no means fixes or exhausts the multitude of the Qualities of Allah. These qualities can always be reduced to a limited group of fundamental differentiations—for example to the triad ‘Wisdom—Clemency— Rigour’—but these polarizations are susceptible of indefinitely diverse reverberations, All-Possibility having no limits. * In Islamic language what the Hindus call Mäyàä is the ‘veil’ (hijab) or the indefinite series of veils that envelops the Essence. The multitude of Qualities, while ‘revealing’ the Divine nature, ‘veils’ the non-dual Unity of Allah. Maya,

as

the

Divine

Power

of externalization

or

of illusion,

is ‘still not

manifested’ (avyakta) and pertains in this connection to the supreme King, of whom in its unfolding it is as it were the ‘art’, the ‘play’ or the ‘trace’. 32

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

Manifestation as such; this is exactly what is signified by the Divine Name ‘the Outward’: Az-Zähir is the world inasmuch as

it is necessarily Divine, in default of which it would be nothing at all; the world is ‘the Outward’ or ‘the Visible’ inasmuch as we

see Being through our five senses;! but since we cannot see Being—nor with all the more reason Beyond-Being—in itself, God is from this point of view ‘the Inward’. No creature is identifiable with ‘God-the-Outward’,? who in Himself is Existence, Life and Consciousness; He is also space, time, form, number, matter and their positive contents, the

perceptible reflections of the Divine Qualities. Az-Z&hir assumes forms, life and other contingencies without becoming confused with this or that; that is to say that He is all that exists, but

nothing in particular; we see Him, because He is ‘the Outward’, while yet not seeing Him, because He is God.

Universal Manifestation is a mystery of ‘emanation’, but the use of this term must not be allowed to obscure the fact that philosophico-scientific and ‘deistic’ emanationism takes no account of transcendence and in practice sees in the cosmos a ‘fragment’ of God—gquod absit—and not an extrinsic aspect; which is to say that in practice it reduces the Principle to Manifestation, whatever terminology may be employed; the Principle is conceived as if it were modified by its manifestation, as if it gave up something of its Substance, thereby impoverishing itself for the benefit of its creation. If it is nevertheless maintained that Manifestation ‘emanates’ from the Principle and is finally ‘re-

absorbed’ into It—and this is a proposition that can be maintained when rightly understood—it needs to be added that for the Principle Itself there is neither manifestation nor emanation of any kind, but only the permanent possibility—sufficing to 1 The senses are a prison which it is absurd to try to elevate into the position of criterion

and

basis of total knowledge,

as modern

science would

have

it.

What is the good of providing exact information about galaxies and molecules if it is at the expense of a knowledge—infinitely more real and more important —of the total Universe and of our absolute destiny? 2 Excepting the Prophets—whence the testimony ‘He who has seen me has seen God’ (Al-Haqq, ‘the Truth’ or ‘the Reality’)—and the sacred symbols such as the letters

and

sounds

of the Divine

Names,

or the great phenomena

of

nature or some of them, depending on the Revelation or traditional perspective involved.

Cc

33

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

itself—of what appears, from our point of view as creatures, as an ‘emergence’ from the Principle or, in another and more restricted perspective, as a creatio ex nthilo. Between

‘the First’ and ‘the Last’ there is the world, but

there is also God, for Manifestation is a ‘message from Him by Himself’,

as the Sufis would

say; and God, in so far as he

‘situates’ or ‘projects’ Himself—one might almost say ‘incarnates’ Himself—between ‘God-the-First’ and ‘God-the-Last’ is none other than ‘the Outward’. In this case Manifestation is envisaged, not as a separate substance, but as a ‘deployment’ or ‘revelation’ illusorily ‘outward’—because projected into ‘nothingness’, or rather in the direction of a nothingness in itself non-existent—of the Divine Principle which is always changeless and virgin. In this ‘revelation’ or this theophany, the Real differentiates itself to an increasing extent, it ‘hardens’ itself by waves or by stages, segments itself like foam and finally consumes itself on reaching the providential limit of its outflowing, so that it may flow back—as ‘God become nothing’1—by stages and by waves ever more ‘inwardly directed’ into its source, that is to say, into its true nature which has never in reality ceased to be what it ‘has been’ from all eternity. This true nature, which has never ‘emerged’ from itself, but which, from the standpoint of contingency, may appear as ‘the Outward’—or in another respect as ‘the First’ or ‘the Last’—is none other than ‘the Inward’. Seen from this Centre, if one may put it thus, there is no ‘Outward’, or there is an ‘Outward’ only in the form of an essential possibility included in the Principle; and the Principle itself is ‘inward’ only from a standpoint that is still contingent, and which is conditioned precisely by this illusory ‘outwardness’. One might perhaps say that ‘the Last’ corresponds analogically in a certain manner to ‘the Inward’, in the sense that the ‘action’ of God in drawing all things back into Himself is more directly in conformity with the Essence than the creative act, which implies a ‘moving away’. In other words, in the process of manifestation, it is manifestation that is the goal, whereas in the process of reintegration or of apocatastasis, the goal is the This is the metaphysical foundation of the Christly mystery.

34

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

Principle ;+ the ‘return’ to God is thus a reality analogous to the ‘inwardness’ of God. As ‘The First’ God projects Himself towards existential ‘nothingness’ because ‘He desired to be known’ distinctively, and thus to be known in what is ‘other than Himself’; whereas in so far as He is ‘the Last’ God has in

view only His own essential and undifferentiated reality or, from a more relative point of view, His victory over disequilibrium. A/-A wwal desired to see Himself in ‘the other’, He consequently desired ‘the other’, whereas Al-Akhiry desires to see this vision ‘in Himself’, He desires therefore to see ‘Himself’.

The relationship is analogous—but in no sense identical—to that which exists between the ‘terrestrial Paradise’ and the ‘Heavenly Jerusalem’, or between the ‘Creation’ and the ‘Redemption’. ‘The First’ and ‘the Last’ are as it were two Divine phases, just as in another dimension—this time belonging to spatial symbolism—‘the Outward’ and ‘the Inward’ are two Divine ‘aspects’, two ‘poles’ which only appear as such by virtue of the ‘veil’ which separates us from the unchangeable Unity of Allah. In order to make this account as clear as possible, it may be summarized and completed in the following manner. As ‘the First’ God is manifested for us by our existence, and thus by our birth; He is also manifested around us by the existence of the world, and thus by the Creation; in a completely universal sense, God in so far as he is ‘the First’ is affirmed by the unfolding of Mayda, of which in this aspect He is the principial and transcendent origin. Similarly, God in so far as he is ‘the Last’ is in our consciousness, in the first place through the certainty of death, then by the evidence of the Last Judgment, and thirdly through the metaphysical notion of the Apocatastasis; death is the antithesis 1 This is also true for the secondary and still relative modes of the ‘reflux’ in question, and therefore for every cyclical ending; the analogy is in any case sufficient to justify the use of a synthetic language. 2 The

Names

Ar-Rahmdn

and Ar-Rahim,

which

are commonly

translated

as ‘the Clement’ and ‘the Merciful’—although the first comprises also the meaning of intrinsic Beatitude—are respectively referable, according to a particular interpretation, to Creation and Salvation, or to Manifestation and Deliverance.

a3

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

of birth, Judgment is the antithesis of Creation, and the Apocatastasis is the antithesis of Maya. | ‘God-the-Outward’ is manifested by our existence as such in all its actuality, then by the existence of the world—envisaged likewise in itself and independently of the question of origin and of end—and lastly and a fortiori by Maya, envisaged, not as the creative power ‘preceding’ its content, but in its aspect of universal ‘externalization’: in this connection Méyd is itself all that it contains; it is the veil into which all phenomena are woven.? Again, ‘God-the-Inward’ is manifested in the microcosm by the Intellect; on the macrocosmic scale and without here taking

account of that existential—and therefore not ‘essential— intermediary which is the Divine Spirit (Ar-Rüh) at the centre of the cosmos, ‘God-the-Inward’ is affirmed by pure Being; and

in relation to total Reality, He is the Self. The Intellect is veiled by the ego; Being by the world; Beyond-Being or the Self by Maya, which comprehends Zshvara or Being. In other words, for the manifested Universe it is Being—since It is the Principle of the Universe—that is ‘the Inward’; but this same Being—with all that it comprises in its creative dimension—is ‘the Outward’ whenever it is envisaged in relation to the Self; the Self is the “Principle of the Principle’ and the ‘Inwardness of the Inward’.* The Sufi lives under the gaze of Al-Awwal, Al-Akhir, AzZähir and Al-Batin. He lives concretely in these metaphysical dimensions as ordinary creatures move in space and time, and as he himself moves in so far as he is a mortal creature. He is consciously the point of intersection where the Divine dimensions meet; unequivocally engaged in the universal drama, he 1 It is the Divine ‘Outwardness’ that makes it permissible to affirm that all things are Atma, to speak in Vedantine terms. Normally ‘the Outward’ corresponds to what the Hindu doctrine understands by ‘Vaishvanara’; it is only from a viewpoint that looks beyond ontology that ‘Outwardness’ can be assimilated to Mayda envisaged in its total unfolding and not simply in its sensible manifestation;

and it should be remembered

that ordinary theologies

are ontologies and consequently stop short of the idea of the Self or of BeyondBeing. In Hindu terms ‘the Inward’ would be either Prajna or Turiya, according to the level of reality envisaged. ? In fact Being is only the Principle of Manifestation; it is only from the standpoint of Manifestation that It is ‘the Inward’, and not from the standpoint of Divinity ‘in Itself’.

36

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

suffers no illusions about impossible avenues of escape, and he never situates himself in the fallacious ‘extra-territoriality’ of the profane, who imagine that they can live outside spiritual Reality, the only reality there is. The world, whatever it may contain of things permanent or transitory, is never detached from God; it is always the same celestial substance fallen into a void and hardened in the cold of separation; the limits of things and the calamities that result from them bear witness to that. The sage sees in things and through things the Divine origin now distant, and also—as he considers limitations and miseries—the fall which is inevitable and in which the world will finally crumble; he discerns in phenomena the ‘flux’ and the ‘reflux’, the expansion and the return, the existential miracle and the ontological limit. But above all the Sufi perceives through the ‘eye of the heart’ that ‘all things are He’; the world, while not God from the standpoint of its particularized existence, is none the less ‘the Outward’ from the standpoint of its fundamental possibility or of the permanent miracle on which it hangs at every moment, and without which it would collapse into nothingness. In one sense the world is not God, but in another sense it is ‘none other

than He’ by virtue of its Divine causation. It may be that words will never be able to describe this mystery in a satisfactory manner; one thing however is certain, and it is that the world ‘is God’, or else it is nothing. God is not the world, and that is why it is impossible to speak of ‘the Outward’ without also speaking of ‘the Inward’; the former is true only through the latter. Every man is as it were suspended between ‘the First’ and ‘the Last’: every man has fallen from the primordial state and is threatened with death. Behind him is the Divine Law, which was

before him, and in front of him is the Judgment consequential on this Law; God is ‘the First’ not only as Creator but also as Legislator. In the same way man extends from his bodily form —‘made in the image of God’1—through the soul and the spirit as far as Being and as far as the Self; he is thus as it were woven

into ‘the Outward’ and opens on to ‘the Inward’, thanks to that Divine spark within him to which no limit can be assigned. 1 Hence the sacred character of nudity in Hinduism and elsewhere. Man was naked at his creation, he is so at his birth and will be so at the resurrection.

37

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

From the point of view of succession, we are a flux emanating from ‘the First’; from the point of view of simultaneity, we are a coagulation supported by ‘the Outward’. Now the flux that is ourselves must carry within itself the sense of its own relativity and the desire for the reflux—for the movement towards ‘the Last’—on pain of being animal and not human; and the coagulation that is ourselves—or our individuation—must carry within itself a consciousness of ‘the Inward’, the sufficient reason

of man being the ‘manifestation of the Unmanifested’ and not Manifestation as such.? ‘The Outward’ is situated between ‘the First’ and ‘the Last’,

whereas ‘the Inward’ is the two together and is neither the one nor the other, for it is as much the Principle turned towards Manifestation as it is the Principle in itself. That which comes from ‘the First’ must return to ‘the Last’: this is the foundation of the eschatological drama of man. We are ‘a message from God to God’ as the Sufis would say, but we must make the journey freely since, being men and not animals, the justification of our nature is the plenary manifestation of liberty. Now liberty is a two-edged sword; but since it is a possibility it cannot but be realized; man is therefore necessary. Liberty carries with it the contingency of the absurd; that is to say the absurdity of the desire to be oneself ‘the First’ from whence one came and ‘the Last’ whither one goes, as if Existence proceeded from ourselves, whereas in reality we exist by an extraneous will and are incapable of creating ex nihilo or even of annihilating.

It might also be said that man, who has obtained nothing from himself and has received everything, is made for obedience; it is only in view of—and in the framework of—obedience that his liberty finds its meaning. Herein is no contradiction, for this framework is wide enough for human liberty to find fulfilment within it; positive liberty, that is to say: the liberty that chooses

the truth and the good and, having chosen, decides

vocationally in favour of a certain truth and a certain good;? 1 As the materialists and the vitalists would have it. * Not a fragmentary good that is opposed, in principle or in fact, to truth or to the total good.

38

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

to be positively free is to choose submission, spiritually speaking!. Before receiving our faculties of sensation and of action we received

existence;

having

received

it, with

all its essential

content, it belongs to us only conditionally; it is obviously absurd to claim total possession of something that is outside our control. The curse of modern man is that he believes himself wholly free de jure, whereas no contingent consciousness could possibly be so; it could only be so on a higher plane than its own and beyond obedience, in the supernatural where the creature,

in surpassing itself{—by way of a gnosis that is but one with the grace of God—, is reunited with Liberty itself, the only liberty there is. But it is not then man who possesses Liberty, it is Liberty that has taken possession of man. The ‘mystique’ of modern man is one of revolt. Between the spirit of revolt and the spirit of submission there is no communication: like oil and water they neither mix nor understand one another; they speak different languages or lead incompatible lives; there is between them a fundamental divergence of imagination and sensibility, to say the least of it. This spirit of revolt has nothing to do with the holy wrath that is by definition directed against error and vice, but is rather a case of pride posing as victim; it marks both a ‘hardening’ and a ‘freezing’ of the soul; it is a spiritually deadly petrification—for hatred is inseparable from it—and an agitation without issue which only intelligence and grace can conquer. And since in the case of most men intelligence fails to resist the passion of bitterness,” nothing but an explosion can break this carapace and calm this whirlwind, whence the necessity of miracles.* A miracle is an irruption of Al-Batin ‘the Hidden’ into the domain of Az-Zahir ‘the Visible’ or ‘the Outward’.

The Celestial Paradise with its company of the blessed has a contrary significance, that of an entry of ‘the Outward’ into the domain of ‘the Hidden’ or ‘the Inward’, making all necessary allowance for relativities since there can be no question here of 1 The word Islam means nothing else. According to Confucius ‘filial piety and obedience are the foundation of humanity’. 2 Bitterness is next door to vainglory; the zeal of bitterness leads to hell,

according to St Benedict. 3 There is besides in every man a latent revolt which most commonly shows itself in indifference towards God and towards the constraints of truth.

oe)

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

an absolute polarity. In an analogous manner the great Revelations—which recapitulate each in its own way the golden age— are ‘belated’ manifestations of ‘the First’,! while cataclysms manifest ‘by anticipation’ ‘the Last’. To be conscious of the permanent miracle of Existence is to live in a devotional collectedness which is as it were the complement of intellectual concentration: the latter is related to truth and the former to beauty and the virtues. To see Existence is to be no longer dispersed in the multitude of things; it is to perceive ‘accidents’ as if they were in ourselves and without losing sight of ‘Substance’. The sap of the human condition is devotion. What is Paradise? It is the inward nature of pure Existence; to be in conformity with that nature is to be carried by the wave of becoming toward Beatitude. To be in conformity with Existence is to submit; to submit ourselves to the celestial law, to conform

to our own essence, the essence by which we exist and which is the innermost nature of things. Without Existence we would not be; how can we reasonably revolt against it and set ourselves against that by which we are, that which makes us to be ourselves? The essence of Existence is blissful; opposition to that essence—the idolatry of contents or of accidents—leads us away from Beatitude and encloses us in the blind alley of our own

contingency and in the measureless hell of our own absurdity. The absence of Beatitude can be nothing else but Hell, for where there is no pleasure there is its opposite; but Existence, from which as human beings we cannot detach ourselves, is made of felicity, despite its knots and its fissures. What is true of Existence is with all the more reason true of Being, and thereby of Beyond-Being, which is the source of all.2 The Sufis do not hesitate to speak of a ‘Paradise of the Essence’ (Jannat AdhDhat), which is none other than the Parinirvana of the Tathagata, that supreme Nirvana in which the very extinguishment of the lamp is consumed. 1 This is equally true—on a much reduced scale—of certain natural facts, such as springtime, youth, morning. ? At least from the human point of view, which is that of separativity and illusion.

40

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

The question: ‘What is the Self’ can be answered, while preserving a symmetry with the answer just given about Paradise, by saying that it is the inward or absolute nature of pure Intelligence. But then one must speak, not of obedience or submission as in the case of existential perfection, but of discernment and contemplative concentration; this is the station of ‘Ipseity’ and of ‘infinite consciousness’. The universal Pole that can be designated, synthetically and in a provisional way, by the term ‘Existence’ is characterized by the qualities of Purity, Inviolability and Mercy. The Pole—or the Centre—that may be called ‘Consciousness’ or the ‘Self’ enters into Existence like a luminous axis, irresistible and liberating. The way that corresponds to Az-Zä&hir is that of action and also that of love of the neighbour; it is the way of obedience and of charity, of works, of an active love of God. The way that corresponds to Al-Batin is that of the contemplative love of God and, at the summit, that of gnosis, of knowledge of the Self. But the thing that unites, humanly speaking, every intention or perspective is the warmth and freshness of devotion. Without it there is no happiness; living without devotion is a pretence of living; it is living in death.

To the question of whether Reality is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ there are logically two answers: the first is that Reality is neither good nor bad; the second is that it is good. If good exists, it is because

the ground of Existence is beneficent; if good can be absent— to a minute degree when the world and the cycle are envisaged in their totality—it is because the ground of Existence, or absolute ‘Reality’, is neither good nor bad, because it cannot be enclosed in an alternative or an opposition. The thing that it is important to understand is that this indifference or this transcendence is essentially of such a nature as to reveal itself as good;

that is to say, good essentially reveals the nature of the indifference that is superior to it. The part can be relatively an evil, but the whole is good, whatever may be its degree of reality; in this sense

the world

is a positive manifestation,

despite the negations it shelters provisionally. Or again, if a thing is bad, it can only be so by virtue of its fragmentary nature and not of its totality. Evil makes things fragmentary,

41

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

as good makes them whole; good dilates whereas evil contracts. God manifests Himself only in perfections, not in their absence; where they are lacking there cannot be either totality or centre. A bad man is no more than a fragment of himself. Three attitudes are possible with respect to the world. The first, which is properly speaking sub-human yet in fact only too human, is to accept sensorial phenomena as being ‘reality’, and to devote oneself to them without reservation and with an undivided will; this amounts to denying that God is not only ‘the Outward’ but also ‘the Inward’, also that His ‘outwardness’

has no meaning save by virtue of His ‘inwardness’. It amounts as well to denying that God is not only ‘the First’ who has created us, but also ‘the Last’ who awaits us at the end of our

journey, the one having as before no meaning save in connection with the other. The second possible attitude, considered as a pure attitude and neglecting combinations with other points of view, is the rejection of the world, of seduction and of sin. It is to see, in place of beauty, nothing but skeletons and ashes, and in place of pleasure, nothing but impermanence, deception, impurity and suffering. From this point of view there is no ‘God-the-Outward’; the world is only something that is not God. The third possible attitude is based on what may be called the metaphysical transparence of phenomena: it is to see the world in its aspect of ‘Divine outwardness’ which implies a consciousness that this ‘outwardness’ is a function of a corresponding ‘inwardness’. This attitude attains to essences by way of forms, but without in any way losing sight of the truth of the preceding attitude, namely, that no appearance ‘is’ God and that every appearance has a reverse side which derives from ‘outwardness’ in so far as the latter is separated from ‘inwardness’. The sage ‘sees God everywhere’, but not to the detriment of the Divine Law to which he is humanly subject. Since most of our contemporaries seem to be in revolt against the idea that sin according to the flesh—which in their eyes cannot anyhow be a sin—can entail what theology calls * Bodily asceticism is not dependent upon this point of view alone; it may have the purpose of eliminating dependence on matter and the senses, however they may be envisaged.

42

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

‘damnation’, let-us examine that question in the light of the doctrine now under consideration. Sexuality belongs to the domain of Az-Zähir: carnal ecstasy in fact belongs only to ‘God-the-Outward’ and not directly to man, who possesses no creative power nor beatific rapture; in this connection man is the instrument of the Divine will concerning terrestrial expansion. The purpose of sexuality is consequently the preservation of the species and the multiplication of individuals; but it has also a contemplative function by virtue of its prototypes in divinis or, what amounts to the same thing, by virtue of the metaphysical transparency of symbols. From another point of view, one may say that nothing human is purely animal, for we are ‘made in the image of God’. Carnal ecstasy, in as much as it betokens an irruption of the Divine into the human, transmits something of the Divine nature; the consequence is that outside the two conditions mentioned—procreation and contemplation—sexual enjoyment is a profanation which cannot but entail a downfall into the infernal states, considering its ontological gravity; it might almost be said that ‘one does not become God for nothing’. To understand man is to understand the ontological gravity of his condition; it is to understand that we can, essentially, deserve Hell or Paradise. The contemplative element as such must find its place in the framework of what a particular sacred legislation prescribes or allows; it cannot therefore compromise de jure a traditional social equilibrium. Morals can vary of course, but the Divine Will remains globally the same, and the best interest of human society is bound up with it. If one wanted, not to form an image of Al-Awwal—for ‘the eye cannot reach Him’—but at least to approach His domain, one would have to be able to go back to the origins of the Earthly Paradise and witness the dawning, in a luminous substance as yet scarcely material, of the innumerable states of existence and of consciousness that are creatures. Likewise, if one wanted under present conditions to form an idea, however hazy, of the

coming of Al-Akhir, one would have to be able to witness by anticipation that sort of explosion of matter, that sort of revulsion or existential reflux that will mark the advent of God;

45

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

one would have to be able to hear in advance the sound of the Trumpet—that rending irruption of primordial Sound—and to witness the breaking up and transmutation of the universe of our experience. On the other hand Az-Zähir is always within our immediate

reach: we see His grandeur in that of the virgin nature that surrounds us and in which we live; in the depths of the sky, in the majesty of mountains, in the boundlessness of seas and in their rhythms of eternity; we also see ‘God-the-Outward’ in the splendours and symbols of sacred art. As for Al-Batin, He is at once near at hand and infinitely remote: He is ‘within us’, but needless to say eludes the resources of an imagination made for contingencies and for this lower world. We have a presentiment of ‘God-the-Inward’ in the experience of truth, in the ‘supernaturally natural’ miracle of pure intellection as well as, in varying degrees, in virtue and in grace. It may indeed be infinitely more than a presentiment, since, in penetrating by Its Omnipresence the centre and the secret of our heart, the Divine Self can consume at will the ‘veils’ of separation. For

the

animal

Az-Zahir

alone

is God;

for the

ordinary

believer, Al-Batin alone is God; but for one who ‘knows through Allah’ (al-‘ arif bw’ Llah) both aspects are God, and at the same time neither of them is. That is to say, these two Names,

in so

far as they represent a necessary polarity—or result from such a polarity—must necessarily be resolved in a superior synthesis, namely, in the intrinsic unity of the Principle. To speak of ‘inwardness’ is still to envisage God relatively to ‘outwardness’, and as being separate from the latter in so far as He is ‘the Inward’. But God is what He is by Himself (bi-Hi) and ‘in Himself’ (f7-Hz) and not relatively to anything whatever that is foreign to His nature. He is either in every aspect or in none, according to the degree of reality envisaged by the Intellect ‘with the permission of God’ (bi-idhni’ Lläh).1 Finally, since the verse of the Qoran containing the four Divine Names in question ends with the affirmation that ‘He knows infinitely all things’, any misinterpretation tending to * For the Intellect, even though it attain to ‘the depths of God’—to the supreme Self and not to Being alone—can do nothing without Being, which is the ‘personal God’.

44

DIMENSIONS

OF

THE

UNIVERSE

reduce the Principle to ‘states’ or ‘substances’ deprived of consciousness is thereby excluded in advance. Al/lah—whether we envisage Him in the context of immanence

or of transcen-

dence or in any other equally possible context—cannot be ‘something less’ when compared with His manifestations or creations. Being the infinite Cause of all, He possesses every conceivable perfection, including therefore that of consciousness and that of activity, but without any possibility of conflict between these perfections and His perfection of unity and simplicity; all possibilities are prefigured in the infinity of His very

Substance.

This

is also the meaning

of another

verse,

immediately preceding that of the four Divine Names: ‘His is the governance of the Heavens and of the earth’—these two worlds representing respectively and in a relative sense Al-batin and Az-Zahir and also Al-Akhiy and Al-Awwal—‘and

He has

power over all things’. Allah is One; and since the polarity ‘Outwardness-Inwardness’ is neither absolute nor eternal—any more than any other conceivable polarity—the ‘inward’ sun will inevitably rise in the ‘outward’ field. ‘God will come’; that is as certain as our birth

and our death. It may also be said that ‘the Outward’ will return to ‘the Inward’;! according to this perspective or this mystery ‘the Inward’ coincides with ‘the Last’; so that, beyond all distinctions of aspects and points of view, ‘nothing remains but the Countenance of Allah’.? 1 This second way of looking at things is in a certain sense more ‘Teal’ than the first, but the first does not for that reason correspond any less closely to a concrete aspect of the end of the world. 2 Wajhu ’ Lläh, that is to say Adh-Dhdt, ‘the Essence’. At this degree, which is fact is no longer a ‘degree’, there has never been an ‘Outward’.

45

CHAPTER

3

The Servant and Union IMAM ABÜ-L-HASAN ASH-SHADHILI has said: ‘Nothing removes man further from God than the desire for union with Him.’ At first sight this statement may seem surprising coming from one who was one of the great promoters of esoterism in Islam; but everything becomes clear once it is understood that it refers to the ego and not to the pure Intellect. Indeed, the ‘servant’ (‘abd) as such can never cease to be the servant; consequently he can never become the ‘Lord’ (Rabb). The ‘servant-Lord’ polarity is irreducible by its very nature, the nature of the servant or the creature being in a certain sense the sufficient reason for the Divine intervention under the aspect of Lord. Man cannot become ‘God’ ;! the servant cannot change into the Lord; but there is something in the servant that can—not without the Lord’s grace—surpass the axis ‘servant-Lord’ or ‘subject-object’ and realize the absolute ‘Self’. This Self is God in so far as He is independent of the ‘servant-Lord’ axis and of every other polarity: while the Lord is in a certain manner the object of the servant’s intelligence and will—and inversely—

the Self has no complementary opposite; It is pure Subject, that is to say It is Its own Object at once unique and infinite, and innumerable on the plane of a certain diversifying relativity. Maya, which breaks up and diversifies both Subject and Object, is not opposed to the Self, of which it is simply the emanation or prolongation in illusory mode; and this mode proceeds from the very nature of the Self, which implies the possibility— 11f formulations

of this sort are nevertheless

encountered

here and there,

they are elliptical and are not intended to be taken literally. When St Irenaeus speaks of ‘becoming God’ he understands thereby the Essence, or in other words he places himself intellectually outside the polarity in question; no doubt he understands also, and perhaps even a priori, a union that is indirect or virtual, but which is already a kind of participation in the supreme Union, at least according to the perspective that concerns us here.

46

THE

SERVANT

AND

UNION

through its infinitude—of an ‘unreal reality’, or conversely, of an ‘existing nothingness’. The Self radiates even into nothingness and lends it, if one may provisionally express oneself in a more or less paradoxical manner, Its own Reality made of Being, Consciousness, and Life or Beatitude.1 The way of Union, then, by no means signifies that the servant

as such unites himself to the Lord as such, or that man ends by identifying himself with God; it signifies that that something which in man—and beyond his individual outwardness—is already potentially and even virtually Divine, namely the pure Intellect, withdraws from the ‘subject-object’ complementarism and resides in its own transpersonal being, which, never entering into this complementarism, is no other than the Self. To the objection that the Self is the object of human intelligence, and that in consequence it fits perfectly into the ‘subjectobject’ polarity, it must be answered that it is only the notion of the Self which is such an object, and that the existence of this notion proves precisely that there is in the human mind something which already is ‘not other’ than the Self; it is in virtue of this mysterious inward connection with the Self that we are able to conceive the latter objectively. If this something increatum et

increabile? were not within us, it would never be possible for us to escape, at the centre of our being, from the ‘servant-Lord’ polarity. Monotheistic theology, like the doctrine of the bhaktas, is in fact strictly bound up with this polarity; it cannot therefore surpass it, and for this reason the Intellect will always be reduced for it to an aspect of the servant. Its general and as it were ‘collective’ language cannot be that of sapiential esoterism, any more in the East than in the West. In the Christian climate, the Self is conceivable only within the framework of a ‘theo1 This is the Vedantine ternary Sat, Chit, Ananda.

By ‘Being’ we mean here,

not the sole ontological Principle—which is [shvava and not Sat—but the preontological Reality which is the complementary opposite of the pole ‘Knowing’

(Chit). For Chit the Sufis would say ‘Ilm (‘Science’) or Shuhud (‘Perception’), the second term being the equivalent of the Vedantine SZkshin (‘Witness’); for Sat they would say Wujüd (‘Reality’), and for Ananda, Hayät (‘Life’) or Ivadah (‘Will’, or ‘Desire’). 2 Et hoc est Intellectus (Eckhart). ‘God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life . . .’ (Genesis, II, 7).

47

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

sophy’; that is to say, it is the element of sophia which indicates emergence from the domain of polarities and the surpassing of the latter. As for Moslems, they will say, not that the Intellect

(‘Aql) is ‘uncreated’ in its essence, but that the Divine Intellect (‘Ilm, ‘Science’) takes possession of—or replaces—the human Intellect, which amounts to the same thing metaphysically; and this mode of expression is in conformity with the Divine hadith according to which ‘I (Allah) will be the ear by which he shall hear, the sight by which he shall see . . .”.1 It follows from what has been said above that it would be completely wrong to speak of the Lord ‘and’ the Self, for God is One. If we speak of the Self, there is neither servant nor Lord, there is but the Self alone, possible modes of which are the Lord and the servant—or what are so-called from a certain standpoint; and if we speak of the Lord, there is no Self in particular or different from the Lord; the Self is the essence of the Lord of

the worlds. The Attributes of the Lord (Sifat, in Arabic) concern the servant as such, but the Essence (Dhät) does not. From this it follows that man can speak to the Lord, but not realize Him, and that he can realize the Essence or Self, but not

speak to It. With regard to the Self, there is no opposite nor interlocutor, for the Self or Essence, let it be repeated, is entirely

outside the axis ‘Creator-creature’ or ‘Principle-manifestation’, although in this relationship It is present within the Creator; but It does not then concern us as creatures or servants, and we are

unable to attain It on the plane of this polarity, if we except the possibility of conceiving It, a possibility accorded by the Lord by virtue of the universal nature of our intelligence, and also by virtue of the universality of the Self. In other words, if we are able to attain the Self outside the said polarity, it is solely by the Will of the Lord and with His help; the Self cannot be realized in defiance of the Lord or in defiance of the ‘Lordservant’ relationship. To put it in another way: although the 1‘In Eternity —declares the Sufi Abi’l-Hasan Al-Khirqani—‘man shall see God with divine eyes’, and again: ‘I have neither body, nor tongue, nor heart, only God, and God is in me.’ And let us mention also the saying of Bayazid (Abu Yazid Al-Bistami): ‘Me and Thee signifies duality, and duality is an illusion, for Unity alone is Truth (4/-Haqgq = God). When the ego is gone, then God is His own mirror in me.’

48

THE

SERVANT

AND

UNION

object of unitive realization is the superontological Essence, and not the Lord, it cannot be effected without the Lord’s blessing; and though the true subject of that union is the supra-personal Intellect,

and

not

the servant,

it cannot

be brought

about

without the servant’s participation. The ego, which is ‘accident’, is extinguished—or becomes absolute ‘itself —in the Self, which is ‘substance’. The Way is the withdrawal of the intelligence into its pure ‘Substance’, which is pure Being, pure Consciousness, and pure Beatitude. The subject of the realization of the Self is strictly speaking the Self itself: that is to say, the Essence of the servant ‘rejoins’ the Essence of the Lord by a cosmic detour, through the operation of a sort of ‘Divine respiration’; it is in this sense that it has been said that ‘the Sufi is not created’, and again that the process of union (¢awhid) is ‘a message from Him by Him’.? Realization of the Essence or Self is not so much effected from the starting point of the servant as through the latter; it is effected from God to God through man, and this is possible because, in the perspective of the Self,—which has no opposite and of which Maya is an emanation or a ‘descent’—man himself is a manifestation of the Self and not a sort of contrary situated on a separative axis. ‘There are paths going from God to men’—states Abii Bakr As-Saydlani—‘but there is no path from man reaching to God’: this means, not only that the servant is unable to attain the Lord, but also that the path of Union is not of the making of the servant as such.? On the other hand, when

Abii Bakr

Ash-Shibli affirms that ‘in the realization of God (of the Essence) there is a beginning to be savoured but not an end’, he is referring, on the one hand, to the irruption of Grace such as it is experienced by the servant, and on the other to the Essence, 1 Bayazid: ‘The knowledge of God cannot be attained by seeking, but only those who seek it find it.’ 2 Dhü’n-Nün Al-Misri: ‘True knowledge is knowledge of the Truth through the Truth,

as the sun

is known

through

the sun itself.—‘The

true knower

(‘ärif) exists not in himself, but by God and for God.’—‘The end of knowledge is that man comes to the point where he was at the origin.’ Bayazid: ‘He who knows God by God becomes immortal.’

3 Al-Junayd: ‘The Sufi is someone who becomes without (personal) attributes and meets God.’

D

49

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

which is Itself infinite and consequently has no common measure with the initial and fragmentary experience of man.1 It has been stated that from the standpoint of the Self there is no confrontation between a Principle and a manifestation, there is nothing but the Self alone, the pure and absolute Subject which is its own Object. But, it will be asked, what then becomes of the world that we still cannot help perceiving? This question has to some extent already been answered, but it may perhaps be useful to enlarge upon this crucial point: the world is Atma—the Self— in the guise of Maya; more especially it is Mdyd in so far as the latter is distinct from Atmd, that goes without saying, for otherwise the verbal distinction would not exist; but whilst being

Mäyä, it is implicitly—and necessarily—Atmd, in rather the same way that ice is water or is ‘not other’ than water. In the Self, in the direct or absolute sense, there is no trace of Maya,— save the dimension of infinitude that has been referred to and from which Maya indirectly proceeds,—but at the degree of Maya, the latter is ‘not other’ than the Self; it is not the servant,

since the polarities are surpassed. Mdyd is the reverberation of the Self in the direction of nothingness,® or the totality of the

reverberations of the Self; the innumerable relative subjects ‘are’ the Self under the aspect of “Consciousness’ (Chit), and the innumerable relative objects are once again the Self, but this time under the aspect of ‘Being’ (Sat). Their reciprocal relationships—or their ‘common life’—constitute ‘Beatitude’, (Ananda), in manifested mode, of course; this is made up of everything in the world which is expansion, enjoyment or movement.

According to the ‘servant-Lord’

perspective,

as has been

stated above, the Essence is implicitly ‘contained’ in the onto1 Bayazid:

‘The

knower

receives

from

God,

as reward,

God

himself.’—

“Whosoever enters into God, attains the truth of all things and becomes himself

the Truth (Al-Haqq = God); it is not cause for surprise that he then sees in himself, and as if it were him, everything that exists outside God.’—Similarly Shankaracharya: “The Yogi, whose intelligence is perfect, contemplates all

things as dwelling in himself, and thus he perceives, by the eye of Knowledge,

that everything is Atmd.’ 3 It is in this sense that it is said in the Mahayana that Samsära ‘is’ Nirvana. # Nothingness cannot exist, but the ‘direction towards’ nothingness exists, and indeed this observation is fundamental in metaphysics. 50

THE

SERVANT

AND

UNION

logical Principle—whence the infinite Majesty of the latter1— but this is the mystery of all mysteries and in no way concerns

us. In order to illustrate more clearly the diverse angles of vision comprised in the science of the supernatural, this perspective of discontinuity or separativity may be represented by a system of concentric circles—or of polygons, if preferred?—which are so many isolated images of the centre. We have seen that according

to the perspective of the Self, everything ‘is’ the Essence, and that if none the less we establish a distinction on this plane— as our existence obliges us to do—it is between the Essence as such and the Essence as ‘me’ or ‘world’.? This is the perspective of continuity, of universal homogeneity or immanence, represented by such figures as the cross, the star, the spiral; in these figures the periphery is attached to the centre, or rather, the whole figure is simply an extension or a development of the latter; the whole figure is the centre, if one may so put it, whereas in the figures with discontinuous elements the centre is to all intents nowhere, since it is without extent. What, then, is the practical consequence of these affirmations

so far as our spiritual finality is concerned? Just this: if we consider the total Universe under the relationship of separativity, according to the ‘Creator-creature’ axis, no union

is possible, unless it be a union of ‘grace’ which safeguards or maintains the duality; but if we consider the Universe under the relationship of the unity of the Essence or Reality, that is to say from the standpoint of the homogeneity and indivisibility of the

Self, union is possible, since it ‘exists’ a priori and the separation is only an illusory ‘fissure’; it is this ‘fissure’ that is the mystery, not the union;* but it is a negative and transitory mystery, an enigma which is only an enigma from its own standpoint and within the limits of its subjectivity; it can be resolved 1 The ‘Personal God’ is in fact none other than the personification of the Essence. 2 In this case, the dimensions or constitutive structures of the worlds and microcosms will be taken into account, not just their existence.

8 Pantheism is the error of introducing the nature of Aima-Mäyaä into the ‘Lord-servant’ polarity, or of denying that polarity on the very plane where it is real. 4 For the Vedantists, Mäyä is in a sense more mysterious—or less obvious—

than Atma. Gi

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

intellectually and, for still stronger reasons, ontologically.* Since Paradise affords perfect beatitude, it may be asked how and why anyone could desire something else and something more, namely a realization that transcends the created and reintegrates the individual accident in the Universal Substance. To this objection, which is justifiable in certain psychological cases, the reply is that it is not a question of choosing this and scorning that, but of following our spiritual nature such as God has willed it, or in other words, of following Grace in the manner

in which it concerns us. The true metaphysician cannot but accept the consequences implied by the scope of his intelligence; which is to say that man follows what is imprescriptible in his ‘supernatural nature’ with the help of God, but man as servant will take what the Lord grants him. True, the Sufis have not hesitated to qualify Paradise as a ‘prison’ and to make use of other metaphors of the kind? in order to underline the absolute transcendence of the supreme Union, but they have also called that Union ‘Paradise of the Essence’,? an expression which has

the advantage of conforming to scriptural symbolism; the word ‘Paradise’ or ‘Garden’ then becomes synonymous with ‘super1 The intellectual solution being the notion of contradictory or privative possibility, such possibility being necessarily included in the All-Possibility, or in the very nature of Infinitude. It would be absurd to object that this notion is insufficient, since anything more adequate is of the order of ‘being’, not of ‘thinking’. ? For Bayazid, ‘the true knowers are the ornaments of Paradise, but for them

Paradise is a place of torment’, or again: ‘Paradise loses its value and brightness for one who knows and loves God,’ a statement which metaphysically possesses an impeccable logic, since from the standpoint of happiness, as in every other respect, there is no common measure between the created and the Uncreated. The verbal audacities encountered in Bayazid and others are explained by a constant concern to escape from all inconsistency and ‘hypocrisy’ (nifaq), and all told they do no more than follow the line of the great Testimony of Islam: ‘There is no God if it is not the only God.’ Despite its positive aspect of ‘nearness’ (qurb), the ‘Garden’ is not God; there is therefore in Paradise a negative element of ‘remoteness’ (bu‘d). Bayazid moreover provides the key to his language when he says that ‘the love of God is that which causes thee to forget this world and the beyond’, and similarly Ibrahim ibn Adham counsels renunciation of the one as of the other; in the same spirit, Abü Bakr Al-Wasiti

expresses the view that ‘a devout person who seeks Paradise thinks to accomplish the work

of God,

whereas

he accomplishes

only his own’,

and

again,

Abül-Hasan Al-Khirqani enjoins us to ‘seek the Grace of God, for it surpasses alike the terrors of Hell and the delights of Heaven’. § Or ‘Garden of Quiddity’ (Jannat Adh-Dhät).

52

THE

SERVANT

AND

UNION

natural beatitude’, and if on the one hand it specifies no degree of reality, it also implies no limitation. The objection mentioned above might equally well be countered by the assertion that it is impossible to assign limits to the love of God; it is therefore unreasonable

to ask

why a given soul, possessing the intuition of the Essence, tends towards the Reality which it senses through the existential darkness. Such a question is devoid of meaning, not only in relation to the ‘naturally supernatural’ aspirations of the gnostic, but also on the plane of the affective mystic, where the soul aspires to everything it can conceive above itself, and not to anything less. It is obviously absurd to want to impose limits upon knowledge; the retina of the eye catches the rays of infinitely distant stars, it does so without passion or pretension, and no one has the right or the power to hinder it.

5e)

CHAPTER 4

Some difficulties in the Qoran and other Scriptures To read with unmixed admiration the Sacred Scriptures of mankind does not necessarily mean that one is always capable of understanding their meaning. We may, indeed, know that a given text, being sacred, must be perfect both in content and in form, without being able to understand why; this is the case when our ignorance comes up against certain passages which only the traditional commentary, and in some cases the original language, would make intelligible to us. To accept with veneration ‘every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God’ does not therefore in the least require any sort of pious hypocrisy, or we should be compelled to accept every incongruity resulting from errors in translation, so long as we were unaware of their inaccuracy. It is true, and even inevitable, that pious illusions of this and similar kinds do occur, even within the fold of the great orthodoxies; as an example we may take the affirmation, not infrequently heard amongst Moslems, that the Qoran possesses, not merely a perfect form, which would be plausible and even obvious, but also a superhuman and inimitable style; and one hears stories of men who tried to imitate the Qoran, but failed lamentably to do so. That they failed, one may accept without difficulty, but not that this was because of the inimitability of the style, for the Qoran is formulated in human language, and the gamut of possibilities of perfection on this level is of necessity 1 The Bible would be much more comprehensible and much less vulnerable if one did not systematically ignore rabbinical exegesis, and one could well dispense with ‘scientific’ and other forms of logomachy. Meister Eckhart had a

perfect knowledge of the exegesis of Maimonides, whom he called ‘the Rabbi’ just as Aristotle was called ‘the Philosopher’.

54

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

fairly restricted; language can scarcely be more than language. That the Qoran is perfect and normative from the point of grammar and syntax is incontestable—the contrary would be inconceivable for a revealed Book; but it is not unique in this. That its language is sometimes of an unsurpassable poetic quality is also certain, but to say that it cannot be surpassed is not necessarily to say that it cannot be equalled. Finally, that it contains all necessary truths, to say the least, is likewise not in

itself a pure miracle. The superhuman value of a revealed Book cannot be apparent in an absolute fashion from its earthly form, nor from its conceptual content alone; in reality, the Divine and therefore miraculous quality of such a Book is of an order quite other than that of the most perfect dialectic or the most brilliant poetry. This quality shows itself first of all in a richness of meanings—a feature that is incapable of being imitated—and also in what might be called the underlying divine ‘magic’ which shines through the formal expression and proves itself by its results in souls,+ and in the world, in space and in time. Only this Divine substance can explain the spiritual and theurgic efficacy of the Qoranic verses, with its consequences in the miraculously rapid expansion of primitive Islam in the conditions in which it took place, as well as in the stability of Moslem institutions and the extraordinary fruitfulness of Islamic doctrine. ? It goes without saying that from a certain point of view the style of the Qoran cannot be imitated, but this is so in the case of every masterpiece. As for the elliptical or metonymic, and so to say supersaturated character which the Qoran acquires from its celestial origin, it cannot be asserted that this is a literary or linguistic perfection. Indeed one might almost say that the Sacred Scriptures wish to make us realize that their perfection is from all points of view difficult of access, and that human 1 ‘Charms have a certain natural force: and any one who comes under the influence of the charm, even if he does not understand it, gets something from

it, according to the nature of the sounds thereof... Just so is it with the giving of names in the Divine Scriptures, only they are stronger than any charms’

(The Philokalia of Origen, XII, 1). 2 ‘And this Qoran, none could have composed it save Allah’ (X, 37). ‘If we had sent down this Qoran upon a mountain, thou wouldst have seen the mountain humbled and split asunder through fear of Allah’ (LIX, 21).

55

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

expression cannot but be imperfect in certain respects. Moreover Moslems, like the exegetists of other religions, have not failed to emphasise the providentially harsh and uncompromising character of revealed Scripture, a character which is at variance, not of course with the perfection of language, but with the opinion of those who would uphold the formal and as it were ‘massive’ sublimity of the revealed Book.! There is indeed in the Qoranic style something of a special concern not to indulge in poetry—which does not prevent certain passages from attaining the most powerful beauty of expression. The non-human character of the Qoran doubtless reveals itself more directly in some passages than in others, notably in the eschatological Meccan sévahs or in passages such as the Throne verse (II, 255) or the Light verse (XXIV, 35), but the zealots already referred to seek to extend this manifest Divine sublimity even to stipulations on civil law. Moreover the distinction which has just been established between degrees of expressivity does not resolve the following fundamental question: is there a style of language which is necessarily Divine? In other words are there formal or literary criteria which bear directly on the Divine provenance of a text? The problem is basically the same as that of the superhuman beauty of the Avatava, which may also be miraculous in its effects:? where visual beauty alone is concerned the face and body of the heavenly Messenger cannot be either more or other than summits of human and racial beauty (admittedly summits that are extremely rare and even unique in virtue of their originality which is compounded of elements that altogether elude our powers of assessment), and it is only with the soul, the expression, and the attitudes that a strictly superhuman beauty first appears. Neither in the 1 The sublimism in question has not been without consequences: thus it has given rise, in a certain ‘specialized’ psalmody of the Qoran, to a curious supersaturation, an idolatry of sound which robs the reading of its spiritual transparence as well as of its acoustic harmony. ? Tradition emphasizes this feature especially in the cases of Krishna and the Buddha; in the latter case the central role of the sacred image illustrates this

truth. In Christianity the importance of icons indicates the same reality, not only for Christ, but also for the Virgin. As for Islam, the beauty of the Prophet is the subject of a dogma, and this is reflected in the general cult of the beauty of things and of the soul, The generosity of man should be able to repose in the harmony of things, which should be like a mirror of that generosity.

56

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

Divine Messenger nor in the Message can there be a perfection that is ‘monstrous’, that is, violating the norm.1 If those sceptical Arabs who tried to imitate the Qoran failed, it was not literary impossibility so much as the supernatural reality which made their efforts vain, the more so because they were Moslems—at least de jure if not de facto; their sin was that of Prometheus, or Icarus, or the Titans. This is an order of things which far exceeds the bounds of literary criticism, either Eastern or Western.? In order to read a Sacred Book without difficulties, one must be

aware, amongst other things, of the associations of ideas that a given word produces in a given language, and of the metonymies which are common usage in it. This brings us to the following distinction: there are Sacred Scriptures in which the original language is of capital importance, whence the more or less express prohibition against translating them for canonical usage—this is so in the case of the Torah, the Qoran and the Veda, and could also be so in the case of the Tao-Te-King— and there are others in which the whole meaning is contained in the imagery and in the direct expression of thought—such is the case of the Gospel and the Buddhist Books—and where translations into popular but noble languages are even traditionally anticipated. Reference is made to ‘noble’ languages in order to emphasize that modern Western languages have lost this quality as a result of several centuries of profane thought and literary triviality. Having lost, in their very substance, the sense of the sacred, they are far from being fit to render the Scriptures, given the requirements of the spiritual, psychological and liturgical realities. The phrase ‘traditionally anticipated translations’ is used in order to recall that the possibility of translating Scripture is already prefigured in the ‘gift of tongues’ and, as 1 And let us not forget that by definition the norm is Divine. 2 To illustrate this, let us suppose for a moment that the Qoran were a part of the Bible,

and that it had been written

several centuries before our era.

There can be no doubt that there would have been ‘criticisms’ to the effect that the Qoran had been written at different periods and thus also by different authors; that certain passages were much more recent than tradition alleged, not to speak of later interpolations by copyists—a never failing argument in the arsenal of the destructive ‘exegetists’ of the Scriptures.

Dy

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

regards Buddhism, in the original parallelism between Pali and Sanscrit; but once it has become liturgical, the language is crystallized and does not change further, even if it undergoes modification in profane usage.! It is noteworthy that these two forms

of Revelation,

the

Buddhist

and

the

Christian,

are

founded on a humanization of the Divine—of the impersonal Divine in the first case and of the personal Divine in the second— whereas

in the

Jewish,

Islamic

and

Hindu

traditions,

the

Revelation essentially takes the form of Scriptures. Hindu avatarism does not alter this fact, for the Veda is prior to the Avatäras; it is not they who reveal the Sandtana-Dharma, or who create it, so to speak. The detailed understanding of the Torah, the Qoran, and the

Brahmanical Books presupposes a knowledge not only of the associations of ideas evoked by the Hebrew, Arabic, or Sanscrit

terms, but also of the implicit propositions furnished by the commentators, either in virtue of their learning, or through inspiration. As for the symbolism which is so important in all Scriptures, including the Gospel, it is necessary to distinguish between a direct, complete, and essential symbolism and one that is indirect, partial, and accidental. When Christ raises his

eyes towards Heaven in prayer, the symbolism is direct, for Heaven or ‘that which is above’ represents by its spatial situation and also its cosmic nature the ‘Divine dimension’; but when, in

the parable of the sower, the birds that carry away the seed represent the devil, the symbolism is entirely indirect and provisional, for it is only in so far as they remove the seed and fly about in all directions that birds, which in themselves symbolize the celestial states, can assume this negative meaning. Another example can also be noted here, this time of a symbolism which is both partial and direct: the Qoran compares the 1 As Joseph de Maistre has said, ‘any changing language is far from being suitable for an unchanging religion. The natural movement of things constantly attacks living languages, and over and above great changes which denature them absolutely, there are also changes which may not seem important but which in fact are most important. The corruption of the age affects some words every day, and spoils them for its own amusement. If the Church spoke our language, the most sacred words of the liturgy would be at the mercy of the first brazen-faced wit who had the effrontery to ridicule them or make them indecent. For every conceivable reason, the language of religion must be kept out of the domain of man’ (Du Pape, Book I, chapter XX).

58

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

braying of a donkey to the voice of Satan, but the donkey in itself is not involved, even though its cry is quite incapable of being given a positive interpretation.! These different levels of symbolism are frequently encountered in the Law of Manu, which it is impossible to understand in detail without knowing the implicit ramifications of the various symbols. For the unprepared reader, many passages of the Scriptures contain surprising repetitions and pleonasms, if indeed they are not altogether unintelligible or apparently absurd. Thus, for example, the Qoran says of Abraham: ‘We (Allah) have chosen him in the world here below, and in truth he is in the world

beyond, amongst the just’ (II, 130). One may wonder what is the function of the second proposition, which in any case is obvious. In fact it is rendered necessary by the preceding words: ‘in this world’; if the Scripture had said simply: ‘We have chosen him’, it would have been unnecessary to elaborate further; but since it adds ‘in the world here below’, it is obliged

to say also ‘and in the world beyond’, so as to prevent the first phrase being interpreted in a limitative sense.? From the Islamic point of view the second phrase was all the more necessary in view of the fact that Christianity placed Abraham in the ‘limbo of the Fathers’ and because Christ described himself as being ‘prior’ to the Patriarch. 1 It was to a she-ass—that of Balaam—that God gave speech, and it was an ass that carried the Virgin and Child on their flight into Egypt, and also Christ on his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Let us remember too that the ass bears on its back the mark of a cross. The ass symbolizes humility, in contrast with the princely pride of the horse, and indeed it incarnates, alongside its noble congener, the peaceful, modest and touching—we might almost say childlike— character of creatures without glory, but nevertheless good. As for its braying, this seems to manifest an ambition to equal the neighing of a horse, as if there were here the caricatural mark of the temptation of the small to play at being great, and thus of the sin of pride. One could accept that the ass at the manger has the meaning of a profane, if not malefic, presence—in view of its braying and its reputation for stubbornness—but according to another interpretation, much more adequate and also corroborated by the Golden Legend, the ass at the manger represents the presence of the small and the humble, those who are despised by the world but received by the Lord. 2 This verse is not unconnected with the following one: ‘We showed Abraham the kingdom of heaven and of the earth so that he might be among those who possess certainty’ (VI, 75). Here ‘heaven’ means both the stars and the heavenly worlds, or, according to Ghazäli, ‘inward vision’.

3 This Christ did in so far as he was an actual and concrete manifestation of the Logos, one which was central for a given world.

59

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

Here is another example: Jesus said (Qoran, III, 49): ‘I shall announce to you what ye will eat and what ye will store up in your houses.’ This passage alludes, firstly to the Eucharist, and secondly to the amassing of treasure in the world to come— two essential elements of the Christ-given message; but these associations are not obvious at first sight. An analogous passage is the following: ‘Jesus, son of Mary, made this prayer: O God our Lord send down upon us a table spread with food from Heaven, that it may be a feast for the first and the last of us,

and a sign of Thy power...’ (V, 114); here again we have an allusion to the Eucharist. As for the words ‘the first and the last of us’, they refer respectively to the saint and to the man of sufficient

virtue,

and also, in a different

connection,

to the

gnostic and to the simple believer. The remainder of the passage contains a Divine threat against the unworthy, who are to be punished ‘with a punishment wherewith I have not punished any of My creatures’, which recalls the analogous threat of St Paul: ‘Whosoever shall eat this bread unworthily eateth damnation to himself’ (I Cor. XI, 27-9). On an entirely different plane, and in a passage concerning the pilgrimage (II, 198), the Qoran remarks, to the amazement of the unprepared reader, that ‘it is not a sin for you if you seek some favour from your Lord’, which means: it is permitted to you during the pilgrimage to gain some subsistance by means of commerce; it is enough to know this, but this meaning is not clear from the words themselves. Of an analogous kind is the following difficulty: “There is no sin for those who believe and do good works, in what they have eaten, if they fear God and are believing, and do good works, and again fear God and believe, and again fear Him and excel in good . . .’ (V, 93). The sum and substance of this is that in the case of true believers, no trace

remains of any sin they may have committed by ignorance before the revelation of the corresponding prescription, or before their entry into Islam; and this also includes the case of the true believers—but not of the hypocrites—who died before this revela1 ‘Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth,

neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also’ (Luke, XII, 33 and 34).

60

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

tion. As for the repetitions contained in this passage, they refer, according to the commentators,

to the divisions of time—past,

present and future—and also to the degree of application—ego, God, neighbour—of our moral duties and of the spiritual attitudes corresponding to them. But this verse also has a meaning both more literal and more general, namely that in exceptional circumstances the alimentary prescriptions are subordinated to the intrinsic principles, that is to say that the observance of the latter may, in case of need, compensate for the lack of observance of the former. One detail in the Qoran which may cause surprise is that often, without transition or logical connection, some legal stipulation or other is followed by a phrase such as: ‘And Allah is Mighty, Wise.’ The reason for this is that the Qoran contains, as it were,

several superimposed ‘layers’; after pronouncing on a temporal matter, the veil of contingency is torn, and the immutable foundation reappears. But, one may ask, if the reading—or rather the understanding

—of the Qoran is so arduous and precarious, even for men who know Arabic, how is it that Islam can win so many followers amongst peoples who do not know this language, and are as far removed from the Arabs as the Negroes, the Chinese and the Malays? The reason is that Islam expands, not through the reading of the Qoran, but by its human, spiritual, psychological and social manifestation: if African Negroes embrace the Moslem religion, it is because they observe the kind of life led by believers, see them praying, hear the call of the muezzin, observe a certain generosity common to believers, as also the serenity of the pious; it is only afterwards that they learn the minimum of Arabic necessary for the canonical prayers. The immense majority of non-Arab Moslems will never be able to read the Qoran, still less appreciate its literary qualities; they live in the effect, without knowing the cause. It is easy to understand the importance in Islam of the ‘lama’, since they are the trustees and, as it were, the reservoirs, not only of the verses of

the Qoran—often most sibylline! but also and above all of the 1 This characteristic belongs much more to the ‘parabolic’ (mutashabthat) than to the ‘confirmed’ (muwhkamat) verses (III, 7) the latter constituting the ‘Mother of the Book’ (Umm al-Kitab); the former contain a multiplicity of

61

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

implicit meanings derived either from the sunnah or the traditional commentaries. Certain enigmas in the Qoran result from a purely metaphysical intention: ‘Dost thou not see how thy Lord hath spread the shade—And had he willed He could have made it motionless —then We (Allah) have made the sun to be its indicator; then We withdraw it unto Us, a gradual withdrawal’ (XXV, 45). In this passage, what is striking in the first instance is that the shade is not described as indicating, by its movement, the movement of the sun, but on the contrary that the sun is described as indicating the shade. According to some exegetists this expresses, or confirms, the fact that God is the direct cause of

every phenomenon—that there are thus no intermediate causes ;+ others relate the term ‘shade’ (z7//)? to the twilight, that is to say, brightness without sun—this is the hour that corresponds to the paradisiac state, free both from darkness and the burning sun. Finally, according to another interpretation of the verse, the shade represents relative existence, which is an

absence of Being or a void (‘adam), the shade itself being an absence of light; and indeed relative’ existence cannot be known

except by virtue of absolute Being* which here corresponds to the sun.’ Another passage of the Qoran which calls for mention here is the following: when Satan says that he will seduce men ‘from in front, from behind, on their right and on their left’ (VII, 17), meanings and the latter one single meaning; this may comprise gradations, but they are parallel and not divergent. The ‘Mother of the Book’ is basically the dogmas together with the essential precepts and prohibitions. 1 On this subject see the formulation of Fudaäli, quoted in the present author’s Stations of Wisdom (John Murray, London, 1961). 2 The meaning of this word is to be distinguished from that of zulmah, ‘darkness’ or ‘obscurity’ and from that of fai’, ‘projected shadow’. 3 The ‘companions of the right’ (the saved) will be found ‘amongst thornless lote-trees, and clustered plantains, and spreading shade. . . .’ (LVI, 27-30). 4 Mentioned, like the foregoing, in the famous compilation of Rah al-Bayan. 5 This is a pleonasm, but the term is used for the sake of greater clarity. 6 Or ‘relatively absolute’, in keeping with a very important metaphysical nuance referred to several times in the author’s works. 7 It has been remarked to the author that in Sufi symbolism, the creation of

shade precedes that of light, because the shade—the

negation of Being, or

ignorance—represents relativization, manifestation, or the first objectivization

of the Essence.

62

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

the commentators observe that neither above nor below is mentioned and conclude that this verse expresses in its fashion the limitation of the power of Satan. The two inviolable dimensions concerned are essentially ‘greatness’ and ‘littleness’: man is saved either because he remains ‘little’ like a child, or because

he rises above things like an eagle.1 These two states, moreover, can and must be combined, as is indicated, for example, by the name of Lao-Tzu, the ‘Child-Elder’; in other words, one must

be both ‘too little’ and ‘too great’ for evil.? The very type of the Promethean or titanic sinner is the impassioned and ambitious adult who, being neither child nor old man, has neither the humble and confident innocence of the little, nor the detached

and serene wisdom of the great. But ‘height’ is also the adamantine Truth, just as ‘depth’ is the inalterable nature of things. The devil has no hold on either the incorruptibility of pure knowledge or on the innocence of pure Being. In the sacred Texts there may be symbolical or dialectical antinomies, but not contradictions. It is always a difference of point of view or aspect which provides the key, even in cases like that of divergent Gospel narratives. For example, when according to St Luke one of the thieves is bad and the other good, it is obviously a case of the simple opposition between evil and good, unbelief and faith, vice and virtue.* On the 1 The same passage affirms that the majority of men are ungrateful, thus emphasizing that what lures man into Satan’s net is lack of gratitude towards God. This would be capable of much development. It is indeed by a kind of ingratitude—or by a thousand kinds of ingratitude and culpable unawareness— that man removes himself from the Centre-Origin. It is the gift of existence, or intelligence, profaned and squandered, and finally trodden underfoot. 2 The innocent littleness of children does not need wisdom, but wisdom— being a totality—is impossible without this littleness. 3 Tauler compares the crucifixion of the first thief to the vain repentance of people who put all their faith in outward austerities and penances born of conceit, which only bring them damnation in exchange for their sufferings; this is the ‘zeal of bitterness’ of which St Benedict speaks. The second cross is that of the sinner who has really turned away from the world, who has sacrificed everything for God, and joyously accepts the sufferings earned by his sins, with a firm hope in the love and mercy of God. The central cross is that of the perfect man who has chosen to follow Christ in all things, and who must be crucified in the flesh in order to attain the ‘cross of the Divine nature of Christ’. From the point of view of Hermetic symbolism, this image can be identified with the caduceus, wherein the central axis or the ‘tree of the world’ comprises two cycles, one ascending and one descending, which relates it to the janua

63

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

other hand, when according to St Matthew thieves abuse Christ, they are identifiable vice, one mental and one moral. These two in the human soul, where Christ appears

and St Mark the two with the two poles of poles are to be found as the pure intellect

and, on a lower level, as the voice of conscience,

which

is a

prolongation or a reflection of the intellect. Moreover in the soul are to be found good and evil as such, and likewise evil masked by virtues and good spoiled by vices. Let us remember also that if one of the thieves was good, he was none the less, as a thief, an offence to Christ, so that the narratives of Matthew and Mark

coincide from a certain point of view with that of Luke. Nevertheless it is Luke’s version which has priority, wherever the alternative is offered, for Mercy has priority over Rigour.} This style of interpretation—whose origins, as far as Christianity is concerned, are to be found in Origen, St Ambrose,

St Augustine, Cassian, St Gregory and others—is profoundly rooted in the nature of things, and consequently it occurs in all traditional milieux. But what is important here is that many of the images contained in the Sacred Scriptures would remain unintelligible without their transposition on to the metaphysical, macrocosmic or microcosmic planes.? Contrarily to what is generally believed today, the people of antiquity were in no way blind to the strangeness, as far as the literal sense is concerned, of certain passages in the Scriptures. Origen noted, most justifiably, that a blow given by the right hand falls on the left cheek, and that it is thus surprising that coeli and the janua inferni, and also, in Hindu terms, to the deva-yäna and the pitri-yana. 1 This is the inscription on the Throne of Allah: ‘Verily, My Mercy hath precedence over My Wrath.’ 2 There is also, on the part of modernistic

sectarians,

a diabolical pseudo-

exegesis, for example, the affirmation by the Ahmadis of Lahore—a heresy founded in the nineteenth century—that the ‘resurrection of the dead’ means the present day ‘awakening of peoples’! This is false twice over, firstly because the resurrection concerns the dead and not the living and takes place at the Last Judgment, and secondly because people are not awakening, to say the least; what is awakening is something quite different. In exactly the same category are those Christian exegetists whose sole concern is to empty the Scriptures of their content, for example by ‘psychologizing’ the angels, who, in reality, are perfectly objective and concrete beings, as well as being at the same time ‘higher states’, a difference corresponding to that between the boddhisattvic function and the corresponding nirvanic level.

64

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

Christ enjoins offering the left cheek after the right, and not inversely;1 or again, that the eyes look at one object together, and not separately, and thus it is impossible to take literally Christ’s counsel to pluck out one’s right eye, if it has looked with concupiscence, quite apart from the fact that the counsel itself can scarcely be meant literally, and so on.? Again, Origen remarks that if there are Israelites ‘in spirit’, there must also be Egyptians and Babylonians ‘in spirit’, and that the Biblical passages concerning Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar cannot all be applied to the monarchs bearing these names. Consequently some of them are applicable only to the ‘types’ which these names designate.® As regards the apparent contradictions of the Sacred Scriptures, a further example from the Bhagavadgitä may be quoted: ‘All this universe is permeated by Me, My form (nevertheless) remaining unmanifested. All beings dwell in Me (but) I do not dwell in them. And yet these beings do not dwell in Me. Behold my Divine yoga! Supporting all beings without dwelling in them

—that is My Self (Atma), the cause of beings’ (IX, 4 and 5). One might think that this passage contains a flagrant contradiction, but the relationships envisaged change from one sentence to the next, as Shankara explains in his commentary: ‘No being deprived (by hypothesis) of the Self can become an object of experience. Thus they dwell in Me, that is to say, they exist by Me, the Self . . . I am certainly the ultimate Essence, even of ether . . . but these things—beginning with Brahmd (and down to the smallest of creatures)—do not dwell in Me... The shruti speaks of the non-attachment of the Self, seeing that 1 The Gospel indicates a logical and moral hierarchy, and not a succession of physical situations. 2 Here the logical and moral meaning is as clear as can be, in spite of the physical impossibility of the image. 3 Analogously,

but on

another

plane,

when

Christ

declares

that

‘no man

cometh to the Father but by Me’, it is a question not only of one particular manifestation of the Logos, but of the Logos as such, and thus of every illuminating and law-giving manifestation of the Eternal Word. The intrinsic truth of the great revelations of humanity force us to this conclusion, just as other objective facts force us to interpret—and thus limit—certain scriptural passages, for example the prohibition of killing, or the injunction to turn the other cheek, which no one takes in an unconditional or absolute sense.

E

65

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

it has no connection with any object: void (of the limitative condition) of attachment. It is never attached.’ Atma cannot comprise in its infinite nature any factors of attachment or of limitation.? Sometimes divergences in the Sacred Texts—and a fortiori between Texts of different provenance—are more or less comparable to the divergence between exact astronomy and that of Ptolemy, the former founded upon the objective—but in a way ‘extra-human’—nature of facts, and the latter upon human experience, of necessity limited, but symbolically and spiritually adequate, because ‘natural’.? A spiritual perspective may, in a given case, opt for one or other of these solutions—analogically speaking—according to its internal logic and to the demands of the occasion. For example, in the fundamental divergence between the Christian and Moslem theses regarding Christ’s end on earth, there is a mystery which the Gospel does not take account of explicitly, and of which each of the two viewpoints providentially conveys as it were an extreme aspect, in keeping with the exigencies or interests of the respective spirituality.® 11t may be remarked in passing that in some respects the European feels nearer to the mentality of the Hindus than to that of the Arabs. In other respects, however, he is nearer to the Arabs and Islam—even if he does not admit

it—than to the Hindus and Brahmanism. The former affinity is explained by the fact that Europe, apart from tiny exceptions, is Aryan, and this is not merely a matter of language, though one should remember that there is no language without a corresponding mentality. The latter affinity is explained by the fact that Europe, being Christian with Jewish and Moslem minorities, is spiritually Semitic, at least by heredity. This observation is not unconnected with the general question now being considered.

2 Let us note in passing that traditional India admits both a flat and a spherical earth. For the Puranas, the earth is a disc supported by Vishnu as a tortoise, whereas for the Swrya-Siddhänta it is a sphere suspended in the void. 3 Docetism and monophysitism have exhibited other aspects of this mystery; the term ‘aspects’ is used because the whole question is one of great complexity, and it is even probable that it is insoluble in earthly terms. At all events it is this mystery which explains, on the one hand, the superhuman and supernatural heroism of the martyrs integrated into the nature of Christ and, on the other hand—on a completely different plane—the profusion of divergent doctrines concerning His-nature from the very beginning of Christianity. However that may be one must not lose sight of the fact that the Qoranic passage in question which while affirming the reality of the Ascension allows the Crucifixion only the semblance of reality (IV, 157-8), can have—and indeed of necessity does have—a meaning which concerns a ‘spiritual type’ and not a historical personage, and that it is sometimes difficult, and perhaps even impossible, in a scriptural passage of this kind, to know where the limit between

66

SOME

DIFFICULTIES

IN

THE

QORAN

The biggest possible divergence in this realm is without doubt the divergence between the non-theism—or nirvänism—of the Buddhists and the monotheism of the Semites, the former being

founded on the oneiric and impermanent character of the cosmos along with the negative or ‘empty’ appearance of Absolute Reality, and the latter on the reality of experience of the world and on the positive and active manifestation of the creative Principle. These definitions, however inadequate they may be

in some respects, illustrate in their fashion the non-contradiction —or the profound coherence—of Universal Revelation. Here we may stop, as the purpose of this chapter was to show that the apparent defects in the Sacred Books are in reality syntheses or ellipses, and also to emphasize that, in order to be in the truth or in orthodoxy, one is not required to find sublime something which one is not able to understand and consequently to appreciate. To be respectful without hypocrisy and sincere without disrespect, it is enough to know that the Divine Word is necessarily perfect, whether we are at the moment capable of recognizing it or not. Be that as it may, since it is impossible to make the Sacred Texts the subject of a demonstration, which

when all is said and done is of secondary importance, without exceeding the limits of such a demonstration—for its contents inevitably open up horizons which take us singularly far from the original intention—, it is fitting to conclude with a quotation which brings the question back to its essence and at the same time serves as a justification for the present study: ‘Say: if the sea were ink for the writing of the Words of my Lord, the sea would be exhausted before those Words, even if We (Allah) were to add a further sea to augment it’ (Qoran, XIX, 109).? history and symbolism lies. This is so especially in those cases where the literal meaning is a matter of indifference as regards the ‘Divine Intention’ of a given Revelation, and from the point of view at which the religion in question must place itself. 1 As the author has remarked elsewhere, ‘theism’ is to be found in a certain fashion within the framework of ‘non-theistic’ Buddhism in Amidism, and

‘non-theism’ is in turn to be found in the monotheistic esoterisms in the con-

cept of the

‘impersonal

Essence’

of Divinity

(In the Tracks of Buddhism,

pp. 18-19, London, Allen & Unwin, 1968). 2 Likewise: ‘And if all the trees on the earth were pens, and the sea, with seven more seas to help it, were ink, the words of Allah could not be exhausted. Lo!

Allah is Mighty, Wise.’ (XX XI, 27).

67

CHAPTER

5

Concerning the phenomenon of Muhammad ISLAM is in perfect accord with Christianity in teaching that Jesus had no human father, that he is the ‘Word of God’, that he was born of a Virgin and that he and this Virgin-Mother have the unique privilege of not having been ‘touched by satan’ at birth, which betokens the Immaculate Conception; now as it is impossible, even from the Moslem point of view, that all these incomparable privileges should have only a secondary significance, or should only have occurred ‘by the way’ and without leaving any decisive traces, a Christian might well ask how it is that Moslems can without contradiction reconcile this sublimity with faith in a later Prophet. To understand this—leaving aside all metaphysical arguments—it is necessary to remember the following: integral Monotheism comprises two distinct lines of descent, one Israelite and the other Ishmaelite; now whereas in

the Israelite line Abraham is so to speak renewed or replaced by Moses—the Sinaitic Revelation being like a second beginning of Monotheism—Abraham continues to remain the unique and primordial Revealer for the sons of Ishmael. The Sinaitic miracle called for the Messianic or Christly miracle: it is Christ who, from a certain point of view, closes the Mosaic line and concludes the Bible, gloriously and irrevocably. But this cycle, extending from Moses to Jesus, or from Sinai to the Ascension, does not

comprise the whole of Monotheism: the Ishmaelite, and still Abrahamic, line was situated outside this cycle and in a way remained open; it called in its turn for a glorious completion, not Sinaitic and Christly in character, but Abrahamic and Muhammadan, and, in a certain sense, ‘nomadic’ and ‘of the desert’.

Abraham

68

existed before

Moses;

consequently

Muhammad

PHENOMENON

OF

MUHAMMAD

had to appear after Jesus; the ‘miraculous cycle’ extending from Sinai to Christ is as though encompassed—temporally speaking —by a parallel cycle of a very different kind, one that in a more marked degree bears the imprint of the monotheistic Truth alone, with all the absoluteness and saving power inherent in its nature, and one that is irradiated by primordial simplicity and ‘Platonic’ transcendence; Islam and Abrahamism are basically religions of nomads without history, scorched by the ever present and ever eternal Divine Sun. In the face of this Sun, man is nothing: that the Caliph Omar should conquer a part of the ancient world or that the Prophet should milk his goat amounts to more or less the same thing; that is to say there is no ‘human greatness’ in the profane and titanesque sense, and thus no humanism to give rise to vain glories; the only greatness admitted is the lasting one of sanctity, and this belongs to God. Islam has perpetuated up to our own day the Biblical world, which Christianity, once Europeanized, could no longer represent; without Islam, Catholicism would quickly have invaded the whole of the Near East, and this would have involved the

destruction of Orthodoxy and the other Eastern Churches and the Romanization—and so the Europeanization—of our world up to the borders of India; the Biblical world would have died. One could say that Islam has had the providential role of halting time—and so of excluding Europe—in the Biblical part of the globe and thus of stabilizing, and at the same time universalizing, the world of Abraham, which was also that of Jesus; Judaism

having emigrated and been dispersed, and Christianity having been Romanized, Hellenized and Germanized, God ‘repented’—

to use the expression from Genesis—of this unilateral development and gave rise to Islam, which He caused to spring forth from the desert, the ambience or background of the original Monotheism. In all this there are balancing and compensatory forces at work which the exoteric perspective cannot take into account, and it would be absurd to require it to do so. 1 Titus Burckhardt, having read these pages, comments as follows on the subject of the cycle Abraham-Muhammad: ‘It is significant that the Arabic language is the most archaic of all the living Semitic languages: its sounds include virtually all the sounds indicated by the most ancient Semitic alphabets,

and its morphology is to be found in the famous code of Hammurabi, which is more or less contemporary with Abraham. Indeed Mecca, containing the

69

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

In Islam it is said not only that the Moslem religion is the fulfilment of the antecedent religions and that Muhammad is thereby the ‘Seal of Prophecy’ (Khätam an-nubuwwah), but also that the earlier prophetic missions—those of Abraham, Moses and Jesus—were carried out ‘by mandate from Muhammad’; now this means, not only that in Islam Muhammad is assimilated to the Logos as such—every religion makes such an assimilation in regard to its Founder—but also that earlier Prophets exercise a sort of function within the framework of Islam itself, a function of example and, sometimes, of esoteric

inspiration. In order to show how the Moslem religion considers itself to be the completion and synthesis of the earlier monotheisms, we must recall firstly that its constituent elements are al-iman, al-isläm

and

al-1hsän,

terms

which

may

be translated,

not

literally, but nevertheless adequately, by the words ‘Faith’, ‘Law’ and ‘Way’. ‘Faith’ corresponds to the first of the three monotheisms,

that of Abraham;

‘Law’

to the second, that of

Moses; and ‘Way’ to the third, that of Jesus and Mary. In Abrahamism, the elements ‘Law’ and ‘Way’ are as it were absorbed by the element ‘Faith’; in Mosaism, it is the element

‘Law’ which predominates and which consequently absorbs the elements ‘Faith’ and ‘Way’; and in Christianity, it is the element ‘Way’ which absorbs the two others. Islam for its part contains these three elements side by side, and thus in perfect equilibrium, whence precisely its doctrine of man, islam and ihsan.

Al-iman, Kaaba

which

‘Faith’, comprises basically the two Attestations, was

built

by Abraham

and

Ishmael,

is the

forgotten

Sacred

City—forgotten both by Judaism, which is ignorant of the prophetic role of Ishmael, and by Christianity, which inherited the same point of view. The sanctuary of Mecca, which is to the Prophet what the Temple of Jerusalem is to Christ—at least in a certain sense—is like the ‘stone rejected by the builders’ which becomes the cornerstone. This overlooking of the Ishmaelite sanctuary, taken in conjunction with the existence of the cycle Abraham-Ishmael-Muhammad—the Arab Prophet being descended from Ishmael—, shows us how the Divine Economy loves to combine the geometrical with the unforeseen. One can ignore in this connection the opinion of those who consider the Abrahamic origin of the Kaaba as a retrospective Moslem myth and who totally overlook the fact that the ancient Arabs possessed a genealogical memory that was both extraordinary and meticulous, as did, moreover, the majority of nomads

semi-nomads.’ 70

and

PHENOMENON

OF

MUHAMMAD

that of the Unity of God and that of the prophetic quality of Muhammad;

al-isläm,

the

‘Law’,

comprises

the

five

ritual

obligations, namely, the two Attestations just referred to, canonical Prayer, Fasting, Almsgiving and Pilgrimage. As for al-thsan, the ‘Way’, its central or quintessential support is the ‘Remembrance of God’ (dhikru ’Liah), the modalities of which pertain in the last analysis to the ‘science of the inward’ (‘tlm al-batin); that is to say one cannot define exoterically the content of the ‘Way’. Al-thsdn is the domain of the Sufis, not of the ‘doctors of the outward’ (‘wlama’ az-zahir). Of necessity all Prophets possess all the virtues; but according to a way of seeing things which is particular to Islam it is possible, without any denial of the foregoing, to attribute to Abraham the virtues pertaining to Faith, to Moses those pertaining to the Law, and to Jesus those pertaining to the Way; and if Islam, on the basis of this schematism, sees in Muhammad

the synthesis of all these qualities, it does so in the same way as in the case of the synthesis 2m4n-isläm-ihsän and with the intention of laying stress on the distinct manifestation of these qualities. It may even be said of a given virtue, and indeed of every virtue, that it belongs attributively to such and such a Prophet in such and such a connection: thus, when we attribute such and such a quality to Jesus, this is in so far as it is envisaged in regard to 7hsän, the Way, and not in an exclusive manner, of course. That is to say we may look on each fundamental virtue in relation to either Faith or certainty, Law or obedience, or else the Way of love or sanctity; the fact that these virtues refer more particularly to one rather than to another of these three elements does not invalidate this principle. That the Arab Prophet should be considered as the ‘best of creatures’ and as the Logos without epithet, in whom other ‘Messengers’ must in some fashion be incorporated, is admissible in virtue of the fact that there is a cosmic sector, extending from earth up to the highest of the heavenly spheres or up to the ‘Throne of God’, where Muhammad alone may truly be identified with the Logos, and this comes about by a particular dispensation of the Divine Will, the same that decreed the coming of Islam, and thus also the existence of the cosmic sector in question; each Avatara is ‘the Logos’ in the cosmic sector at

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

reserved to him.! To see in a given Founder of religion the sole personification of the Word is thus not merely a matter of perspective, but also of objective reality for those who are enclosed in the corresponding spiritual sector, and this independently of the question whether the Prophet concerned possesses—or should possess in virtue of the nature of his mission or of the structure of his message—the same avataric breadth as some other Founder of religion; for what counts with God is not the personality of the spokesman alone, it is the totality of this and his mission taken together. This totality, whatever be the forms involved, is always entirely the Word of God; it thus also constitutes an element of absoluteness and infinitude, besides being integral and saving Truth. What has just been said may serve as an illustration of the principle according to which God alone is one, a metaphysical principle which Buddhism for example expresses by the doctrine of the innumerable Buddhas. If emphasis has been laid on the question of cosmic sectors, this is because those who accept the validity of all intrinsically orthodox religions generally limit themselves to emphasizing the oneness of Truth, which is not by itself sufficient in that exoteric claims remain unexplained, or are even considered to be errors pure and simple; such an assumption is unacceptable in view of the essential and saving content of the great Revelations. Religions are so many sectors of the ‘universal circumference’, the centre being the Divine Principle or Nirvanic Reality. God is one; the personification of the Logos cannot be so, except for the sector concerned. The Avatara is Divine Man and human God; grosso modo Islam opts for the first of these aspects and Christianity for the second. “Divine Man’ means here: perfect, primordial, normative man;

undeformed

‘image’

of the

Creator,

but

nevertheless

image, not Divinity. ‘Human God’ means: Divine Spirit animating a human form, to the point of absorbing the soul and making of the soul and the Spirit a single Substance. 1 It is to the ‘projection’ or ‘establishment’ of this sector that, for Islam, the

‘Night Journey’ corresponds. 72

(Lailat al-Mi‘raj,

‘Night of the Ascension’) of the Prophet

PHENOMENON

OF

MUHAMMAD

One of the stumbling blocks for the Westerner in his approach to Islam is the question of the sanctity of the Prophet; the difficulty resides basically in the fact that the Christian perspective approaches this question from another angle than does Islam. The difference in question can perhaps best be illustrated figuratively in the following manner: there is a sanctity which pertains a priori to formal perfection, at least as regards its habitual manifestation: the saint is perfect in the same way that the sphere is the most perfect form, or that regular geometrical figures are perfect in comparison with figures that are asymmetrical or even chaotic, and so arbitrary. But there is another mode in which sanctity may manifest itself, and this corresponds, not to the perfection of the form, but to the nobility of the substance; and just as we can say that the sphere or the cube are perfect forms, whatever be their substance, so also we can

say that gold or diamond are noble substances, whatever be their form. In the case of Christ or Buddha it may be said that their sanctity is proved extrinsically by the perfection of their form; whoever fails to realize a perfect form, as they have, is not a saint. On the contrary, in cases such as those of Krishna, Abraham and Muhammad, it may be said that everything they did was precious or penetrated with holiness, not because of the form, but because of the substance; here it is the substance which

legitimizes and ennobles the act, and which makes of it a positive sign and a carrier of benediction. Whereas the Christian will say that whoever possesses a celestial nature will prove it by his way of acting, the Moslem will say rather that the acts of one who has a celestial nature cannot but possess a celestial quality. Certainly, sanctity of substance excludes intrinsically imperfect acts, but it does not exclude acts which are ambiguous in appearance; also, sanctity of form is impossible without sanctity of substance, but a seemingly perfect form without sanctity—hence hypocrisy—is possible, although this is a glory of the most fragile kind. Krishna may play with the milkmaids, but he always remains Krishna and his play confers something of the liberating Infinite; conversely, it is in vain that the Pharisees condemned by Christ meticulously conform to formal orthodoxy; they are

73

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

not saints on this account, they are even quite the contrary. In Christianity, the majority of saints are monks or nuns, if not hermits, but there are also kings and queens and warriors;

in Islam, the majority of saints—those

of the

origin—are

warriors or at least men of action, but after a certain date the

majority of Sufis held themselves apart from the world, except for preaching when the occasion presented itself. As for the Prophet himself, one has the impression—keeping in mind the characteristic perspective of Islam—that God introduced into his life apparently fortuitous elements, in order to show that the Messenger is but a man and that the fate of man is the contingent and the unforeseeable, and in order to prevent the Messenger being deified after his sojourn on earth. It is precisely this aspect of things that causes Islam to insist on sanctity of substance and to see, behind an ‘acting’ involved in the accidents and vicissitudes of the world—and lacking in itself the value of a decisive criterion—, a ‘being’ independent of this ‘acting’; this ‘being’ or this sanctity is revealed through its tendencies, and through the spiritual perfume which it projects, for those who are witnesses of it, on its own exteriorizations.1

On the one hand, the Moslem deduces the total sanctity of Messenger from the absolute truth of the Message, while Christian proceeds the other way round; on the other hand, bases himself on the evidence of those who, having known Prophet, bear witness to his incomparability.

the the he the

It is indispensable to say something here about the metaphysical basis of prophecy. Man cannot, in any degree, know the ‘Self’ without the assistance—and ‘blessing’—of the ‘Divine Person’; likewise, he cannot approach the Divine Person without the assistance and blessing of ‘God made manifest’, that is to 1 The famous ‘tea ceremony’ in Japanese Buddhism is an example that has become liturgical of this ‘interiorizing exteriorization’—or this ‘manifestation of the Void’—which even the most ordinary actions of men filled with God reflect. The ‘tea ceremony’.is great, not because of a moral sublimity, but in virtue of a ‘being’ or a gnosis made manifest in an activity that a priori is most ordinary; it thus emphasizes the contrast between the profundity of the ‘being’ and the modesty of the act. An example of a different kind is provided by an incident in the life of ‘Abdu’l-Qadir al-Jilani: the saint relates a little story about

cats, and the whole

audience

begins to weep

from

spiritual emotion,

after having listened with boredom to a brilliant sermon by a great theologian.

74

PHENOMENON

OF

MUHAMMAD

say of the Divine reflection in the cosmic substance: ‘No man cometh unto the Father but by Me’, said Christ, and a hadith tells us that ‘no one shall meet Allah who has not first met the Prophet’. There are in fact three great theophanies, or three hypostases, which are in descending order: firstly Beyond-Being or the Self, Absolute Reality, Atma; secondly Being or the Lord, who creates, reveals and judges; and thirdly the manifested Divine

Spirit, which possesses three modes: Universal (or Archangelic) Intellect, the Man-Logos who reveals in human language, and the Intellect in us, which is ‘neither created nor uncreated’, and

which confers on the human species its central, axial and ‘pontifical’ rank, one which is quasi-divine with regard to other creatures.

It is this mystery of ‘God made manifest’ that explains, in a perspective as rigorously unitarian and transcendentalist—not immanentist—as Islam, the immense importance of the ‘prayers on the Prophet’, which would remain unintelligible without the in a certain sense ‘Divine’ character of the Messenger; the traditional accounts of the person of the Prophet enable us to take cognizance of both the incontestably human, and the equally incontestably superhuman nature of the manifested Logos. To understand this doctrine more clearly—a doctrine which from the Moslem point of view is esoteric—recourse may be had to the following metaphor: when the sun is reflected in a lake, one can distinguish firstly the sun, secondly the ray, and thirdly the reflection; it would be possible to discuss interminably whether a creature who saw only the reflection—the sun being hidden from sight by some obstacle—saw only the water or on the contrary really saw something of the sun. This much is indisputable: without the sun, the water would not even be visible, and it would not carry any reflection whatsoever; it is

thus impossible to deny that whoever sees the reflected image of the sun thereby also sees ‘in a certain manner’ the sun itself, as is enunciated in the saying of Muhammad: ‘Whoever has seen me, has seen the Truth (God).’ Certainly all avatarism is foreign to Islam; nevertheless, Islam cannot but attribute to the prophetic quality of its

75

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

Revealer a unique virtue, in view of the fact that the sufficient reason of every manifestation of the Logos is that it should manifest itself as the only manifestation, or as the most ample, or as the first or the last, or as that of the essence of the Logos, and so on. No Divine Name is another Divine Name, but each is God; and each becomes central as soon as it reveals itself or as soon as one invokes it, for it is God who reveals himself in it and it is God whom one invokes in it; and mutatis mutandis

this applies also—to speak in Buddhist terms—to the AdiBuddha who, projected variously in time and space (both heavenly and earthly),! is always the same Logos. . In speaking of the great theophanies—Beyond-Being, Being and

Divine

Centre

of Existence,

or Self, Lord

and

Logos-

Intellect—mention has also been made of the human intellect (this being referable to the Logos), which is ‘neither created nor uncreated’: it is thus possible, if desired, to distinguish a fourth theophany, namely, the Logos reflected in the microcosm; this is the same Divine Logos, but manifesting itself ‘inwardly’ rather than ‘outwardly’. If ‘no man cometh unto the Father but by Me’, this truth or this principle is equally applicable to the pure Intellect in ourselves: in the sapiential order—and it is only in this order that we may speak of Intellect or intellectuality without making implacable reservations—it is essential to submit all the powers of the soul to the pure Spirit, which is identified, but in a supra-formal and ontological manner, with the fundamental dogma of the Revelation and thereby with the Sophia Perennis.? 1 The Paradises are beyond extension and duration in the physical and earthly sense, but they nonetheless comprise strictly analogous conditions, for the simple reason that every cosmos requires on the one hand a condition of stability and simultaneity, and on the other hand a condition of change or succession. There is no cosmos without expansion and without rhythm. ? When

the Ancients saw wisdom

and felicity in submission to reason, both

human and cosmic, they were referring directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously, to the one Intellect. The proof of this lies precisely in the fact that they linked reason to Universal Nature; in practice many committed the error of reducing this Nature to human reason, after having reduced God to Nature. This double reduction is the very definition of Greco-Roman paganism, or of the Greco-Roman spirit in so far as it was pagan, and not Platonic; it may be added that only the Man-Logos or Revelation ‘resuscitates’ and gives full importance to reason, and only an exact notion of the Absolutely Real and of its transcendence gives a meaning to Nature.

76

CHAPTER

6

The Qoranic message of Sayyidna ‘Isa For Islam, as we have seen, Christ is ‘like Adam’

no human

in having

father; he is indissolubly linked with the Virgin;

he is uncomprehended

(ef tenebrae eum

non comprehenderunt),

whence the necessity of a final synthesis, Islam; he is perpetually journeying (Filius autem hominis non habet ubi caput reclinet), healing the sick and resurrecting the dead; he is

the Seal of sanctity (Spiritus ubi vult spivat ... sed nescis unde ventat aut quo vadat), and thus the pre-eminent exemplar—or the direct and miraculous manifestation—of esoterism under its two aspects of love and wisdom. And yet for the Christian nothing is more strange and less convincing than the reference, in the sacred book of the Moslems, to a Christ who is limited to

confirming the Torah and to announcing the coming of another Prophet. As often happens in the Qoran, and in the Semitic Scriptures in general, the simplicity and strangeness of the literal meaning expresses—or veils—a spiritual geometry, the principle of which requires to be understood and its content deciphered.? It must be said that from the Christian point of 1 Hadith: ‘Whoever bears witness that there is no other divinity but God, Who

is without

associate;

that Muhammad

is His servant

and

His Envoy;

that Jesus is His servant and His Envoy, His Word cast into Mary, and the Breath

which

has emanated

from

Him;

that Paradise

is a truth,

as

also

is

Hell. God will suffer him to enter Paradise, whatever his works may have been.’ 2 An example: ‘O Envoys, eat good things (tayyibat) and do right (saliha). Verily I am aware if what ye do.’ (XXIII, 50). The meaning of this exceedingly elliptical and, at first sight, amazing verse is as follows: ‘Let no one reproach Muhammad in particular or the Envoys in general for not doing penance. Being Prophets, they are dispensed therefrom by virtue of their supereminent perfection, which proceeds from the Divine Order (amr); they act normatively —‘‘do right’’—in view of their nature and by virtue of the Divine Order, since every quality comes from God, and God knows infinitely better than any-

77

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

view Islam represents a particularly difficult case, for the reason that the Qoran combines a perspective which differs from the Christian one with a symbolism which is very similar. The resulting misunderstandings are doubtless providential, since each religion must be what it is and cannot be intermingled with other credos, just as each individual is a man who cannot be other individuals, even though they too are human. This analogy, which is much more than a simple comparison, contains a doctrine which is crucial from our point of view: in reality every revelation is ‘true man and true God’, that is to say ‘true ego and true Self’, which explains precisely the differences on the surface of Unity. A revelation is a ‘means of salvation’,

and such a means

is what

the Buddhists

call an

upäya, a ‘heavenly mirage’,! without giving to this word the least pejorative nuance, unless it be that only the Absolute is entirely real. This means is necessarily drawn from the cosmic or samsaric Substance, that is to say, from Maya; and the same

meaning is also included or implied in the Shahädah as well as in the doctrine of the two natures of Christ, and particularly in the words: ‘Why callest thou me good? There is none good but God.’ Space can be measured either by a spiral or by a star, but neither measure is the other; the same is true of theologies inasmuch as they are measures of the Infinite. It is the function of esoterism to encompass those measures which exoterism excludes, and cannot but exclude; nevertheless, even if esoterism

knows a given metaphysical measure, this does not mean that

it knows tpso facto the coincidence of this measure with a religion other than its own, for gnosis is an essential and qualitative science, and as such is independent of the knowledge of facts foreign to its own traditional framework. Moslems envisage Christ from the standpoint of the ‘concentric circle’, which is that of the discontinuity between Creator and creature. Christians envisage him from the standpoint of the one the truth of the matter.’ Thus the Divine Order has been given in eternity and before creation. Christ’s reply to those who reproached the disciples for not fasting will be recalled here; it is doubtless by analogy with the latter incident that the verse quoted follows one concerning Jesus. 1 A ‘mirage’ making intelligible the pure Truth which otherwise would remain inaccessible. The more or less feminine complement is Prajna, ‘liberating Knowledge’.

78

QORANIC

MESSAGE

OF

SAYYIDNA

‘ISA

‘radius’ or ‘ray’, which is that of metaphysical continuity; but they admit this status for Christ only, whereas Hindus apply it

to all Avatäras and even—but in an eminently different and less direct fashion—to everything created. Sapiential! esoterism combines the ‘circle’ with the ‘cross’, whatever be the ‘geometrical type’, if one may so express it, of its religious context. According to the Qoran, the message of Jesus—Sayyidna ‘ Isa— essentially presents three aspects, of which one corresponds to the past, one to the present, and one to the future. Indeed the Qoranic Christ is presented as confirming what was revealed

before him, namely the Torah,? and as predicting what was to come after him, ‘an Envoy whose name is Ahmad’.’ As for the present, Christ makes a gift of a meal come down from Heaven; this can be identified without difficulty as the Eucharist.* To understand the deepest, and thus the most universal, meaning of the prediction of Sayyidna ‘Isa, it is of the first importance to know that the ternary ‘past-present-future’ also represents another ternary: ‘outward-centre-inward’. It is this second ternary which is the key to the properly esoteric 1 This epithet is necessary because there is also an esoterism which defines

itself as such by the liberties which it takes—de juve and with regard to the ‘letter —from the point of view of love and the unio mystica alone. 2*Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil’. (Matth., V, 17). 3“And when Jesus, son of Mary, said: “‘O children of Israel! I am the Messenger

of Al/ah

unto

you,

confirming

the Torah

that is before

me,

and

bringing good tidings of a Messenger who shall come after me, and whose name shall be Ahmad!”’’ (Qoran, LXI, 6). 4‘Send down on us a table spread with food from Heaven, that it may be a feast for us...’ (Qoran, V, 114). According to the commentators, this meal was a fish, which symbolizes the passage from one state to another, or a regenerating grace. It is well known that in the early Church the fish is an emblem of

Christ, the Greek word ichthus, ‘fish’, being composed of the initial letters of the words lésous Christos Theou Uios Sétér, ‘Jesus Christ Son of God Saviour’. This symbolism is associated with the profession of the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James and John, and with the words of Christ calling them to the apostleship; the regenerating grace is represented by the water of baptism, whence the term piscina, ‘fish pond’. This recalls the story in the Qoran about the fish of Moses, which having been touched by a drop from the Fountain of Immortality, became alive again and returned to the sea; this too refers to the passage from one state to another by means of a vivifying grace. Finally, in Hinduism, the Matsya-Avatära—Vishnu incarnated as a fish—also represents (in connection with a symbolism of flood and ark), the passage from one cycle to another.

7?

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

message of Christ and also, by the same token, to the esoteric meaning of the Qoranic passages concerning Sayyidna ‘Isa. According to this interpretation, ‘the Messenger who shall come after me’ is none other than the transcendent and immanent Logos, and thus the ‘inward Prophet’, or the Intellect considered under its dual human and Divine aspect; it is the ‘Divine Spirit’, the mystery of which is referred to more than once in the Qoran.} According to the most ordinary Islamic interpretation, this ‘Messenger whose name shall be Ahmad’ is the Prophet. To understand

the

meaning

of this

double

assimilation,

it is

necessary to remember two things: firstly, that in the cyclic unfolding of the monotheistic ternary Islam corresponds to ‘knowledge’ or ‘gnosis’, Christianity representing ‘love’ and Judaism ‘action’; from this point of view, the assimilation of the historical Muhammad with the ‘dimension of gnosis’ is thus perfectly plausible. Secondly, the name ‘Ahmad’ is the ‘heavenly name’ of the Prophet; in the passage quoted, it is thus a question not so much of an earthly reality as of its heavenly root, and this brings us to the ‘inward dimension’ referred to above. The ‘Paraclete’ promised by Christ is the ‘Spirit of Truth’; it is not a ‘consoler’, as a faulty translation would have it, but an ‘ever-present helper’. This is to say that the Spirit helps believers ‘inwardly’ in the absence of the ‘outward’ presence of Jesus. It is known that Moslem commentators read zepixAvurds ‘the Illustrious’, for rapdkAnros and that they see in this Greek word a translation of the name Ahmad, which like Muhammad is derived from the root hamada, ‘to praise’ or ‘to exalt’; some have Arabized zepixdAurés into Faraglit, ‘he who

distinguishes between truth and error’, deriving from the root faraga, ‘to separate’, ‘to discern —whence A/-Furqän, a name 1 ‘And they will ask thee concerning the Spirit (Rah). Say: the Spirit is at the Command of my Lord (min Amri Rabbi), and of knowledge ye have been given but little’ (XVII, 85). The fact that in other passages the Spirit is not included with the Angels, but named separately, indicates its almost Divine quality; this is expressed by the words ‘at the Command of my Lord’. The concluding words of the passage quoted show that the Spirit is a mystery, that is to say, a reality not easily accessible to human understanding. It is traditionally taught that the Spirit is so great that it occupies the same extent as the whole company of Angels, and also, that it alone will not die before the Last Judgment.

80

QORANIC

MESSAGE

OF

SAYYIDNA

‘ISA

of the Qoran; this, of course, is not so much a matter of etymology as of the method of phonetical interpretation which the Hindus call nirwkta.1 Be that as it may, if the Prophet of Islam is assimilated with the ‘Spirit of Truth’ prophesied by Christ, it is precisely because he represents—along with Islam, which he manifests—the perspective of gnosis, expressed scripturally and dogmatically by the unitary Attestation ld ildha illa ’Llah. Furthermore, this ‘Spirit’ is essentially the Intellect, thus the ‘Inward’, under its dual aspect of organ of Knowledge and dimension of the Infinite—the ‘Kingdom of Heaven is within you’. It is in connection with this perspective, or with this reality, that Sayyidna ‘Isa is Khätam al-wiläyah, ‘Seal of Sanctity’.? This brings us to a further point: Sayyidna ‘Isa, according to the Qoran, is ‘messenger to the Children of Israel’. Now apart from the fact that this term is capable of the extension given it by St Paul,* Jesus had—and in principle has—a mission concerning the Jews; a purifying mission on the one hand and an esoteric mission on the other, the two things in reality being connected. This is to say that Jesus is the ‘Seal of Sanctity’, not only from the point of view of Moslems, but also, and even a priori, for the people of the Torah, at least de jure. From another point of view, this very expression of Khatam al-wilayah shows that the triple message of the Qoranic Christ has the meaning, not only of a unique and particular message, but also of a type of message, and that consequently there is a place in Islam, as in every other traditional framework, for an ‘‘Isan’ wisdom, a Mikmah ‘isawtyah, characterized precisely by the ‘three-sidedness’ in question. To resume, the ‘Isan wisdom firstly manifests its accord with the ‘antecedent’— and therefore primordial and underlying—Truth, the Religzo 11t is worth remarking here, though it is unconnected with our present subject, that the apparently etymological interpretations of sacred names in the Golden Legend is an example of the same method. They are thus far from being the gratuitous phantasies which some have wished to see in them. 2 Sayyidatnä Maryam—the Virgin Mary—shares in this pre-excellence; she is the Queen of the women saints in the Moslem Paradise. 3 The incident of the centurion of Capernaum, or more precisely, the words of Jesus which give it its doctrinal substance, have the same meaning of universality. It should be added that according to the visions of Anne-Catherine Emmerich, Christ had more than one meeting with pagans.

F

81

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

perennis; secondly, it offers a heavenly ‘manna’, an ‘ambrosia’ or ‘nectar’; and thirdly it opens the way to ‘immanent Prophecy’, that is to say, to sanctity or gnosis. If it be objected that this schema applies to every religion, the reply may be made that this is indeed the case and that every revelation offers a schema which, while being characteristic for the revelation in question,

can also be applied to every other revelation. This observation might be thought to be merely playing with words, but in fact it corresponds to a particular causal need and therefore has a place here. A striking characteristic of the ‘Isan message is its Marian or Maryaman? dimension: in the Qoran, Jesus and Mary are in fact closely linked, to the point of appearing almost as a unique and indivisible manifestation. Christ is ‘Jesus Son of Mary’— “Isa ibn Maryam*—and the Qoran expresses this unity ‘JesusMary’ in these terms: ‘And We (Allah) made the Son of Mary 1 In other words: we can understand the ‘Isan perspective in three different ways: firstly, it is the historical message of Jesus; secondly, it is the specifically ‘Isan wisdom, as we have defined it above; and thirdly, it is the ‘Isan aspect of every religion. From this last point of view, every spiritual tradition presents in one way or another the three dimensions which we meet in the message of the Qoranic Christ, just as for example, there is a ‘Muhammadan’ wisdom of universal character and, by the same

token,

a Muhammadan

aspect in each

religion—that of original purity, of synthesis, of equilibrium, and of intemporal ‘Platonism’. * The use of adjectives derived from the Arabic names is to recall that it is a perspective having its roots in the Qoran that is under discussion here, and not a priori Christian theology. 3 When the Angels said: ‘O Maryam, verily Al/ah has announced to thee the good news of the arrival of a Word from Him (bi-Kalimatin minhu) whose name will be the Messiah ‘Isa son of Mary, (who will be) illustrious in the Immediate (the here-below) and in the Last (the beyond), and who will be among the Near (Muqarrabiin).’ This announcement—apparently banal from the Christian point of view—in reality comprises a ‘symmetrism’ characteristic of Qoranic language in particular and of the Arab spirit in general: Jesus is a priori a ‘Word’ of God, he will thus a posteriori be near Him, like a circle which closes in on itself; he is ‘illustrious’, that is to say, great and venerated, a

priori in this life and a posteriori in the next. According to Baidawi, Jesus is ‘Prophet in this world and Intercessor in the next’. The word mugarrab ‘near’,

comprises an allusion to the most exalted angelic perfection—made of ‘luminosity’ and ‘proximity’— namely, that of

Av-Rah, the ‘Divine Spirit’, concerning

which one cannot say humanly whether it is created or uncreated. It has been said that the ‘Word’ breathed into Mary was none other than the creative word kun, ‘bel’, from which proceeded Adam

82

and the whole world.

QORANIC

MESSAGE

OF

SAYYIDNA

‘ISA

and his Mother to be a (miraculous) sign, and We gave them refuge on a height offering tranquillity (and safety) and watered with springs.’ (XXIII, 50).! This association of the Avatära and his Shakti?—to speak in Hindu terms—appears even in the Trinity ‘God—Jesus-Mary’ which the Qoran attributes to Christianity, thus indicating on the one hand, by way of a reproach, a psychological state of fact and, on the other, by way of esoteric allusion, a mystery inherent in what has been called the ‘“‘Isan message’; for this message is likewise, and by definition, a Maryaman message, from the fact that the Virgin is the ‘Spouse of the Holy Spirit’ and that she is an aspect of the Way and the Life. This is a reference to the integration of the ‘soul’ (nafs) in the ‘Marian substance’; the spirit (Raf), for its part, is aspirated by the ‘Christly principle’. This aspect of spirituality has been highlighted by St Bernard, Dante* and later St Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort,4 to mention only 1 Or again: ‘And she who kept intact her virginity; and We breathed Our Spirit into her and made of her and her son a sign (a miracle and an example) for the Universe’. (X XI, 91). 2 According to a hadith, ‘no child is born without the devil touching it and making it cry, except for Mary and her son Jesus’. 3 ‘The name of the beautiful flower (Mary) which I always invoke, morning and evening, brought my spirit to contemplating the greatest light (21 maggior fuoco, the Virgin). And when my two eyes had made known to me the dimensions (of goodness and of beauty) of the living star... from the depths of Heaven I saw descend a flame forming a circle like a crown, which girt the star (of the Virgin) and moved round her’ (Paradiso, XXIII, 88-96). 4 “Mary was very hidden in her life: that is why she was called by the Holy Spirit

. . Alma

Mater, hidden and secret Mother

. .. The Divine Mary is the

earthly paradise of the new Adam... The holy Virgin is the means used by Our Lord to come to us. She is also the means which we must use to go to him ... It is in truth possible to reach Divine union by other roads. . . But by the road of Mary the way is sweeter and more tranquil. . . St Augustine calls the holy Virgin ‘the matrix of God’ . . . Whoever is thrown into this Divine matrix is soon formed and shaped in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ in him: in a short time and with little difficulty, he will become

God, since he is thrown

into the same matrix as formed God . . . But remember that only what is already melted or liquid is thrown into this matrix .. .’ (St Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort: True Devotion to the Holy Virgin). The reference to an ‘easy’ and ‘rapid’ way may cause surprise, but it must be remembered that this possibility presupposes special qualities and demands attitudes which, in fact, are far from being present in the majority; the difficulty here is less in ‘doing’ than in ‘being’; Marian or ‘shaktic’ perfection is to be as God created us. The following words by the same author may also be quoted because of their aptness: ‘Do not concern yourselves without a special call from God, with outward and temporal things, however charitable they may seem, for the outward practice

83

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

these three names. It is necessary to add that this perspective is independent of the distinction between the way of love and the way of gnosis, and that it is to be found in both, as the ‘Marian’ or ‘shaktic’ aspect in the way of Ibn “Arabi proves. In Islamic language, the distinction between the terms salat, ‘blessing’ and salam, ‘peace’, as well as the corresponding verbs salla and salam, used eulogistically following the names of Prophets, serves as an indication of the nature of the ‘‘Isan’ and ‘Maryaman’—or the ‘Christly’ and ‘Marian’—realities, the first corresponding to saldt and the second to salam. It has been recorded elsewhere! that—according to the Shaikh Al-‘ Alawi— the Divine act (tajalli) expressed by the word salh, ‘bless’, is like lightning and implies the extinction of the human receptacle, whereas the Divine act expressed by the word sallim, ‘greeting’, spreads the Divine influence in the substance of the individual, like water which conserves, and not like fire which burns; and

this is the difference between the Marian and Christly graces; the latter are ‘vertical’, and the former ‘horizontal’; the feminine

influence predisposes to the balanced and harmonious reception of the virile influx.

In other words,

the soul which

is both

hardened and dispersed takes on, in a certain fashion, the goodness, beauty,? purity and humility’ of the Virgin in order to be pleasing to God*. There is an obvious connection, on the one hand with rebirth ‘of water and of the spirit —water corresponding to the virginal principle—and on the other hand with the eucharisof charity towards one’s neighbour has caused some to lose the spirit of prayer . . Understand that the greatest things done on earth are done inwardly’ (Spiritual Instructions.) 1 Understanding Islam (Allen and Unwin, 1963), chapter The Prophet. ? For ‘the Buddhas also save by their superhuman beauty’; this meaning is also to be found in the ‘Song of Solomon’. The Golden Legend states that Mary, while being extraordinarily beautiful, extinguished every passion in those who looked on her. $ Awareness of our existential nothingness before God, and effacement with regard to men. The Virgin lived in effacement and refused to perform miracles; the almost complete silence of the Gospel in regard to her illustrates this effacement, which is so deeply significant in more than one connection. Maryam is thus identifiable with esoteric Truth (Hagigah), inasmuch as she is a secret Revelation, corresponding to the ‘Wine’ in the Khamriyah. * It should be recalled in this context that for Vishnuism every soul is a gopi, a servant—and

lover—of

Krishna,

their summit and quintessence.

84

and is thus identified with Radha, who is

QORANIC

MESSAGE

OF

SAYYIDNA

‘ISA

tic species, bread representing what might be called ‘Marian homogeneity’. In Islamic terms, this homogeneity is the influence of saläm which completes and ‘fixes’ that of saldt. The virginal principle thus assumes apparently opposed functions, depending on the aspect which it manifests: it is both receptive—and thus passive and plastic—and conservative or ‘coagulative’. From a higher point of view, it assumes an aspect of ‘fluid or nectarian inwardness’, in keeping with its reality of supreme Shakti. The manifested Divine Spirit is in certain respects comparable to the reflected image of the sun on a lake. In this image there is a feminine or ‘horizontal’ element, and this is the potential luminosity which is inherent in water, and the perfect calm of a surface unruffled by any wind; and since these qualities permit the perfect reverberation of the solar body, they are already something of it. So it is that the Primordial Recipient is a providential projection—or a sort of off-shoot— of the Divine Content. Primordial Femininity ‘was there when He (God) prepared the Heavens; when He set a circle upon the face of the depth; when He established the clouds above; when He strengthened the fountains of the deep; when He gave to the sea his decree that the waters should not pass his commandment; when He appointed the foundations of the earth.’ (Proverbs, VIII, 27-9). The qualities of this Materia prima or this Prakriti are purity or transparence, and receptivity with regard to Heaven and intimate union with it; Sayyidatna Maryam, the Virgin, is in fact described as ‘chosen and purified’, ? ‘submissive’,? and ‘believing the Words of her Lord.* She does 1‘O Maryam, verily God hath chosen thee and purified thee, and hath chosen thee above all women’ (Qoran, III, 42). The first choosing is intrinsic; Allah chose the Virgin in herself and for herself. The second choosing is extrinsic;

he chose her in regard to the world, and for a Divine plan. 2‘O Maryam, be in prayer (uqnuti) before thy Lord and prostrate thyself (usjudi) and bow (arka‘t) with those who bow’. (bid., 43.) As in other passages, the order given to the avataric creature does no more than express the nature of this creature, cosmic perfections always deriving from a Divine order (amr); in pronouncing His order in eternity, God created the nature of the Virgin. The angels only repeat this order to the glory of Mary. It is worthy of note that this verse in effect indicates that the movements of the Moslem prayer pertain to the Marian nature. 3‘And Maryam, daughter of ‘Imran, who kept intact her virginity: We breathed into her (an element of) Our Spirit (min Ruhind); and she accepted

85

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

not exist without the Divine Word, nor the Divine Word without

her; along with this Word, she is all.

Within the framework of Islam, a particular and personal reference to Sayyidna ‘Isa or his Mother—and also to Sayyidna Idris (Enoch), for example, and to Sayyidna al-Khidr (Elias)— derives from the fawfig (‘Divine help’) or #agäm (‘station’) associated with a given spirituality of a very exalted nature,* and not from a religious schema. In Islam, such a schema could only be Qoranic and ‘Muhammadan’, by the logic of things.? In the foregoing we have seen what is implied in a spiritual reference to the reality ‘‘Isa-Maryam’. In order to make still clearer the nature of such a reference, one may recall the conversation between Christ and Nicodemus—a conversation which took place ‘at night’, which evokes the Laila or Hagigah of the Sufis—and at which it was said that ‘except a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God’. Apart from other more contingent meanings, Water represents Perfection according to Maryam, whereas Spirit is Perfection according to ‘Isa, their cosmogonic prototype being ‘the Spirit of God moving on the Waters’;* in the as true (saddaqat) the Words of her Lord and His Books, and was of those who are resigned (to God).’ It is important to note that in the Qoran as in other Scriptures, there are parabolic passages the function of which is less to relate facts than to depict a character, an attitude, a situation, depending on what is

paramount for the ‘Divine Intention’. 1 This point is indispensable, for in Islamic spirituality there is no anticipated reference to a ‘Pole’ other than the Founder of Islam. It was on the basis of his maqam that Ibn ‘Arabi was able to have inward contacts with Sayyidna ‘Isa. ? But this is independent of the prestige enjoyed by Mary in Islam. It may be recalled here that Ephesus, near Smyrna, where the Assumption took place, is a place of pilgrimage where the Virgin performs miracles for Moslems as well as for Christians. 3‘The

Waters’

must

not be confused

with the primordial

chaos,

made

of

‘desert and void’ (tuhu wa buhu); they must be interpreted as ‘Divine Passivity’ or as the perpetually virgin Universal Substance. In Hindu terms, this is the aspect sativa in Prakriti, the former being the very essence of the latter. The

Manava-Dharma-Shastra St Bernard

Dante

celebrated

in his turn

has

stresses the ‘benevolence’ the

‘sweetness’

sung

in these

and

of the quality

‘mildness’

terms:

of sattua.

of the Virgin,

‘Whatever

melody

which

soundeth

sweetest here below, and most doth draw the soul into itself, would seem a rent

cloud thundering, compared unto the sound of that lyre wherewith was crowned

the beauteous sapphire (Mary) by which the brightest heaven is made more limpid (del quale il ciel pit chiaro s’inzaffiva)’ (Paradiso, XXIII, 97-102).

86

QORANIC

MESSAGE

OF

SAYYIDNA

‘ISA

Song of Solomon there is an analogous reference in the words of the Beloved: ‘I sleep, but my heart wakes.’ Holy sleep, or apathera, refers to the first of these two mysteries, and holy wakefulness

to the second;

their combination

gives rise to a

spiritual alchemy which is found in a variety of forms in all initiatory methods. The mental faculty is in a state of sleep in that it detaches itself from the world, which is ephemeral and which disperses; thought thus remains in a calm and pure disposition, in parallel with acuity of discernment, for serenity is all the more precious as its substance is intelligent.1 The heart, for its part, is in a state of wakefulness because, having by faith and virtues—or by gnosis—overcome its hardness and its heaviness, it receives and transmits the Divine Reality, which is Verbum, Lux et Vita. 1 The Christian tradition also testifies to the wisdom and infused science of the Virgin; her strength is in her adamantine inviolability. Inversely, the masculine pole must possess the virginal qualities, so as to identify itself with Intelligence and Power.

87

CHAPTER 7

The Wisdom of Sayyidatna Maryam In speaking of the ‘wisdom of Sayyidatna Maryam’ we are considering the Virgin Mary, not solely as the Mother of Jesus, but also and above all in her capacity as Prophetess! for all the descendants of Abraham; and this permits us to examine the Magnificat side by side with certain parallel passages from the Qoran. The Magnificat (Luke, I, 46-55) contains the following teachings: holy joy in God; humility—‘poverty’ or ‘childlikeness’ —as

a condition of Grace; the holiness of the Divine Name;

inexhaustible Mercy and its connection with fear; immanent and universal justice; the merciful assistance accorded to Israel, this name having to be extended to the Church? since according to St Paul the Church is the supra-racial prolongation and renewal of the Chosen People.* Further, the Magnificat speaks of the favour granted to ‘Abraham and his seed’, and not exclusively to Isaac and his seed; Abraham includes all 1 Obviously not a law-giving Prophetess nor the foundress of a religion, but one who sheds light and sanctifies. Amongst Moslems there is a divergence of view on the question as to whether Maryam was a ‘Prophetess’ (nabiyyah) or simply a ‘saint’ (waliyyah); the first opinion is based on the Virgin’s supereminence, that is to say on her unequalled rank in the spiritual hierarchy, while the second opinion stems from a carping and timid theology that only takes account of the fact that Mary could not have a law-giving function, a ‘juridical’ point of view which by-passes the essential with an astonishing lack of sense of proportion. 2 Or to the Churches, if outward schisms are taken into account.

8 “His servant Israel’ says the Magnificat, thus specifying that sacred servitude enters into the very definition of Israel, to the extent that an Israel without this servitude is no longer the Chosen People, whereas inversely a non-Israelite monotheistic community is identifiable with Israel—‘in spirit and in truth— by the very fact that it realizes servitude towards God.

88

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

monotheistic Semites, racially or spiritually, thus irrespective of physical race in certain cases. The connection between fear and Mercy—enunciated in the Magnificat—is of cardinal importance: contrary to prejudices current in the world of lukewarmness and psychologism, the traditional doctrines which insist most on Mercy have as their point of departure the conviction that we run the risk of hell, or even deserve it, and that we are only saved by the Goodness of Heaven;! the way then consists, not in wishing to save oneself by one’s own merits, since this is considered quite impossible, but in conforming to the requirements of a Mercy which seeks to save us while demanding of us a priori the fear of being lost. Mary’s hymn is impregnated with elements of Mercy and Rigour, and it thus reflects an aspect of the nature of the Virgin herself: the mildness of the Virgin is accompanied by an adamantine purity and also by a strength of soul which evokes such Biblical figures as Miriam and Deborah, and which represents a dimension inseparable from the greatness of her who was called o clemens, o pra, o dulcis Virgo Maria.?

The severities of Mary’s canticle towards the proud, the mighty and the rich, and the consolations directed to the humble, the oppressed and the poor, refer—apart from their literal meaning—to the equilibrium-restoring power of the Beyond; and this insistence on cosmic alternations is easily explained if we remember that the Virgin herself personifies Equilibrium, since she is identifiable with the Substance of the Cosmos which is both maternal and virginal—a Substance of Harmony and Beauty, andthereby opposed to all disequilibriums. In the doctrine of Mary the essential disequilibriums are pride, injustice and attachment to riches,’ or more precisely, love of self, contempt for one’s neighbour and the desire to possess, which includes insatiability and avarice. 1The Buddhist ‘Pure Land’ schools are particularly characteristic in this respect. 2 Words added spontaneously by St Bernard to the Salve occasion of a solemn gathering at Speyer cathedral.

Regina on the

3 And not the mere fact of being rich, for an outward situation is nothing in

itself; a monarch is necessarily rich, and there have been holy monarchs. To condemn the ‘rich’ is nevertheless justified by the fact that owners, on the average, are attached to what they own: inversely, only he is ‘poor’ who is content with little.

89

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

As for the joy referred to in the Virgin’s canticle, this goes hand in hand with humility—the awareness of our contingency and of our ontological nothingness—or more precisely with the Divine Answer to this humility; whatever is empty for God will by the same token be filled, as Meister Eckhart explains by the example of the hand lowered and opened upwards. To the humility—or poverty—of man corresponds the Generosity of God; now the message of the Virgin according to the Qoran is, as we shall see, a message of Divine Generosity. The doctrine of Mary as it appears in the Qoran insists on Mercy on the one hand and on immanent and cosmic Justice on the other, or on the alternations due to universal Equilibrium. We find the idea of Mercy—as a doctrine of the Virgin—in the following passage: ‘And her Lord (‘‘her’’ refers to St Anne, the “wife of ‘Imran’’) accepted her (Mary) with full acceptance and caused her to grow with a goodly growth,! and made Zachariah? her guardian; whenever Zachariah went in to her in the prayerniche (m1hr4b),$ he found her supplied with food;* he asked: O Mary, whence cometh unto thee this (food)? She replied: it cometh from God: truly God giveth beyond measure to whom He will’ (stivah ‘the Family of ‘Imran’, III, 37). This reply is the very symbol of the Marian message as it appears in the Qoran; and even in other passages, in which the name of Mary is not mentioned, this phrase in fact indicates an

aspect of the message. “The life of this world has been made 1 An allusion to the avataric beauty of the Virgin, and also, according to the commentators, to the growth of grace in her. 2 It is to be noted that the name Zachariah, which in Hebrew means ‘God remembers’ (Zekaryah), comprises in Arabic (Zakariya) the root zakara, and

thus the meaning of ‘fullness’ and ‘abundance’. The Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew zekar is dhakara, whence the word dhikr, ‘remembrance’ (of God). 8 The reference here is to a certain place in the Temple of Jerusalem, reserved for the Blessed Virgin. The association of ideas between Mary and the prayerniche in mosques is common amongst Moslems: in many mosques the verse of Zachariah and Mary is inscribed above the mihrab; this is notably so in the case

of Hagia Sophia, which thus remains dedicated to the Virgin even after the Byzantine era and under the Turks. 4 Winter fruits in summer and summer fruits in winter according to tradition; tradition likewise relates that Mary’s apartment was closed by seven doors, which evokes the symbolism of the ‘book seven times sealed’. go

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

attractive (by Satan) to those who do not believe,! and they mock those who believe; and those who fear God will be above

them on the Day of the Resurrection; for God giveth beyond measure to whom He will’ (s&rah ‘the Family of ‘Imran’, III, 212). In this passage we encounter, along with the key-phrase regarding Divine Generosity, the ideas enunciated in the Magnificat: the necessity of fear, then the play of cosmic alternations, i.e. the compensatory and equilibrium-restoring relationship between the here-below and the beyond. An analogous passage from the same s#rah reads as follows: ‘Say (O Prophet): O my God (Allahumma), Sovereign of Royalty, Thou givest royalty to whom Thou wilt and Thou takest away royalty from whom Thou wilt; Thou exaltest whom Thou wilt and Thou abasest whom

Thou wilt; in Thy Hand

is welfare;

truly Thou art powerful over all things. Thou causest the night to pass into the day and Thou causest the day to pass into the night. And Thou bringest forth the living from the dead, and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living. And Thou givest sustenance beyond measure to whom Thou wilt’ (26-7). Here again, along with the key-phrase, we find the idea of cosmic alternations. Another passage: ‘O my people! The life of this world is but a passing enjoyment and in truth the future life is the abode of stability. Whoever doeth an ill-deed is requited only with the like thereof, and whoever doeth good, whether male or female,

provided he is a believer?—all such will enter Paradise where they will receive sustenance beyond measure’ (sévah ‘the Believer’, XL, 39-40).

One of the most important passages, from the generally Islamic as well as from the specifically Marian point of view, is the Light Verse and the three verses which follow it: ‘God is the light of the heavens and the earth; His light is comparable to a niche wherein is a wick; the wick is in a crystal; the crystal is like a 1 Literally: ‘who cover (kafarü)', that is to say: who cover the Truth; this contains an allusion to innate knowledge which has been ‘covered’ by passion and pride. 2 This reservation is crucial. It is faith that saves, not action as such; both faith and action, however, are susceptible of complex, subtle, and sometimes

paradoxical nuances. 3 Not a ‘lamp’, as most translators seem to think.

OI

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

brilliant star; it (the wick) is kindled from a blessed tree (from which comes the oil), an olive tree which is neither of the East nor of the West, and whose oil would almost glow forth (of itself) though no fire touched it. Light upon light; God guideth unto His light whom He will; and God speaketh to mankind in parables; and God knoweth all things.’ Coming immediately after this famous passage are the following verses: ‘In houses which God hath suffered to be built, and in which His Name is

remembered (invoked), men whom neither trade nor barter distract from remembrance (invocation) of God, nor from Prayer and Alms-giving, glorify Him at dawn and at dusk; they fear the day when hearts and eyes will be overturned. So that God may reward them for the good works they accomplished and give them more out of His grace; and God giveth His sustenance beyond measure to whom He will’ (sarah ‘Light’, XXIV, 35-8). This group of verses evokes first of all the symbolism of the prayer-niche, symbol of the mysteries of the Divine Light and of its modes of presence or immanence, and ends with the keyphrase of the Marial message, the words on Generosity. We likewise encounter an allusion to the Name of God and another to fear; finally, the Light Verse contains the virginal symbols of crystal, star,! blessed tree? and oil, the Marian interpretations

of which can easily be discerned.5 In its intrinsic meaning the Light Verse refers to the doctrine of the Self and of the refractions of the Self in cosmic manifestation; the connection with the Virgin is convincing because she personifies the receptive or passive perfections of universal Substance; but she likewise incarnates—by virtue of the formless and occult nature of the Divine Prakriti—the ineffable 1 The names Stella Matutina and Stella Maris will be recalled here. 2 Within the framework of this particular symbolism the words

‘neither of

the East nor of the West’ seems to indicate that the Virgin, personifying both the universal Shakti and the Sophia Perennis, does not belong exclusively either to Christianity or Islam, but that she belongs to both religions at once,

and that she constitutes the link between them. #In Brahmanical terminology, as we have seen in the preceding chapter, Mary incarnates the luminous and ascending element (sativa) of the uncreated Substance (Prakriti), which already radiates by its purity alone, and thus even apart from the illuminating and ‘vertical’ intervention of the creative Intellect

(Purusha).

92

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

essence of wisdom or spirituality, the both virginal and maternal materia prima of all formal coagulations of the Spirit.1 But Moslems think of the Virgin in connection not only with the prayer-niche (mzhrab), but also with the palm-tree (nakhlah): Mary is beside a withered palm-tree in the wilderness, and a voice commands her: ‘Shake the trunk of the palm-tree toward thee,

thou wilt cause ripe and fresh dates to fall upon thee’ (sérah ‘Maryam’, XIX, 25). This miracle of the palm-tree is the companion of the miracle of the niche: in both cases, Mary is nourished by God, but whereas in the first case the fruits arrive without her doing anything other than invoking God in the prayer-niche, in the second case she must participate in the miracle; it is a miracle of pure grace in the first case, and a miracle of active faith in the second. That is to say, the niche evokes the graces of prayer of a static and contemplative kind, while the palm-tree suggests active and dynamic prayer; to the perfection of quietude must be added the perfection of fervour; the latter demands an awareness of our earthly distress or of our exile, while the former implies our sense of Unity and of Beatitude. The Qoran contains a particularly synthetic passage, already briefly referred to in the last chapter, concerning not so much the ‘wisdom’ of the Virgin as her ‘mystery’: ‘And Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran,? who kept her virginity intact: We breathed 1 According to Al-Baqli, commentator on the Qoran and patron saint of the town of Shiraz, ‘the substance

of Mary is the substance of original sanctity’.

A Maghribi shaikh, who had no knowledge of Christianity except through the Qoran, told us that Maryam personifies Clemency-Mercy (Rahmah) and that our age is especially dedicated to her for that very reason; the essence of Mary— her ‘crown’—are the Names

Rahmän

and Rahim, and she is the human

mani-

festation of the Basmalah (‘in the Name of God the Clement, the Merciful’). In prayers for the dead intended for general use, the name Muhammad, representing in Islam the human ideal, stands for the departed person, on the understanding that whoever uses the formula will substitute for ‘Muhammad’ the actual name of the dead man or woman. But since before God a person is held to be primarily the child of his or her mother, the ideal name figures in the prayer as ‘Muhammad the son of Maryam’, these two names representing the summits of the two hierarchies of men and women in Islam. 2 The triliteral root of this name comprises amongst others the meanings of ‘prosperity’ and ‘flowering’, which are most appropriate for her whom God ‘caused to grow with a goodly growth’ and to whom He gave ‘His sustenance beyond measure’ (st#vah ‘the Family of ‘Imran’, III, 37). It should be noted

93

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

into her of Our Spirit; and she believed in the Words

of her

Lord and in His Books and was of those who are resigned (to God)’ (särah ‘the Prohibition’, LXVI, 12). ‘Who kept her virginity intact’: the Arabic term, which is concrete, implies a symbolism of the heart: God introduces into the heart of the Virgin an element of His nature, that is to say that in reality He ‘opens’ this heart to the transcendentally omnipresent Divine Spirit. Hearts are unaware of this Spirit from the fact of their hardening, a hardening which at the same

time is dissipation; the virgin heart, on the other hand, is both fluid and concentrated, metaphorically speaking. ‘We breathed into her of Our Spirit’: the image of breath evokes both the intimacy and subtlety of the gift, its depth or infinitude, if one will; ‘of Our Spirit’: no Divine manifestation

can involve the Divine Spirit in itself and in its intrinsic totality, otherwise the Spirit would henceforth be in the manifestation in question, and no longer in God. ‘And she believed in the Words of her Lord and in His Books’: the Words are inward certainties, the contents of the Intellect; the Books are the Revelations, which come from outside.

‘To believe’ or ‘to accept as true’ (saddaga) means here, not to admit with difficulty or retain in the mental faculty alone, but to recognize immediately and believe ‘sincerely’, that is to say, drawing the consequences which the truth implies and demands; this virtue explains the epithet Siddigah which Islam attributes to the Blessed Virgin: ‘She who believes sincerely, totally.’ There is thus in this quality a part of intuitive discernment

that the words ‘daughter of ‘Imran’ link Mary not only to her direct father but also to her ancestor,

the father of Moses

and

Aaron,

whence

the description

‘sister of Aaron’ which the Qoran likewise employs, wishing thus to stress that the priestly and esoteric super-eminence of the brother of Moses is remanifested in Mary: in other words, there is a concern

to show, on the one hand that the

Blessed Virgin is of the race of the two brother prophets, and on the other hand that she is a prophetess—not law-giving and exoteric like Moses, but contemplative and esoteric like Aaron. 1 The reason for this particularity is to prevent it being asserted that Mary accepted only the Books and not the Words, or vice versa, or that she remained

passive without accepting anything positively; a precaution which is far from being unnecessary in a Semitic climate, and in view of a meticulous, not to say

pedantic, theology.

94

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

relating to ‘purity of heart’ and a part of ‘realization-bringing’ sincerity, of total gift of the soul. ‘And she was of those who are resigned’ (gänitin): the Arabic term implies the meaning not only of constant submission to God, but also of absorption in prayer and invocation (qunit), meanings which coincide with the image of Mary spending her childhood in front of the prayer-niche and thus personifying contemplative prayer. Muhyi’d-Din ibn ‘Arabi, after declaring that his heart ‘has opened itself to all forms’, that it is ‘a cloister for monks, a temple of idols, the Kaaba’, adds: ‘I practise the religion of Love;? now it is over this informal religion that—Semitically speaking—Sayyidatna Maryam presides. She is thus to be identified with the supreme Shakti or with the heavenly Prajnaparanuta of the Asiatic traditions.’* The fact that the Islamic tradition records the supereminent dignity of the Blessed Virgin’creates a problem: if on the one 1 In ‘The Interpreter of Desires’ (Tarjumän al-ashwag); cf. Etudes Traditionnelles, August-September 1934. * It is true that the author specifies in his commentary that this religion is ‘Islam’, but he was doubtless obliged to do this in order to escape a charge of heresy, and he could moreover do this in good conscience by understanding the term 2s/äm in its immediate and universal meaning. 3 At the time of the persecution of Christianity in Japan, the Christians did not

hesitate

to make

their

devotions

in front

of statues

of Kwannon,

the

Buddhist goddess of Mercy. Another example of Marian universality, if one may so call it, is the following: the basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe, near Mexico City—a famous place of pilgrimage—is built on a hill which in ancient times

was

consecrated

to the

mother-goddess

Tonantzin,

a divinity

of the

Earth and the Moon; this divinity appeared herself, in the form of an Aztec princess of great beauty, to a poor Indian, telling him that she was the ‘Mother of God’ and that she wished to have a church on this spot. Another example: above the principal gate of Cérdoba, now no longer extant, there was a statue of the Virgin; archaeologists think that it was the image of a Roman goddess identified by the Christians as Mary; the Moslems, when they came, respected the statue and in their turn venerated the statue of the Virgin-Mother as the patroness of Cérdoba. But above all the following coincidence must be mentioned: it is not by chance that the town of Ephesus, where Mary was assumed into Heaven,

was dedicated to Artemis, goddess of light, in that she was the

sister of Apollo, and goddess of the moon, in view of her femininity, and identified by the Ionians with a foster-mother-goddess of perhaps Oriental origin; let us likewise recall that Artemis is the protectress of virginity and the beneficent guardian of the sea, and that she is thus both virgo and stella maris, and that her favourite animal is the hart, which in Christian symbolism represents the soul thirsting for the heavenly fatherland: ‘As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God’ (Psalms, XLII, 1).

95

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

hand the Logos in Islam is necessarily and obviously identified with the Founder of this religion,! and if on the other the feminine aspect of the Logos—to the extent that it is taken into consideration—can only be personified by Maryam in view of her incomparable quality as attested by the Qoran and the Sunna, why did this personification have to appear outside the Arab world and in connection with the Founder of the Christian religion?? The reason for this is the following: precisely because, in the world of the Semitic monotheists, Maryam is the only ‘feminization of the Divine’, if one may so put it (or the only avataric Shakti of Vishnu, in Hindu terms)? she had to appear in all three monotheistic religions at once, and consequently on the threshold of Christianity. If she had been an Arab, she would have remained a stranger to the other two religions: if she had lived in Israel before the time of Jesus, she would have remained a stranger to the Christian religion, or she would have anticipated it in a certain manner;* being unique and incomparable both in Judaism—by her concrete personality as Prophetess, whether understood or not—and in Christianity—by her function as Co-Redemptress—she was 1pso facto unique and incomparable for Islam and was ‘at home’ in it, like all the Semitic prophets up to and including Christ. From the point of view of Islam there was thus no necessity, nor even any possibility (this question not existing for the other two religions) that Maryam should have a function in the genesis of the Moslem world; in her quality as the sole major Shakti in the monotheistic world, she occupied the only historical place that she could occupy and assumed the only religious role that she could assume. Or again: if Maryam could neither appear in the Arab world nor in the Jewish world before Christ, it was because, in view

of her very incomparability,

she had to be linked with

a

1 But for all that without excluding, in the esoteric order, interferences by

other manifestations of the Logos, especially that of Jesus, the ‘Seal of Sanctity’. ? This is a question which has no sense from the specifically Christian point of view, but we are considering here the Semitic monotheistic world as a whole with its three great traditional dimensions. 3 One hadith places Mary alongside Adam and above Eve, because of the

privilege of having been breathed into by the Divine Spirit. 4 An idea in itself contradictory, but not devoid of meaning or function—in a provisional manner—in the present context.

96

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

masculine manifestation of ‘human Divinity’;! now this manifestation, in the Semitic world, is precisely Christ or, in other

words, the possibility of such a manifestation in the Semitic world is in itself quite enough to explain the existence of Christianity, from the point of view at issue here. Maryam belongs to Judaism by her personality in fact, to Christianity by her special function, and to Islam by her supereminence in the whole Abrahamic cosmos. The Jewish message of the Virgin is to be found precisely in the Magnificat in so far as it refers to Israel; this hymn is at the same time her Christian message in so far as ‘Israel’ is the Church, and it is also her Islamic message in view of the reference to the ‘seed of Abraham’; a message which, as we have seen, was re-formu-

lated by the Qoran in terms appropriate to Islam. In a word: Maryam comes into the Abrahamic-Muhammadan cycle by virtue of the fact that she belongs to the Sinaitic-Christian cycle which, from the Moslem point of view, constitutes an internal dimension of the first-mentioned cycle.? We must remember also that the Marian wisdom is necessarily an expression of the Christ-given wisdom, to which she adds—or from which she extracts—an aspect which is proper to herself, and this is precisely the aspect enunciated in the verse of the prayer-niche;* whereas the doctrine of cosmic or human alternations is of Mary because it is of Christ, the doctrine of sustenance obtained from God—or ‘from the 1 Brahmanically speaking, a woman Avalära is necessarily the Shakti of an Avatära and thus necessarily appears along with him; she could thus appear neither in isolation nor, needless to say, in a spiritual climate whose perspective providentially excludes the notion of ‘Divine Descents’. 2 Moses and Aaron open the Sinaitic cycle; Jesus and Mary complete it. From another point of view, however, this cycle is perpetuated by orthodox Judaism, which moreover would lose none of its specific orthodoxy—founded on the perpetuity of the Law—if in general it accepted Jesus as a prophet of

esoterism and a spiritual renewer, or if at least it left the question open: for Jesus does not ‘abolish’ the Law, he ‘transposes’ it. Be that as it may, the Qoranic epithet ‘sister of Aaron’ conferred on Mary shows in its way the complementary relationship between these two cosmic miracles which were Sinai and Christ.

3 The most direct Qoranic expression of this aspect, or of this Marian mystery, is without doubt the following verse: ‘And God is the best of Providers’ (s#rah ‘Friday’, LXII, 11). The Divine Name corresponding to this idea is ‘The Provider’, Ar-Razzäq, whence the somewhat Marian Moslem name: ‘Servant of

the Provider’, ‘Abd ar-Razzäq.

G

97

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

Inward’—is of Mary herself, along with the virginal and maternal graces which emanate from the very person of the Virgin. The following saying of Jesus is, in spirit, Marian in nature: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth

of God’

(Matthew,

IV, 4) and likewise the

saying: ‘My yoke is easy and My burden is light’ (Matthew, XI, 30). As for the Magnificat and its Biblical anticipations, it is in no wise contradictory to describe as ‘Christ-given’ a teaching formulated before the birth of Christ himself, given on the one hand the cosmic and spiritual inseparability of Jesus and Mary, and on the other the unity or timelessness of the Logos, considered here in its Semitic and monotheistic interpretations. Specifically Marian spirituality may be summarized in these terms: to become pure prayer, or pure receptivity before God —Gratia plena—so as to be nourished only by Him; for Maryam, the Divine Quintessence of this bread—or of this ‘sustenance’

(rizqg)? was ‘isa, the ‘Word of God’

(Kalimatu ’Llah) and

‘Spirit of God’ (Rihu ‘Lläh), this Bread on which she lives in eternity and on which she was already living, inwardly, during her childhood in the Temple. That the Blessed Virgin, speaking spontaneously, should express herself in Biblical terms, is a matter of course for anyone with an inkling of what must be the relationship between infused knowledge and formal Revelation in the soul of such a being as Mary. We should like now to quote the main Biblical passages which in some fashion prefigure the words of the Magntficat—if it be permitted to express oneself thus,? and we shall do so in the same order as the ideas in this hymn appear. “Yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my Salvation’ (Habakkuk, III, 18). “Who is like unto the Lord, our God, who dwelleth on high,

who humbleth Himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth! He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lef. chapter VI. * The same verbal root as Razzaq, the Divine Name mentioned above. * This is permissible in the sense that this prayer is an inspiration in its turn, and not an improvisation based on prior readings as some have imagined.

98

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

lifteth the needy out of the dung-hill’

MARYAM

(Psalms, CXIII,

5-7).

‘The Lord hath done great things for us; whereof we are glad . . . They that sow in tears shall reap in joy’ (Psalms, CXXVI, 3 and 5). ‘He sent redemption unto His people: He hath commanded His covenant for ever: holy and reverend is His Name. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom...’ (Psalms, CXI, 9 and 10). ‘Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord hath mercy on them that fear Him... But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear Him, and his righteousness

unto

children’s

children;

to such

as keep His

covenant,! and to those that remember His commandments do them’. (Psalms, CIII, 13, 17 and 18).

to

‘Thou hast broken Rahab? in pieces, as one that is slain; Thou hast scattered Thine enemies with Thy strong arm’.

(Psalms,

LXXXIX, Io). ‘And the afflicted people Thou wilt save: but Thine eyes are upon the haughty, that Thou mayest bring them

down’

(II

Samuel, XXII, 28). ‘Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the Lord; awake,

as in the ancient days, in the generations of old. Art Thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?’ (Isaiah, LI, 9). ‘The Lord lifteth up the meek: He casteth the wicked down to the ground.’ (Psalms, CXLVII, 6). ‘The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain: and the glory of the Lord shall be 1 This reservation is crucial; it indicates both the relativity and the universa-

lity of the notion of ‘Israel’.

2 This name is synonymous with Leviathan: this is a monster which personifies primordial chaos under its ‘aqueous’ aspect, if one may put it thus, and which is killed by God, by the Fiat Lux in fact. The name of Rahab is likewise applied to idolatrous, magic-working and tyrannical Egypt, the only one known to the Hebrews. The Flight into Egypt by the Holy Family is like an act of homage to the other Egypt, that of the sages; and it is not without significance that the Flight retraced the steps of Joseph, the Patriarch, who found there blessing and glory.

Og

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it’ (Isazah, XL, 3-5).1

‘To set up on high those that be low: that those which mourn may be exalted to safety. He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise’ (J 00, V, 11 and 12). ‘For He satisfieth the longing soul, and filleth the hungry soul with goodness’ (Psalms, CVII, 9). ‘But Thou Israel, art my servant Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant; I have chosen thee,

and not cast thee away. not dismayed; for I am will uphold thee with (Isatah, XLI, 8-10). ‘He hath remembered

Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be thy God: I will stregthen thee: yea, I the right hand of my rightousness’

His mercy and His truth toward the

house of Israel; all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation

of our God’ (Psalms, XCVIII, 3). ‘And I will establish My covenant between Me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee’

(Genesis, XVII, 7). Finally the canticle of Hannah, mother of Samuel, summarizes

the whole doctrine of the Magnificat: ‘My heart rejoiceth in the Lord, mine horn is exalted in the Lord? . . . The bows of the

mighty men are broken, and they that stumbled are girded with strength. They that were full have hired out themselves for bread; and they that were hungry ceased . . . The Lord killeth and maketh alive: He bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up.’ The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich: He bringeth low, 1 This passage, taken up again by St Luke (III, 4-6), evokes the equilibriumrestoring function of the Principle, that is to say, there is a reference here both to Divine Justice, immanent in a certain sense, and to Universal Harmony, beneficent as well as implacable; it is this Harmony that is incarnated by her

who has been called ‘Divine Mary’. * The horn symbolizes strength; the exalting of the horn is success, prosperity or victory given by God. 8 ‘I kill, and I make alive: I wound and I heal: neither is there any that can

deliver out of My hand’ (Deuteronomy, 100

XXXII,

39).

WISDOM

OF

SAYYIDATNA

MARYAM

and lifteth up. He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill . . . He will keep the feet of His saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness . . . He shall

give strength unto His king, and exalt the horn of His anointed’ (I Samuel, II, 1-10).

IOI

GHAPLERES

An-Nür ACCORDING to a teaching (hadith) of the Prophet, ‘the first of the things Allah created (that is to say: the first unmanifested Reality in the Divine tendency to manifestation, or the first Divine self-determination with a view to creation) is the Pen (Qalam) which He created of Light (Ndr), and which is made of white pearl; its length is equal to the distance which is between the sky and the earth (the distance which separates them, that is to say: the incommensurability between formless—or supraformal—and formal Manifestation). Then He created the Tablet (Lawh, or Lawh al-mahfuz, the ‘‘guarded Tablet”), and it is made

of white pearl, and its surfaces are of red rubies; its length is equal to the distance which is between the sky and the earth, and its width stretches from the East to the West’ (it embraces all the possibilities of Manifestation). According to another teaching ‘there is near to Allah a Tablet one side of which is of red rubies and the other of green emerald (colours which, like red in relation to white, indicate the differentiation of cosmic tendencies, the gunas of Hindu doctrine), and its Pens (Aglam) are of Light’ (the Principle of universal Manifestation—the Hindu Purusha—is here conceived as a plurality of vertical rays, which correspond respectively to the essential possibilities derived from the Divine Names or Aspects of Being. 1According to another possible interpretation of the colours of the guarded Tablet, one of the colours represents universal Substance in so far as it retains

its undifferentiated purity, and the other this same Substance in so far as it manifests the possibilities transmitted by the Pen; in the first case, Substance— like Mary who is an incarnation of it—is ‘Virgin’, and in the second it is ‘Mother’ (of the manifested

Universe);

as ‘Virgin’, it is the undifferentiated

Substance

of universal Manifestation (Jawhar al-haba', literally ‘Substance comparable to a cloud of dust’, that is to say, ‘undifferentiated’); as ‘Mother’, it is the ‘differen-

tiating Substance’ 102

(Tabi‘at al-kull, literally ‘total’ or ‘universal’

Nature)—

AN-NÜR

Another created the was on the envisaged,

tradition, reported by Ibn Abbas, says that ‘Allah Pen before He created the Creation (Khalg), and He Throne (AJlah is on the Throne since a relativity is the Throne signifying here, not formless manifesta-

tion, but the immutable Transcendence or the incommensurable

‘discontinuity’ of the Principle in relation to Its more or less relative aspects, so that this second proposition means that the ontological Principle remains unaffected by Its bi-polarization from which cosmic manifestation will proceed);1 and the Pen looked towards Him with a look of reverential fear (haybah) and or one might say the ‘efficient Cause’—of manifested things. In the first case, the Tablet is ‘white’, and in the second it is ‘coloured’. This distinction between

Jawhar al-hab@ and Tabi‘at al-kull is not without analogy with the distinction which Hindu doctrine establishes between Prakriti (which is none other than Natura naturans) and Vikriti (Natura naturata), this latter term signifying Substance in so far as it is ‘differentiated’ or ‘actualized’ in its productions. The expression Jawhay al-haba@’ is frequently employed in the sense of Materia secunda; the term Al-Jawhar al-hayülani (‘the material Substance’), very frequently too has the same sense; often, one simply says A/-Habda (‘the cloud of dust’) or Al-Hayülä (from An, ‘first Matter’). As for the expression Al-‘Unsur al-a‘zam (‘the supreme Element’), it signifies exclusively Prakriti as such. Islamic symbolism views the universal Substance also as the ‘Book’ (AI-Kitab) or the ‘Mother of the Book’ (Umm al-Kitab), the ‘Book’ being in this case the Revelation, or by extension the entire cosmos; the Pen itself often has the name of ‘supreme Pen’ (A/-Qalam al-a'là), which indicates its identification with the Logos. According to Ibn ‘Arabi, the terms Al-Qalam, Al-‘Aql al-awwal (‘the

first

Intellect’),

Ar-Rüh

al-kulli

(‘the universal

Spirit’),

Al-Hagq

al-

makhlig bihi (‘The Truth by which the created exists’) and Al-‘Adl (‘Justice’, ‘Equilibrium’) are synonymous; A/-Qalam is then not the Word, but its cosmic refraction, Av-Rah,

‘The Spirit’, of which the ‘passive’ or ‘feminine’

aspect is

An-Nür, ‘The Light’. 1 Since the Throne indicates a relationship,—that of the Principle in relation to Its manifestation,—this symbol can be applied at different levels. In his treatise ‘Uqlat al-mustawfiz, Ibn ‘Arabi says that ‘the infinitely glorious Throne (Al-‘Arsh al-majid) is uncreated Intellect (Al-‘Agl, which is identical to the supreme Pen), and the immense Throne (Al-‘Arsh al-azim) is the uncreated Soul (An-Nafs) which is the guarded Tablet; then comes (in descending order) the Throne of Clemency (Al-‘Arsh ar-rahmaäni), which is the sphere of spheres, and the generous Throne (Al-‘Arsh al-kavim) which is none other than the Footstool (Al-Kurst)’. Generally speaking the fundamental cosmological symbols of Islam can be applied at different levels, including the metacosmic sphere, and this is because of their concrete nature which is the mark of their

universality. To the objection that this ‘imprecision’ of technical terms makes Sufi texts very difficult to read, it may be replied that the latter were not written for the convenience of modern Arabists, and that they were always accompanied by the oral teaching of a ‘school’ for which the terms in question had a perfectly precise meaning.

103

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

burst open; and the Ink (Widäd, which represents the initial and undifferentiated possibility of manifestation, while the Letters —Hurüf—mark its indefinite differentiation) dropped from it’. The Divine Incommensurability being mirrored in the Pen,—Its existential self-determination—the latter could not contain within the limits of its determination the incommensurability of the Divine Indetermination, and translated the latter into differentiated mode; the Ink is thus the reflection of the All-

Possibility—a reflection which, as such, could correspond only to the possibility of manifestation—and it will be transmuted by the Pen into indefinitely diverse existential possibilities. The All-Possibility is the totality of the Divine Names (Asmd’) or Mysteries (Asrär), and that is also the higher meaning of the Letters,

which

will then be conceived

as inherent

either

in

the supreme Essence (Dhät), and so in ‘Non-Being’, or in the Qualities (Sifat), and so in Being,! without prejudice to the fact that Being is ‘one’ ad intra (ittisdlan) as well as ad extra (infisälan);? it is in this sense that the higher Letters (purely principial, each being Allah, but none being the others), are ‘mirrored’ in the Pen which, ‘being made of Light’, receives their reflection and ‘bursts open’ under the ‘pressure’ (symbolized by al-haybah, ‘fear’) of their incommensurability, to transcribe them in manifested, created, ‘broken’ mode.

Ibn Abbas says that ‘the Pen burst open and the Ink flows from it until the Day of the Resurrection (Yaum al-Qiyämah, that is to say so long as the cycle of universal Manifestation “endures’’); and Allah commanded the Pen: Write! And the Pen replied: Lord, what shall I write? He said: Transcribe My Science of My Creation; all that will exist until the Day of the Resurrection (the totality of the possibilities of manifestation 1 The Divine Names are divided into Names of the Essence or of the Quiddity (Asma’ Dhätiyah) and Names of the Qualities (Asma’ Sifatiyah); these latter refer to the Aspects of Being. For example, ‘the Holy’ (Al/-Quddias) is a Name of the Essence, for there is nothing in A//ah which is not holy; on the other hand,

‘He who is full of pardon’ (4/-Ghaffär) is the Name of a Quality, not of the Essence, for all in God is not pardon, since he has also the Quality of ‘Avenger’ (Al-Muntagim). The Names of Quality are either ‘glorious’ or ‘terrible’ (jaläliyah), or Names of ‘Beauty’ (jamdliyah), that is to say beneficent or merciful. ? Which signifies that Being is without associates and also without parts; in the first sense it is ‘unique’ and in the second sense it is ‘one’.

104

AN-NUR

included in the divine Omniscience)’.! According to Sa‘id ibn Mansir, ‘the first thing that the Pen wrote was: in truth My Mercy precedeth My Wrath’ (Inna Rahmati sabaqat Ghadabi).? Ibn Abbas also relates that ‘the Pen set down in that hour that which will exist until the Day of the Resurrection (the pralaya of Hindu doctrine), and that which has been determined of good and of evil, of happiness and of unhappiness, in conformity with the divine Utterance: We have calculated (predestined) every thing in a precise model (a prototype) (Qoran, sürah

Ya Sin, XXXVI,

11); which is to say: on the guarded

Tablet.’ ‘In truth, there is beside Allah a tablet of white pearl at which He looks each day and each night three hundred and sixty times;* and with every look, He creates and makes to subsist, kills and makes alive, dethrones and enthrones, and does

that which He wills’ (that is to say: that which no individual will can ever modify, and that of which individuals as such do not know the causes). Finally, one other hadith of the Prophet may be mentioned: “Allah has written the destinies of creatures fifty thousand years 1 This passage indicates the phallic symbolism of the Pen, which recalls the creative lingam of Shiva, and which moreover brings clearly to light the sacred character of sexual union. On the other hand it is worth noting the relationship between the Pen and the prophetic function or—from another point of view—supreme sanctity: thus the Prophet Muhammad says of himself: ‘I am the Pen’ (Ana’l-Qalam); similarly Sayyidna ‘Ali, the ‘St John of Islam’, said: ‘I am the (diacritical) point beneath the letter ba; I am the side of Allah (the ‘‘Word”’ ‘‘seated on the right hand of God’’); I am the Pen; I am the guarded Tablet; I am the Throne of Allah;

I am the Seven Heavens’. One will also notice

the similarity between the Command given by Allah to the Pen: ‘Write!’ and the command of the Archangel Jibra'il to Muhammad: ‘Read!’, as also between the reply of the Pen ‘What shall I write?’ and that of Muhammad: ‘I cannot read’,—replies directly connected with the ‘illiterate’ quality (wmmz) characteris-

tic of the Prophet; likewise, the annunciation made to the Virgin Mary presents, in all essential details, a remarkable analogy with just cited. 2 Allah is Ar-Rahkmän (‘the Clement’) in Himself Creation, and Av-Rahim (‘the Merciful’) in relation that Allah was Ay-Rahmän ‘before’ the Creation latter, in Himself,

the examples that we have

and in relation to the total to creatures; it is said also (that is to say beyond the

in the sense of the Sanscrit term

dnanda),

and that he is

Ar-Rahim ‘since’ the Creation (that is to say, within the latter and ‘outside of Himself’); the first of these Qualities is intrinsic and the second extrinsic. 3 The number three hundred and sixty corresponds to the three hundred and sixty degrees of the Zodiac, the revolution of which takes place in one day and one night.

105

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

(a symbolical number expressing the incommensurability between the principial order and the manifested order) before He created the heavens (formless Manifestation) and the earth (formal Manifestation). And a commentator adds: ‘This hadith shows that the Pen preceded (principially and ontologically) the Throne, and that it is the first of created things (the word “created” having here the meaning not of ‘“‘manifested”’, but of ‘‘determined”’); and He created the Tablet after it (the Pense If the Creation took place fifty thousand years after the inscription

of the ‘destinies

of creatures’,

it is important

to

underline that this symbolically temporal gap indicates the transcendence of the Pen and of the Tablet in relation to the result of their ‘common act’. When the latter is considered as a ‘predestination’, following Western terminology,—it would be better to say ‘apportionment’ (g7smah, whence the Turkish word kismet) or ‘choice’ (1khtvyar),—care must be taken to understand this in the sense of a purely principial and so extra-temporal relationship. The two ‘Instruments’ of universal Manifestation are themselves respectively the two first Letters of the Divine Alphabet, that is to say the Alif and the BG; all the other Letters are contained virtually in the diacritical point under the Ba, this point being the reflected image of the divine Unity; it is the first drop of Ink which escaped from the Pen and its meaning is ‘Mercy’ (Rahmah). The common act of the two divine Instruments has two aspects, the one principial and the other effective, in conformity with the teachings quoted above; thus ‘the Pen set down at that moment that which will exist until the Day of the Resurrection’, and ‘Allah inscribed the destinies of beings fifty thousand years 1 A hadith says: ‘I was Prophet when —a formulation which comprises the Pen.’ This calls to mind a saying of individual) was, I am’ (as God). The

Adam was yet between water and mud’, same meaning as this other: ‘I am the Christ: ‘In truth before Abraham (as an holy Virgin too was created before the

Creation, as the Shakti of Christ, to use Hindu terms; Christ is the ‘Pen’, and

the Virgin the “guarded Tablet’, to return to Islamic symbolism,—while the Prophet comprises both aspects; his quality of ‘illiteracy’ corresponds to the ‘purity’ of the Virgin, and so to the epithet of ‘guarded’ or ‘preserved’ (mahfiz), which designates the protocosmic ‘Tablet’. Moreover, the ‘Immaculate Conception’ is a necessary derivation from this pre-existential character of the Virgin.

106

AN-NÜR

before He created the Heavens and the earth’; on the other hand,

‘the Ink runs until the Day of the Resurrection’; that is to say not only has the Pen written, but it is permanently writing as manifestation proceeds;

in the first case, the Pen determines the

possibilities of manifestation in the principial order, and in the second, it realizes them in the manifested order by its immediate act. It may be added that the two surfaces of the Tablet are symbolically equal to the ‘two seas’ (bahrayn), that is to say to the ‘upper Waters’ and the ‘lower Waters’, which are respectively formless—or supra-formal—possibilities and formal possibilities. The Throne (‘Aysh), being the first ‘creation’ after the Pen and the Tablet, and therefore the manifestation

of the first word

which is inscribed thereon,—and which is ‘Mercy’ (Rahmah),— corresponds to what the Hindu doctrine designates by the term Buddhi

(or Mahat),'

which

is the first of all manifestations,

namely that of Brahma affirming Himself as universal Intellect; from this is will be apparent that the Pen and the Tablet, which precede the Throne ‘by fifty thousand years’, coincide respectively with the two principles which the Hindu doctrine calls Purusha and Prakriti, the two unmanifested poles of all manifestations.® A difficulty might seem to arise here owing to the fact that the Pen, the Tablet and the Throne, which none the less belong, as

we have seen, to incommensurably distinct degrees of reality, are said to be ‘created’, or more precisely ‘created of Light’; however, the unitary perspective of Islam admits in God only the distinction of the ‘Essence’ (Dhät) and of the ‘Attributes’ (Sifat} and has to consider as being ‘created’ (makhliq) any1 For the Sanscrit terms, the reader is referred to ‘Man and his Becoming according to the Vedanta’ by René Guénon (Luzac, 1945). 2 According to a cosmological theory of ‘Ibn ‘Arabi—a theory which derives from a more analytical perspective than that of the ahadith quoted, and which is founded on the terminology of Plotinus—the guarded Tablet is identified with the ‘Universal Soul’ (An-Nafs al-hulliyah), the Wvyn of the Plotinian system. In this case, the guarded Tablet will only be the distinctive aspect of Prakriti; the latter, from the standpoint of its indifferentiation, will be identi-

fied with the ‘supreme Element’ (A/-‘Unsur al-a‘zam). 2 The apophatic theology of the Greek Church knows this distinction between the ‘Quiddity’ and the ‘Energies’ and draws from it all its consequences; on the other hand Western theology seems to reduce God to Being, which is a result of its too specifically philosophical character.

107

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

thing that could appear to be an ‘association’ (shzrk);* the ‘Attributes’ are all aspects of Unity; while the pair QalamLawh—or Purusha-Prakriti—has no point apart from its duality. As for the ‘Light’ (Nd), which we see simultaneously attributed—like the character of ‘creature —to Divine, and therefore unmanifested, realities, and to cosmic, and therefore

manifested, realities (or more precisely to realities belonging to formless Manifestation), it must be appreciated that the cosmos comprises three fundamental degrees: firstly, ‘earth’ (fin), secondly ‘fire’ (nar) and thirdly ‘light’ (nar); the human body, like the whole sensory order (‘alam al-mulk, in Sanscrit sthilashariva), is made of ‘earth’, beings of the ‘subtle state’ (‘alam al-malakit, in Sanscrit sukshma-sharira)—that is to say ‘spirits’ (jinn)—are made of ‘fire’, and the Angels and the whole formless order (‘dalam al-jabbarüt, in Sanscrit vijndnamaya-kosha) are made of ‘light’. These three ‘cosmic substances’, if one can so call them, are ‘static’ expressions of the ‘qualities’ or ‘tendencies’ inherent in the cosmos,—the gunas of Hindu doctrine—in the sense that the ‘earth’ (or more exactly the ‘dust of the ground’ from which the body of Adam was made) or gross manifestation is ‘obscurity’ or ‘ignorance’ (¢amas), ‘fire’ or subtle manifestation is ‘expansion’ or ‘passion’ (vajas) and ‘light’ or formless manifestation is ‘the tendency towards Reality’ or ‘conformity to Being’ (sativa); but if the summit of the cosmos is ‘light’ by reason of its conformity to Being, Being Itself will be a fortiort ‘Light’ (‘Alam al-‘izzah or ‘ Alam al-ghayb, in Sanscrit Anandamaya-kosha), for the ‘luminosity’ of the Heavens can derive its origin only from the ‘Light’ of God; to say that the Heavens are ‘created’ of ‘Light’ can therefore signify only one thing, namely that they are alone in being directly ‘conformable’ to the Divine ‘Light’, and consequently in being identified with this ‘Light’ in the sense of an ‘essential identity’. God is necessarily the Archetype of all light: ‘Allah is the Light of the ? According to Ibn ‘Arabi, the idea of Creation (khalg) comprises two aspects: according to the first, ‘Creation’ signifies the essential determination (ta‘ayyun) of possibilities in the state of non-manifestation; according to the second aspect, which must be limited to the Divine Name ‘The Producer’ (A/-Bari’), the ‘Creation’ is the ‘manifestation’, that is to say, the production in distinctive

mode, of the essential and immutable determinations (A/-A ‘yan ath-thabitah).

108

AN-NÜR

Heavens and of the earth’ (Qoran, swrat an-Nür, XXIV, 35). Ibn Abi Hatim says in his commentary that ‘Allah created the Throne of His Light, and the Footstool (Kursz) from the periphery adjoining the Throne; and round the Throne are four rivers: a river of sparkling light, a river of blazing fire, a river of white snow and a river of water, and the Angels stand upright in these rivers and glorify Allah’. ‘Allah is ‘‘seated’” on the Throne’ and His ‘Feet’—the one symbolizing ‘Glory’ (Jalal) or ‘Anger’ (Ghadab) and the other ‘Beauty’ (Jamal) or ‘Mercy’ (Rahmah)—are placed on the Footstool which contains formal Manifestation;

the ‘Throne’

itself constitutes

formless

Mani-

festation, ‘made of light’, and that is why it is called ‘the Throne which encompasses’ (A/-‘ Arsh al-muhit), in conformity with the teaching of the Qoran, since the formless cosmos in fact encompasses the formal cosmos. From the Footstool ‘Glory’ and ‘Mercy’ radiate as far as the earth, ‘Mercy’ prevailing over ‘Glory’ as it is proclaimed in the inscription on the Throne already quoted:‘ My Mercy precedeth My Wrath.’ Again according to Ibn Abi Hatim ‘Allah created the Throne out of green emerald, and made

for it four columns

of red rubies; the distance which

separates one column from another is that of a journey of eighty thousand years . .. and the columns are carried by eight Angels, and it is like a dome above the Angels and the world’. The same exegetist mentions the following hadith: ‘In truth, the Throne (which is here identified with Av-Rah, “the Spirit”) was on the water (cosmic possibilities), and when Allah created the Heavens, He placed it above the seven Heavens, and He

placed the clouds (sahab or ghamam)? as a sieve for the rain (the 1 See on this subject: ‘Av-Ruh’ and Note sur l’angélologie de l'alphabet arabe, by René Guénon, in Etudes Traditionnelles, August-September 1938.—-As for the Throne and the Footstool we may note that Al-Ghazaéli compares the first to the heart and the second to the brain. According to the Qoran (surat

al-Bagarah,

U1, 256), ‘His Footstool

(Kursi) extends

over (wasi‘a) (or ‘‘en-

compasses”’) the Heavens and the Earth, and their conservation causes Him no labour; He is the Most High (A/-‘Al/i), the Immense (A/-‘A zim)’. ‘Causes Him no labour’ signifies that He remains unaffected by the creative Act and the functions connected with it. 2 ‘Do they expect that Allah will come to them in the shadow of a cloud and with the Angels?’ (Qoran, sdvat al-Bagarah, IT, 210).—-The ‘clouds’ constitute the ‘partition’ (barzakh) which separates two different cosmic degrees, without which the lower degree would be absorbed in the higher degree; such a barzakh

always presents itself as a ‘void’.

109

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

Graces, whether spiritual or psychic or even physical, emanate from the Throne, of which the visible sky is the terrestrial image); were it not thus, the earth would be submerged’ (Manifestation

would

be

‘annihilated’,

or rather

‘re-absorbed’

or

‘re-integrated’ by the incommensurability of the Divine Mercy, as if the Name Rahim were replaced by the Name Rahman.! Ibn ‘Abbas adds: ‘Rain water derives from a sea situated between Heaven and the earth, and this sea possesses a multitude of waters ... Allah entrusted the rain to the Angels, and not one drop descends without being accompanied by an Angel who places it on the spot that Allah has chosen, whether on the earth (the physical earth), or in the sea (al-bahr al-muhit), “the sea which surrounds’’, that is to say the subtle world which surrounds the gross world as the formless world surrounds the formal world, and as a fortiori God surrounds the formless world and with it all the lower worlds); and when the Angel thus places the drop on the earth, Allah produces from it corn and grasses (indispensable gifts for physical life, for man on the one hand and for animals on the other). And when the Angel places the drop in the sea, Allah creates of it small and large pearls’ (gifts concerning the life of the soul and the spirit, or again, concerning respectively the “Lesser Mysteries’ and the ‘Great Mysteries’). We have seen that Al-‘Arsh is equivalent to Buddhi; this equivalence emerges in a very explicit way from the following passage of the Mänava-Dharma-Shästra (1, 12-15): ‘In the primordial Egg (Hivanyagarbha), the Lord (Brahma) lived one Divine year, then He caused the Egg to divide into two parts; and from these two parts He formed Heaven and earth; between

them He placed the atmosphere, the eight celestial regions and the permanent abyss of the waters . .. And, before the inner sense (manas) and individual consciousness (ahankära), He produced the great intellectual Principle (Mahat, Buddht) . . .’ These eight celestial regions correspond to the circumference of Al-‘ Arsh; they are constituted, like the latter, of the four cardinal 1 Bearing in mind the symbolism of the ‘lower Waters’, this sieve will be seen as the passage from Cause to effect; by this ‘passage’, the simultaneity of the

possibilities of formal Manifestation is translated in ‘effective’ and ‘successive’ mode. A ‘simultaneous’, ‘instantaneous’ or ‘total’ manifestation would in sum

be equivalent to a cataclysm. IIO

AN-NÜR

points and the other intermediary points; the eight ‘Gods’ (Devas) who preside there are exactly identical with the eight ‘Angels’ who carry the Throne (4/-Malä'ikatu hamalat al-‘ Arsh) and who are likewise placed at the cardinal points and at the intermediary points. The ‘abyss of the waters’ is situated beneath Heaven as the ‘sea’ is situated beneath the Throne from which emanates the ‘rain’; finally, Mahat is identified with Heaven in so far as

the latter is the first ‘region of Light’, and thus as it were the ‘abode’ of Mahat into which He penetrates and from which, as Trimurti, He penetrates and rules, all the worlds; in the same

way, the four Archangels (Jibra’il, Mika’il, Isvafil and ‘ Izra’il) inhabit the Heavens beneath the luminous vault of the Throne,

and they are identified with the latter in so far as it embraces the totality of all the worlds, and in so far as they are so to speak the ‘functions’ of the “Throne which surrounds’ (Al-‘ Arsh al-Muhit). Ar-Rüh (‘The Spirit’) which resides at the centre of the ‘Throne’ is none other than Brahma who is born from the ‘golden Egg’: ‘Then, the Lord subsisting by Himself (Svayambhu), who is not visible, appeared . . . making the Universe visible . . . and dissipated the darkness (the Fiat Lux of Genesis) ... He whom the Intellect alone can perceive . . . having resolved to make the diverse creatures come forth from His Substance, produced first the waters; and He placed in them a seed.! The seed became an Egg shining like gold, flashing with a thousand rays, and in this Egg the Lord Himself was born as Brahma, the Grandfather of all the worlds’ (Mänava-DharmaShastra 1, 6-9). According to the traditions (ahddith), ‘the greatest of the Angels is called A7-Rüh (“The Spirit”); Allah says (in the Qoran): “The day when the Spirit and the Angels will raise 1The

‘Lord’,

the

‘waters’

and

the

‘seed’

correspond

respectively,

in the

symbolism of the Arabic alphabet, to the letters alif and b& and to the diacritical point under the bd. The Pen, the guarded Tablet and first drop of Ink which fell from the Pen signify the same Realities; this first drop is the diacritical point of the ba—symbolically identical with the golden Egg—from which emanate the ‘letters’ the totality of which will constitute the manifested Universe. When using the term ‘Archangels’ to designate the quaternary ‘polarization of the cosmic Spirit, it is in the ordinary meaning of the term, which simply establishes an elementary hierarchical distinction between ‘Angels’ and ‘Archangels’, and not in the strictly Dionysian sense which places other angelic hierarchies above the Archangels. LIRE

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

themselves in ranks’’—and also: “Allah, Lord of the steps (Ma‘arij) by which the Angels and the Spirit will mount towards Him’’,—and again: “The Angels and the Spirit have descended in it (in the night of the Revelation)”. In truth, this Angel whose name is Ar-Rüh will on the Day of the Resurrection occupy one rank by Himself because of his immensity, and the totality of all the Angels constitutes another rank; and the Spirit has power over the Angels by his immensity.’ As for the Angels in general, it is said that ‘Allah created the Angels of radiant Light, and they are ranked in different categories: there are those who resemble the sons of Adam in their constitution and others who inhabit the Heavens; there are others again who inhabit the earth, and lastly those to whom has been entrusted the task of guarding the sons of Adam; in addition there are the bearers of the Throne; and (above them all) there are Ar-Rüh, Jibra’il,

Mtk@ il, Israfil and ‘Izr@il’.

‘Allah created

the four

generous Angels, and he placed in their hands the affairs of creatures and the direction of the whole Universe; He made of

Jtbra’il the Lord of revelation and of message, of Mika’il the Lord of rains and of crops, of ‘Izra’il the Lord of the carrying away of souls (death) and of Zsräfil the Lord of the trumpet (of the Last Judgment).’+ It is clear from these quotations that A7-R%h (or Sayyidna Mitätrün) corresponds, as was said above, to the creative Principle, Brahma; a correspondence which emerges very clearly from what is said of A7-Rüh in Genesis: ‘The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.’ Sayyidna Isra@fil and Sayyidna Mika’il are identified by their respective functions with two fundamental and complementary aspects of Vishnu, 1 According to St Denys the Areopagite—with all due deference to those who, by a great act of ‘demolition’, wish to impose on us a ‘Pseudo-Denys’, a name of which they do not even feel the unmannerliness (why must the holy author of the Areopagitics, in his venerable name, drag after him like an iron ball the memory of a historians’ quarrel?)—according then to St Denys, the first angelic order, that of the Thrones,

round the Divinity’, which flection of the latter in the doctrine of the same Saint whatever exoteric theology are

concerned

here,

envisaged

not

existential or cosmic manifestation. I12

Cherubim and Seraphim ‘makes a circle

is another way of saying that it is the direct recosmic Substance. Ar-Rük (or An-Nür) is in the ‘the simple Ray of Light in itself’; in fact, and may say, it is really with the ‘Holy Spirit’ that we in its Divine

transcendence,

but

in its

AN-NÜR

for both affirm Manifestation, the first in a ‘vertical sense’ (or according to the ‘principial dimension’), namely by the resurrection of the dead at the end of the cycle, and the second in a ‘horizontal sense’ (or according to the ‘manifested dimension’), by giving life and subsistence to beings. As for Sayyidnd Jibra’il and Sayyidnä ‘Izra’il, they are identified by their respective functions with two fundamental and complementary aspects of Shiva: both do away with, transform or absorb Manifestation, the first in a ‘vertical sense’ or ‘positively’ by leading back Manifestation towards the Principle, and the second in a ‘horizontal sense’ or ‘negatively’, namely by destruction (or rather by dissociation, separation or decomposition). On the other hand, the five Archangels are reflected even in the corporeal order, where they are mirrored in the five elements which are at the basis, not of Manifestation as such, but of the

sensible world which symbolizes it in an integral manner. Just as Israfil gives life thanks to the force of the Principle (b1amri Llah), hence in a quasi ‘supernatural’ or ‘miraculous’ manner, and not through a chain of causation of a purely ‘physical’ or ‘horizontal’ order, while Mikda’il gives it in a ‘natural’ fashion, that is to say by means of ordinary causality, in like manner there exists a completely analogous distinction between the air, the primordial and universal food in the framework of the terrestrial world, and water, a relatively secondary food compared to air. Again: Jibra’il reduces Manifestation to its Principle in principial mode, whilst ‘Jzva@’zl reduces it to ‘nothingness’ in manifested mode; in the same way fire reduces matter by a sort of direct ‘essential’ integration, whilst the earth absorbs it by indirect ‘material’ integration; finally, A7-Rüh will here be represented by ether, which contains and penetrates the other elements, exactly as the ‘Spirit’ contains and penetrates the ‘Archangels’. According to Ibn ‘Abbas, Jsräfil requested Allah that He should give him the force of the seven Heavens, and Allah gave it to him; and (that He should give him) the force of the seven earths, and Allah gave it to him; and (that He should give him) the force of the winds, and Allah gave it to him; and (that He should give him) the force of the mountains, and Allah gave it to him; and (that He should give him) the force of men and of

H

113

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

jinn (literally: of the two heavy ones, ‘that is to say those who are not created of Light like the Angels, but of earth in the one case and of fire in the other, elements whose materiality is expressed by the idea of heaviness), and Allah gave it to him; and (that He should give him) the force of lions, and Allah gave it to him’. These requests signify the receptive predisposition of the angelic Intelligence; it is clearly the divine Force which this Archangel ‘contemplates’ or ‘realizes’, and there is no manifestation of force which does not derive from him, as indeed the

description given above indicates, although in an inverse sense. But to continue: ‘And from the soles of his feet to his head, he

has hairs and mouths and tongues over which are stretched veils; he glorifies Allah with each tongue in a thousand languages, and Allah creates from his breath a million Angels who glorify Allah until the Day of the Resurrection, and these are: the “Near Ones” (Al-Mugarrvabiin) who are close to Allah, and the “Bearers of the Throne” (Al-Mala’tkatu hamalat al-‘ Arsh), and the “Magnanimous” (4/-Kiräm), and the “Scribes” (of destinies) (Al-Katibuin); and they all have the aspect of Jsrafil. And Isvafil looks each day and each night three times towards Hell and approaches without being seen and weeps; and he grows thin and becomes like a bowstring and weeps bitter tears.’! ‘As for Mitka’il, Allah created him five thousand years after Israfil; he has hairs of saffron from his head to his feet, and his

wings are of green topaz; and, on each hair, he has a million faces, and, in each face he has a million eyes, and he weeps from each eye, out of pity for the sinners among the believers; and in each face he has a million mouths, and in each mouth he has a

million tongues; each tongue speaks a million languages, and 1This calls to mind Shiva devoting himself to austerities on the sacred Mount Kaïlasa. On the subject of Sayyidna Isräfl, there also exists the following description: ‘He is the Angel who must sound the trumpet; and it is said that Allah created Isvafil five thousand years before Mika’il and presented to him the horn. Tradition also recounts that the horn has the form of a beast’s horn and it contains dwellings like the cells of a bee’s honey comb, and it is in these that the souls (of the dead) repose. Its length is the distance which is between Heaven

and earth,

and when

the days here below

are

accomplished,

Allah

orders him to sound the horn; and the souls come out of these cells (which are the tombs), and they are in flames; and he sounds the horn three times: first the

sound of terror, then the sound of a cry, and finally the sound of the resurrection. It is recounted also that Israfil possesses innumerable wings; and Allah gives him more force and greatness than the other Angels.’

114

AN-NÜR

each tongue asks pardon from Allah for believers and sinners; and from each eye fall seventy-thousand tears, and Allah creates from each tear a single angel in the image of Mika’il, and they glorify Allah until the Day of the Resurrection. Their name is Cherubim (Karibi’ tin); they are the helpers of Mika’il and they lean down over the rain and the plants and the crops and the fruits; and there is nothing in the seas, nor fruits on the trees, nor plants on the earth, which are not under his domina-

tion and for which he has not the care’.? As for Jtbr@il, Allah created him five hundred years after Mik@il; he has one thousand six-hundred wings and he has hairs of saffron from his head to his feet; and the sun is between

his eyes, and on each hair he has the brightness of the moon and of the stars; and each day he enters the Ocean of Light three hundred and seventy times. And when he comes forth, there falls from each wing a million drops and Allah creates from each drop a single angel in the image of Jzbra’il, and they glorify Allah until the Day of the Resurrection; these are the ‘Spiritual Beings’ (Rähäntyün).? 1 Another version: ‘It had been given into his care to provide for the subsistence of the sons

of Adam,

as well as to guard the birds and the animals

(of the earth) and the rain and the clouds and the seas and the trees and all the plants. And as for his attributes, tradition recounts that he has a green plumage of the colour of emerald; on each plume are a thousand faces, and in each face a thcusand mouths and in each mouth a thcusand tongues, which ask pardon of Allah for the sinners of the community of Muhammad. And Allah creates each day seventy thousand Angels according to the attributes of Mik@’il,

who

have, like him, care of the subsistence

of beings. And

it is re-

counted that M7ka'il, since he caught sight of the fire (of Hell), laughed no more nor smiled for terror of what he had seen of the fire, and for fear of Him

who governs with a terrible and irresistible force’. 2 Another

version:

‘He has six thousand

wings; and between

each pair of

wings is a distance (from one wing to another) of a journey of five hundred years; and he has plumage which goes from his head to his feet and which is of the colour of saffron; and each plume looks like the light of the sun. And tradition recounts that he plunges each day three hundred and sixty times into the Ocean of Light, and when he comes forth drops of Light fall from him, and Allah creates from these drops angels in the image of Jibra’il, who glorify Allah until the Day of the Resurrection. And the meaning of the name /ibra’il, which is Syriac, is in Arabic: servant of Allah (‘Abdw’ Llah).’ The Archangel appearing to the Prophet is described in the following way: ‘His wings stretched from the East to the West. It is said that his feet were yellow, his wings green, and that he carried a necklace of red rubies, or according to others, of coral. His hair had the colour of coral, his brow was light, his face luminous;

his teeth were of a

radiant brightness; between his two eyes were written the words: There is no

divinity but God, and Muhammad is the Prophet of God’.

II5

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

‘And the appearance of the Angel of death is like unto that of Isräfil in his faces and tongues and wings and immensity and force, neither less nor more.’ According to a tradition which goes back to the Prophet himself, ‘When Allah created the Angel of death, He veiled him before creatures with a million veils. His

immensity is vaster than the Heavens and the two earths (East and West); the eastern and western countries here below (in the terrestrial world) are between his hands like a dish on which all things have been set, or like a man who had been put between his hands that he might eat him, and he eats of him what he wishes;1 and thus the Angel of death turns the world this way and that just as men turn their money in their hands. He is attached by seventy thousand chains; each chain has the length of a journey of a thousand years; and the angels do not approach him, and they do not know his whereabouts, and they do not hear his voice, and they do not know his vocation. And when Allah created death, He gave it for master the Angel of death; the latter said: “‘Lord, what is death?’ Then Allah commanded

the veils that they should uncover death so that the Angel might see it and Allah said to the Angels: “Stop and look, this is death.” And all the Angels remained upright and said: “Our Lord, hast thou created a creation more terrible than this?’’ Allah said: “I have created it, and I am greater than it, and every creature shall taste it.” And Al/ah said then: “Oh ‘Jzva@’il take it! I have put it under thee.” ‘Zzr4'il replied: “Oh Divinity, by what force shall I take it? for it is greater than I.” And Allah gave him the force; and ‘Jzva’il took death, and it dwelt in his hand;? and

death said: “Oh Lord, allow me to call out in the Heavens just once”. And Allah allowed it; and he called out loud: “I am death

who separates friends! I am death who separates husband from wife! I am death who separates daughters from mothers! I am death who separates the brother from his sisters! I am death ? This image corresponds exactly to that of Kali—or of Yama—devouring a ~ human body; this does not symbolise solely ‘death’ in the ordinary meaning of the word, but more generally ‘time’ which engulfs everything which is situated in it. ‘Time’ must be here understood in a sense which goes beyond the temporal condition: we are here concerned with universal transformation and not its ‘physical’ mode alone. * In Hindu terms, this would be expressed by saying death is a Shakti of the Deva ‘Izva’ il.

116

AN-NÜR

who destroys houses and palaces! I am death who fills the tombs! I am death who seeks you and finds you, ‘even though you were on high towers’ (Qoran, IV, 80)! And there remains no creature who does not taste me.” It is said also that ‘Jzra’il seized the souls of the sons of Adam and of other beings, such as the birds and the animals of the earth, and all that possess a soul. Tradition recounts that his attributes are like those of Zsrafil, and that he is seated on a throne in the sixth Heaven: he has four wings which spread from the East to the West; it is said again that the rest of his body is covered with as many eyes as there are creatures, and that they look towards all that possesses a soul; and when he seizes a soul, the eye which had looked at it closes; and when all creatures are dead, all these eyes which are on his body will be closed, and there will remain only his eye (which concerns himself) ;? and he knows that only this eye will remain to him (which will be extinguished in its turn at the end of the Universe’).’* 1 This extension of ‘death’ to inanimate things indicates that we are really concerned here with the universal function of Shiva which embraces all Manifestation. 2 According to the cosmology of the Sioux, and of other North American Indians, at the creation of the world a bison was placed in the North-West, in order to retain the waters of the sea. Each year this bison loses a hair and when he has lost them all, our world will have arrived at its term. Each of the

feet of the bison corresponds to one of the four ages of the terrestrial cycle; and the Sioux affirm that in our days the bison is almost completely hairless, and that there remains to him only one foot. The bull of the Dharma, in the Hindu tradition, is exactly the same symbol: at the end of each of the four ages (yugas), this bull withdraws one of its feet from the earth. It may be noted in passing that this remarkable analogy is an indication, amongst others, of the hyperborean affinities which exist between the two traditional forms just mentioned. 3 As-Suyüti recounts in his Kitab ad-durar al-hisan: ‘It is said that the Angel of death has four faces: one face before him, and a face on his head, then a face behind his back, and finally a face beneath his feet; and he seizes the souls of

the Prophets and the Angels while regarding them with the face which is on his head, and the souls of the believers while regarding them with the face which is before him, and the souls of the unbelievers while regarding them with the face which is behind

his back, and finally the souls of the demons

while

regarding them with the face which is beneath his feet. And it is said also that the Angel of death turns the world between his hands as a mortal turns his money. And his body is covered with eyes to the number of the creatures, and when a creature dies here below, one eye is extinguished on the body of the Angel. Tradition also says that Allah created under the Throne a tree whose leaves are of the number of the creatures, and which is called the ‘‘Lote-tree of

IT?

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

The obvious inadequacies of the descriptions quoted above, their complexity which is difficult to grasp at the first attempt and even their apparent ‘monstrosity’, merely reflect the impossibility of rendering into human language the celestial Realities; human thought, being unfitted to grasp simultaneously a great diversity of aspects, above all when their subtility and complexity appear to imply contradictions and when they are also ceaselessly in ‘movement’—human thought, to resume, can only contain a broken, congealed, simplified and paradoxical image of the Realities which surpass it; it is the very transcendence of what it has to contain which so to speak breaks the natural bounds of expression. To describe a celestial Reality is, to employ an analogy, to describe a melody, or more particularly a polyphonic melody, or again, to employ another image, it is to describe the infinitely differentiated and combined movements of the waves of the ocean to a blind man who has never heard tell of the sea. The very immensity of what has to be expressed by limited and feeble means gives to the images, on the one hand, the character of sketches, and on the other an imprint of

horror which well expresses the incompatibility between the celestial ‘dimensions’ and terrestrial ‘matter’. The essential identity between Svayambhü (‘He Himself’) and Brahma born from the golden arbha) permits an understanding of this teaching “Allah was in a cloud (ghamäm), and above Him

who subsists by Egg (Hiranyagof the Prophet: there was no air,

and below him there was no air;! then he created His Throne on theextremity”’ (sidrat al-muntaha) ; and when aservant must dieand there remain to him not more than forty days to live, a leaf of this tree falls on ‘Jzva@’il; the Angels call this man dead, although he is still living on earth for forty days.’ This number forty, which is found in diverse traditional forms in connection with the posthumous

states, is the numerical

value of the letter mim, whose

meaning amongst others is death (al-mawt). The texts quoted—which the author has drawn from various Arabic treatises of which he knows no translation —belong to a very complex descriptive symbolism, characteristic for Islam as for the Semitic mind in general; such a symbolism, which in short compensates for the absence of painted or sculptured images, would doubtless have less point in a civilization like that of the Hindus, for example, where sacred images (pratikas) have become the predominant forms of symbolic language. * God, in so far as He ‘prepares’ to create, is clearly identified with Being, in relation to which Non-Being is, symbolically speaking, ‘nothingness’, that is to say, non-determination; but there is in relation to Being also a lower non-

118

AN-NUR

the water.’ In fact, the ‘Spirit of God’ (Ruah Elohim) of Genesis, which ‘moved on the face of the waters’, is God, but It is also identified with the ‘Divine Manifestation’, the ‘Throne on the

water’; and in Hindu cosmogony, ‘He who walks on the waters’ (Narayana) is not only Being polarizing itself into Purusha and Prakriti,—the latter representing existential ‘water’,—but also the Divine Spirit manifested, Brahma. It is said that Närädyana, after having placed the golden Egg in the water, ‘was Himself born again as Brahma (who is the ‘central’ and ‘creative’ aspect of Mahat); but Vishnu (who is the ‘conserving’ aspect) has likewise the name of Naäräyana, because formless Himself, He moves on the waters of formal manifestation. Vishnu Narayana, or by extension Mahat (or Buddht), is thus the direct and primordial manifestation of the supreme Ndrdyana, as the formal Waters are the reflection of the formless Waters; it is

important to bear this in mind when one encounters apparently divergent acceptations of the Arabic terms ‘Arsh, Rüh and Nir. In other words, Al-‘Arsh, like An-Nür and Ar-Rih, is an ‘essential’ or ‘vertical’ Reality which, as such, can be considered

independently of the levels on which it affirms itself; it may therefore be said that the Throne in itself, and independently of the level of reality, is the ‘partition’ which separates the Principle from its refraction; but this ‘partition’ is at the same time an ‘opening’, for not only does it hide the incommensurability of Allah, but it expresses it and transmits it by Ar-R&üh. The ‘Throne’ and the ‘Water’, on whatever level they are envisaged, are inseparable; the Throne would in fact have no reason for being without something in relation to which it supports the Divinity; and the ‘Water’ is conceivable only if it is separated from its transcendent Principle by a principial discontinuity, without which it would be identical with this Principle. It is therefore quite permissible to define A7-Rüh as the affirmation of Unity in all the degrees of universal Existence, which is equally true for An-Nür, although in a slightly different determination, as the hadith quoted indicates, and this is the symbolic ‘nothingness’ from which God draws the world; it is in a certain sense the infinite distance

which separates pure Being from the possibilities of manifestation; possibilities, indeed, can in no wise be conceived as ‘parts’ of Being.

these

119

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

relationship; Ar-Rüh is most often figured as a ‘centre’, a ‘ray’, a ‘descent’, a ‘presence’ or ‘immanence’,

while the nature of

An-Nür can be rendered by an expression such as ‘Divine Substance’, with all the reservations imposed by the use of such a term; as for Al-‘ Arsh, it has more an aspect of ‘totality’ and of ‘integration’; it is the ‘circumference’ of which A7-Räh will be the ‘centre’ and An-Nür the ‘matter’. A last point which deserves to be mentioned is the following: according to a hadith, Christ is called Rähu’ Lläh; it is said also,

having regard solely to the human nature of Christ, that ‘Jesus (Sayyidnad ‘Isd) is equal, before Allah, to Adam; He created him of earth, then He said to him: “Bel” And he was’ (sérat al-Ma‘idah, V, 52). Jesus and Adam are in fact alike in having had no human father: both of them are Raju’ Lläh; and this enables us to understand the meaning of the adoration of Adam by the Angels (Qoran, sürat al-Bagarah, II, 32), who themselves are ‘peripheral’ beings—although ‘Iluminous —and who by this fact are subordinate to Av-Rah, with which must also be included its ‘functions’, the four Archangels. A7-Rüh might be symbolized by the figure 1, the Angels by the figure 2 and Adam by the figure 3; now the figure 2 is nearer Unity than the figure 3, but the latter reflects unity in an integral manner, adequately and not ‘fragmentarily’ like the figure 2; and thus the Angels, although superior to Adam by their substance which is Nar, ‘Light’, are none the less made in the image only of ‘Aspects’ of God, in the sense that each Angel reflects only a single one of these ‘Aspects’ or ‘Names’ and is ignorant of the others, whilst Adam, although lower than the Angels by his substance which is ‘hardened earth’ (fin l&z1b), is made directly in the image of God and reflects God in His integral Unity. The Angels are situated in the ‘proximity’ of the Throne, since they are made of its ‘luminous’ substance; but they remain in its periphery, the centre being occupied by Ar-Rih; now Sayyidna Adam, in his earthly existence, is far off from the Throne, but he is situated in the central ray which emanates therefrom, at the end of the vertical axis which is the ‘place’ of Revelation.

120

CHAPTER 9

Earthly concomitances of the Love of God THE notion of the ‘love of God’ evokes rightly or wrongly the image of a sentiment directed towards a human person. Such an image seems to contradict both the formless and transcendent character of the Divinity and the spiritual and supernatural character of contemplative love, but in reality there is no'contradiction, in the first place because God effectively assumes, in regard to man, a human aspect,! and further because spirituality, in so far as it is human, necessarily includes the affective element of the soul, whatever be the place or function accorded to it. But when we leave aside this humanization of the Divine, which is both law-giving and merciful, and also this spiritual canalization of human sensibility, we shall see that the ‘love of God’ in itself has nothing limitative as regards the object nor specifically sentimental as regards the subject; it amounts in the last analysis to our choice of the ‘inward dimension’, in conformity with the words of the Gospel: “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.’ Fundamentally it is a question of a choice between the ‘outward’ and the ‘inward’, or between the world and God:? the ‘outward dimension’ is the domain of multiple things, of dispersion and impermanence, and also, correlatively, the domain

of limitation, of egoistic com-

pression and ‘hardness of heart’; the ‘inward dimension’, on the contrary, is the domain of unity, synthesis and permanence, and also, correlatively, the domain of unlimitedness, spiritual 1 The same applies even in Buddhism, in which the Buddhas and the great Bodhisattvas

assume, in practice and

according to need, the function

of the

personal Divinity. 2 Or Nirvana, for what counts here is not the aspect of personality, but that of

absoluity, infinitude and salvation. I21

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

dilatation and ‘melting of the heart’. Love of God thus appears as a fundamental change of emphasis or tendency, or as a reversing of an initial and natural movement—a movement which is inverted by reason of the perversion of our fallen nature; moreover this reversal or conversion must constantly be renewed even within the framework of a stabilized spiritual love, for the power of the ego is always there, and the movement towards the Inward always demands a certain separation from phenomena. The man who ‘loves God’—whether he be Monotheist or Buddhist—is thus basically one who dwells in or is orientated towards the ‘inward dimension’. In this attitude there is both immobility and movement: spiritual immobility is opposed to the endless movement of things situated in duration, while spiritual movement, on the contrary, is opposed to the natural passivity of the soul, which is but an aspect of ‘hardness of heart’.

The love of God implies, not only that man should make himself independent of the outward dimension as such, and refuse its exteriorizing contents, but also that within this dimension— viewed now in so far as it is the mirror of the Inward—he should spontaneously give his preference to things which manifest Inwardness;

in other words, the love of God is projected in-

directly upon things which are its symbols or vehicles and which, because of this fact, may be said to prolong the Inward in the outward. This projection is all the more legitimate in that, strictly speaking, nothing is situated outside God and outwardness is basically only an appearance. The spiritual man will therefore be disposed, at least a priori, to prefer the almost paradisal virginity of nature to human works;

but

he will

also

love

sanctuaries,

because

amongst

human works the sanctuary is Divine: it is as if virgin nature, in all its reflected divinity, manifested itself within the very framework of human art, transposing the latter on to the Divine plane; virgin nature and sacred art may thus be likened to alpha and omega, opposing each other in a complementary manner like the Earthly Paradise and the Heavenly Jerusalem. Each in its own way manifests the Inward in the outward, and 122

LOVE

OF

GOD

leads towards the Inward the man who understands their signs. What the symbolism and beauty of virgin nature and of sacred art offer us is far from being reducible to mere ‘sensible consolations’, as the majority of theologians would no doubt consider them to be; such a moralistic notion in fact does far

less than justice to the nature of things and takes no account of the metaphysical transparency of phenomena; basically it expresses only a sentimental subjectivity.! In earthly forms of heavenly inspiration there is much more than satisfactions of a more or less passional kind: there is in them something of the Divine Archetypes, which they manifest under the aspects of both truth and beauty. In their quality of ‘exteriorizations of the Inward’ they encourage the ‘interiorization of the outward’ and thereby retrace that function of Revelation and of the Avatära which is to ‘descend’ in order to ‘cause to rise’, to be

diversified in order to unite, to become human in order to deify. To the love of nature and of sanctuaries is added—and must be added—the love of the company of holy men:? just as the love of sanctuaries, made by human hand, makes up for the renunciation of human buildings, so the love of the company of holy men, and thus of a collectivity, makes up for the renunciation of human society. Further, just as the sanctuary is a ‘natural building’ in the sense that it is basically the work of God, so the spiritual collectivity is a ‘society of hermits’, since spirituality is precisely this tendency to transcendent Inwardness.? Virgin nature is the art of God, and sacred art—executed by men—springs from the same Divine Source; solitude is the gateway to Inwardness, and spiritual company is, as we have seen, 1 Only the prodigious insufficiency of this notion can explain the acceptance of an art as opaque—that is to say, deprived of all transparency and all alchemy—as that of the Renaissance and the Baroque, not to mention contemporary aberrations whose truly infernal formalism no longer even pertains to the order of ‘sensible consolations’; ‘desolations’ would be more appropriate. 2 This is what the Hindus call satsanga, a word which has the meaning of ‘association’ with the ‘ascending quality’, sat. 3 Sacred dress belongs to the same order as the sanctuary, and sacred nudity belongs to the same order as virgin nature. It should be added that in most traditional civilizations, dress always has a more or less sacred character.

123

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

a collective solitude and an interiorization by reciprocal influences. This proves that spiritual attitudes are never really privative limitations or prejudices; they are always realized on the plane of what seems to be their opposite, which implies that fundamentally every village and every town is normally the extension of a sanctuary and ought to remain such, and that every human collectivity is normally a spiritual association, and ought consequently to realize ‘collective solitude’ by being the vehicle of the interiorizing tendency.? It is important to distinguish—and this indeed is obvious— between the quality of inwardness proper to any given outward phenomena and the inward or interiorizing way of looking at all things: the first point of view is objective and the second subjective, but neither point of view does away with the other; nothing indeed is more false than the pretence that all things are in all respects of equal worth, on the grounds that only the ‘spirit’ counts, which amounts to saying that the qualities of things have no sufficient reason and efficacy. In reality it is essential to opt, as far as is possible, for things which are in conformity with the love of God, and then to realize this love— and this is the second phase—within the context of whatever is imposed on us by destiny; on the basis of objective distinctions, and without confusing points of view, man can always realize an integration or synthesis, and thus arrive at the transcendent indistinction. Without this objective basis, indifference is no more than hypocritical and foolish affectation; ordinary imperfection is preferable to a false wisdom. The key to the whole of the doctrine outlined above is basically to be found in the theophanic character of the world in its positive aspects: nature is a theophany, and so is the sanctuary; and so, above all, is the living and central content of these two environments, namely man;

but in this context, man

means of necessity spiritual man, who is ‘creation’ like virgin nature, and ‘revelation’ like the sanctuary or like all liturgy in general. One of the main errors of a would-be but ignorant spirituality is a contempt for environment, either in the name of It is this that Islam aims to realize in making of each man a priest and of each home a mosque, and in plunging all social existence in religion without leaving room for any purely profane element.

124

LOVE

OF

GOD

‘pure spirit’! or under cover of a cult of poverty improperly understood.? In traditional civilizations, nothing lies outside the ‘liturgical’ and eschatological environment, and no profane ‘culture’ is there to shatter this framework or ‘collective dream’. To be sure,

the worldly element insinuates itself everywhere, and is even capable of producing partial deteriorations of many kinds, but the sacred framework neutralizes these tendencies and prevents the general environment from ceasing to be what it must be and from offering what it must offer.

By definition, man is a synthesis: this is to say that everything is to be found in him, with the result that his links with his

environment have always something relative about them, at least in principle, and however important they may be in themselves. Man is a synthesis, not only as an isolated individual, but also, though in a different way, in the couple man-woman, the

bipolarization of the primordial androgyne: under normal conditions conjugal love synthesizes the elements ‘virgin nature’, ‘sanctuary’ and ‘spiritual company’, because man himself synthesizes these three elements. If sexuality can be rejected through ascetism, because of its aspect of ‘outwardness’ or ‘exteriorization’, it can equally be integrated, by contemplation, in the ‘love of God’, by virtue of the quality of inwardness which belongs to it in principle, and which is also proper to man as such and to union as such.ÿ 1 All the erroneous simplifications that one meets with on the subject of Hinduism, for example, have come from forgetting that Hinduism essentially amounts to an ‘environment’. Modernized Hindus are the first to lose sight of this fact and their unawareness in this respect forms part of the arsenal of the modern spirit. The same remark also applies to the practice of the virtues: Shri Shankaracharya was assuredly not a moralist in the narrow sense of the term, but he could not but possess in the highest possible degree the essential virtues and he would indeed have been astonished had he been presented with an aspirant who despised the virtues on the pretext of pure jndna. Virtues make the man,

and it is to man,

and not to a human

fragment, that Advaita-

Vedanta is addressed. 2 It is known that the Curé d’Ars, that ‘pauper of paupers’, took an extreme care in decorating his church. While he deprived himself of everything, nothing was too precious for the house of God. 3 Whence the sacramental quality of marriage. For Moslems, ‘marriage is the half of religion’ (hadith), a conception which, on the one hand, transcends,

125

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

‘Women, perfumes and prayer’: these three things, according to a famous hadith ‘were made worthy of love’ to the Prophet;

and this symbolism provides us with a concise doctrine of the outward

reverberations

of the love of the Inward.

Woman,

synthesizing in her substance virgin nature, the sanctuary and spiritual company, is for man what is most lovable; in her highest aspect, she is the formal projection of merciful and infinite Inwardness in the outward; and in this regard she assumes a quasi-sacramental and liberating function. As for ‘perfumes’, they represent qualities or beauties that are formless, exactly in the same way as music; that is to say that side by side with the formal projection of Inwardness, there exists also a complementary formless projection, symbolized, not by visual or tangible qualities, but by auditory and olfactory ones; perfumes are silent music. As for ‘prayer’, the third element mentioned in the hadith, its

function is precisely to lead from outward to Inward, and it both consecrates and transmutes the qualitative elements of the outward realm; from this it may be seen that the ternary comprised in the saying of Muhammad, far from being of an astonishing arbitrariness and a shocking worldliness—as is believed by those who have no idea either of Oriental symbolism in general or of the Islamic perspective in particular—provides on the contrary a doctrine which is entirely homogeneous, and which is founded, not on the moral or ascetical alternative!—

that goes without saying—but on the metaphysical transparency

as does the sacrament, the biological utilitarianism of moral theology, and on the other, is diametrically opposed to the insolent libertinism of the world; it

is moreover the element of ‘profanation’ which relates fornication to the ‘sin against the Holy Ghost’, for to make oneself god in a gratuitous and trivial manner is a usurption which amounts to spiritual suicide. As regards the intrinsically sacramental character of marriage, it will be recalled that Eve was created because

‘it is not good that man should be alone’, and also that

‘I will make him an help meet for him’ (Genesis, II, 18); the Song of Solomon is

likewise situated on a different plane from that of utilitarian morality, which is sufficient socially, but not humanly or spiritually. 1 Principle: to realize God one must reject the world, since the latter moves us away from God in a variety of ways. This perspective is incarnated by Buddha and Christ.

126

LOVE

of be in it

OF

GOD

things.! The nature of the three elements of the ternary can further delineated with the help of the notions—enumerated the corresponding order—of ‘beauty’, ‘love’ and ‘sanctity’: is beauty and love that reflect the Inward in the outward

world, and it is sanctity, or the sacred, which establishes the

bridge—in both directions—between the outward and inward planes.? ‘All that is beautiful comes from the Beauty of God’, says a hadith. Moslems readily affirm the link between beauty and love and show little inclination to dissociate these two elements which for them are but the two faces of one and the same reality; whoever says beauty, says love, and conversely, whereas for Christians mystical love is almost exclusively associated with sacrifice, except in chivalric esoterism and its prolongations.* The hadith just quoted really contains the whole doctrine of the earthly concomitances of the love of God, in conjunction with the following hadith: ‘God is beautiful, and he loves beauty’; this is the doctrine of the metaphysical transparency of phenomena. This notion of beauty or harmony, with all the subtle rhythms 1 Principle: everything that has a natural and positive character is compatible, in principle if not always in fact, with the highest spirituality and may thereby assume the role of support or aid with respect to contemplation and realization. In other words, no positive or natural thing removes us from God by its nature as such; it only does so to the extent that our own attitude forces this function upon it. This perspective is incarnated by Krishna and Muhammad, ? This ternary ‘Sanctity’, ‘Beauty’ and ‘Love’ is also found in the Qoranic formula of consecration and opening: ‘In the Name of God (Allah) the infinitely Good (Rahmaän), the infinitely Merciful (FRahim).’ The Name Rahmdn contains the idea of intrinsic and radiant Bliss—or Beauty—and Rahim contains that of active Goodness. In other words: God intrinsically enjoys His Beauty; He has created the world by the radiance of His Beauty, and He supports, feeds, illumines and saves creatures by the action of His Love; His Beauty contains His Love, and inversely, and the two Qualities are united and immutable in

His Holiness. 3 Some may think and therefore foreign relationship is rooted latter in function of

that the relationship ‘beauty-love’ is purely ‘natural’ to spirituality; this is to overlook that a positive natural in the supernatural and comprises the virtues of the the spiritual value and ritual attitude of man. At the exoteric level, this is the fruitless dialogue between two different orders of

truth, one ascetical and one alchemical; this is stressed once again because, at least on the moral plane, it is the main stumbling block between West and

East. In this connection it may be added that all exoterism—be it de facto or de jure—tends to put humility in the place of intelligence, and merit in the place of beauty, as if these were unavoidable alternatives.

127

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

and symmetries which it implies, has in Islam the widest possible significance: ‘to God belong the most beautiful Names, says the Qoran more than once, and the virtues are called ‘beautiful things’ (husna). ‘Women and perfumes’: spiritually speaking these are forms and qualities, that is to say, they are truths that are both dilating! and fruitful, and they are also the virtues which these truths exhale and which correspond to them within us. ‘Everything on earth is accursed except the remembrance of God’, said the Prophet, a saying which must be interpreted not only from the standpoint of abstraction (tanzth) but also from that of analogy (tashbih); that is to say, the remembrance of God is not only an inwardness free from images and flavours, but also a perception of the Divine in the symbols (&yät) of the world. To put it another way: things are accursed—or perishable2—in so far as they are purely outward and externalizing, but not in so far as they actualize the remembrance of God and manifest the archetypes contained in the inward and Divine Reality. And everything in the world that surrounds us which gives rise to a concomitance of our love of God or of our choice of the ‘inward dimension’, is at the same time a concomitance of the love which

God shows towards us,* or a message of hope from the ‘Kingdom of Heaven which is within you’.

These considerations—or even simply the notion of the ‘love of God’—lead us to a related question, that of the Divine Person in relation to our capacity for love: what, it may be asked, is the 1 The unitary truth of Islam, according to the Qoran, ‘expands the breast’, while error contracts it. Error causes trouble and uproar, whereas truth is the ‘house of Peace’ (dar as-Saläm); truth is beautiful and calm.

2 ‘Everything is perishable save His Face’ (Qovan, XXVIII, 88). 8*The seven heavens and the earth and those who dwell therein praise Him, and there is nothing existent that does not praise Him, but ye understand not this praise . . .’ (Qoran, XVII, 44).—And likewise: ‘The thunder celebrates His praise . . .’ (XIII, 13)—‘Do they not look at the things that God has created, how the shadows (of things) turn from right to left, prostrating themselves before God and humbling themselves?’ (XVI, 48)—‘To Him belong the most beautiful Names; everything in heaven and earth celebrates His praise...’ (LIX, 24). “ This is precisely what is expressed by the turn of phrase: ‘They (woman and perfumes) were made (by God) worthy of love to me.’

128

LOVE

OF

GOD

meaning of the masculine character attributed to God by the Scriptures, and how can man—the male—accord all his love, naturally centered on woman, on a Divine Person who seems to exclude femininity? The answer to this is that the reason for the masculine character of God in Semitic monotheism signifies, not that the Divine Perfection could possibly exclude the feminine perfections (which is unthinkable), but simply that God is totality and not part, and this totality has its image, precisely, in the human male, whence his priority with regard to woman —a priority which in other respects is either relative or nonexistent; it is indeed important to understand that the male is not totality in the same way that God is, and likewise that woman is not ‘part’ in an absolute manner, for each sex, being equally human, shares in the nature of the other. If each of the sexes constituted a pole, God could neither be masculine nor feminine, for it would be an error of language to reduce God to one of two reciprocally complementary poles; but if, on the contrary, each sex represents a perfection, God cannot but possess the characteristics of both—active perfection, however, always having priority over passive perfection. Whether one likes it or not, in Christianity the Blessed Virgin assumes the function of the feminine aspect of the Divinity, at least in practice, and in spite of every theological precaution; however, this observation, far from being a cause of reproach in the eyes of the writer, has on the contrary for him the most positive of meanings. In Islam it is sometimes said that man has a feminine character in relation to God; but from another point of view, the doctrine of the Divine Names implies that the Divinity possesses all conceivable qualities, and if we see in the perfect woman certain qualities which are proper to her, she cannot have them except in so far as they are a reverberation of the corresponding Divine Qualities. The ‘lover of God’, as was said above, cannot but love—a priori

and in a certain fashion at least—that mirror of Heaven which is virgin nature, though he does not necessarily love it in an exclusive manner, since in principle he also loves sanctuaries made by the hand of man; and he loves the solitude of nature and of sanctuaries, but not in an exclusive manner, I

since he 129

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

likewise loves the company of saints, that is to say of men whose tendencies converge inwards, and who are firmly established in the Divine Dimension within. Nevertheless, to say that man is a synthesis means that he carries everything within himself: virgin nature by the virginity of his soul, the sanctuary by the sanctity of his heart and by his remembrance of God, and spiritual company by the truth and loftiness of his thoughts. In other words: to the extent that man is aware of the theophanic character of his earthly surroundings, he is obliged to realize it in himself. For the saint,

a congenial environment never has the

sense of a worldly attachment; it has the function of a ‘spiritual hygiene’ which is both negative and positive: negative, in so far as it reduces troubling and dissipating influences to a minimum, or even excludes them altogether, and positive, in so far as it

allows the soul to benefit from the appeasing influences and supports of ‘interiorization’ which pure and purifying surroundings offer; but it goes without saying that it is the inward reality alone which constitutes the conditio sine qua non of the way.? The concomitances of the love of God must finally be divided into two kinds: on the one hand those which are outward, natural

and in the main passive, namely preferences in conformity with the real and quasi-Divine values of things—of which mention has just been made—and on the other hand those which are inward, supernatural in their plenitude, and active, namely, the fundamental and decisive virtues, or simply virtue as such. Virtue, the active concomitance

of the love of God, can be

either static or dynamic: in the first case it is acceptance of the Divine Will, gratitude, contentment,

patience, recollection; in

the second case it is, complementarily, the gift of self, hope, confidence, generosity, fervour. And this makes it possible to define virtue as such: it is none other than ‘piety’, the integral 1It must also be said that in a world steeped in ‘hypocritical angelism’, the most outward forms, by contrast, assume a spiritual importance which they did not have previously; in a traditional civilization symbolism and beauty are everywhere, and with them intelligence and truth. Be that as it may, the whole question of a favourable environment is related to what has been called ‘sacred geography’: a saint may in a certain manner be identified with a river, a mountain, a sanctuary; Shri Ramana Maharshi seemed almost to be the incarnation of Mount Arunachala, manifestation and earthly seat of Shiva.

130

LOVE

OF

GOD

awareness of our dependence with regard to God, together with all the attitudes of the will and the emotions which this awareness implies. Without this piety or devotional instinct intellectual discernment and contemplative concentration would have neither breadth nor stability. A lack of virtue, though no doubt unable to prevent a high degree of knowledge provided the intelligence be capable of it, nevertheless limits the inward deployment of knowledge and renders it fragmentary; in other words, the best endowed intellect is not proof against every vicissitude if it closes itself to grace, which in part depends on our character and therefore on our total virtue.! The spiritual virtues, in the plural, are the (in principle) endlessly varied modalities of the one virtue, just as colours are the modalities of light. The problem of the ‘love of one’s neighbour’ is obviously contained in that of the ‘love of God’, in the sense that the first is essentially an exteriorized aspect of the second; that is to say,

charity between men retraces in the ‘outward dimension’ something of the ‘inward dimension’. The crucial importance of this charity results from a certain complementarism between ‘God within’ and ‘God in the world’ and from the necessity of an equilibrium between the outward and the Inward. To express this in another way: one cannot enter the inward dimension through egoism; now to transcend oneself in order to meet God is to see oneself (and in a certain manner

God) in others; con-

versely, to strive to see oneself in others in the name of Truth is to contribute powerfully to contemplative interiorization. In the absence of other men—in the case of the hermit, for example —the ego of the contemplative becomes the ego as such and, by this very fact, includes all individualities; its deliverance is virtually that of all believers, whence a sort of analogical magic which scatters its invisible blessings like dew. By laying stress on slightly different nuances, the key-virtues could be named as ‘patience’ and ‘generosity’, which have already been mentioned above: the former virtue consists in 1 Plotinus

has said that it is impossible,

or illegitimate,

to speak of God

without being virtuous. This means that while it is no doubt not impossible for the man devoid of virtues to recite lessons in metaphysics, it is impossible for him to speak of Divine things in a spontaneous and detailed manner, and consequently with authority.

131

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

putting up with more than one thinks one can or must, while the latter, on the contrary, consists in giving more than our nature likes. Generosity implies the absence of all meanness, not only towards creatures, but also and especially in regard to Heaven. With patience one must associate ‘gratitude’, which in a sense looks towards the past as Divine Origin and Norm;! and with generosity one must associate ‘confidence’, which looks towards the future as Divine Goal and Accomplishment.? The future and the past are here situated in the Eternal Present, which is the athanor of all contemplative alchemy; in other words, the static or passive perfections refer to the always present Divine Past and the active or dynamic perfections refer to the already present Divine Future.ÿ As for the virtues of ‘contentment’ and ‘hope’, the latter, being directed towards

the Divine

Future, is related to confidence,

and the former, being rooted in the Divine Past, is closely connected with gratitude. On the one hand are the qualities of recollection and quietude, and on the other those of fervour or

life. If the highest act of the soul is the act of adoration—a participation of the will and the emotions in our awareness of metaphysical causality—virtue as such may be said to be indirectly such an act: it is founded on a respect for beings and things, and thus for their Divine significance. This has nothing to do with the unintelligent and woolly levelling characteristic of a certain ‘liberal spirituality’, for only he is capable of respect who is capable of the contrary; in other words, every creature deserves respect except one who despises what is worthy of respect; the ability to despise one who unjustly despises is a necessary dimension of respect for Existence and its positive contents. Holy anger is aimed at pride and not at the theomorphic person of the proud man, who in principle remains capable of conversion; that the truly virtuous man cannot overlook this distinc-

tion is proved by the fact that he rejoices at the conversion of a 1 Whence the idea of ‘tradition’. pe the eschatological zeal which is a sort of complement of traditional 3 God is ‘the First and the Last and the Outward

LVII, 3).

132

and the Inward’

(Qoran,

LOVE

OF

GOD

sinner. As regards the proud or wicked man, the man who despises what is worthy of respect, his immortal and convertible personality—which alone is unconditionally worthy of respect —is imprisoned in the depths of the conscious ego, at a level where soul and sin coincide; consequently it is not a question of entirely dissociating sin and the sinner, but of despising, together with sin, that part of the soul which is infested by it and which acts by means of it. When one corrects a child, one’s indignation is not directed against its immortal soul, nor exclusively against vice in the abstract, but rather against the amalgam between soul and vice, and thus against this something which we may call concrete or individualized vice.! In the last analysis virtue is our conformity to pure Existence. By this latter is meant, not a philosophical abstraction deriving from the false idea that only phenomena are concrete, but on the contrary, the concrete Universal Substance of which we are modalities, so that if there is anything abstract here, it is on our side, rather as the foam on a wave

could be called ‘abstract’

with regard to the unvarying reality of the water. Existence in its virginity is everything that we ought to be; only its ruptures of equilibrium produce, in a fragmentary and ephemeral way, these privative manifestations which we call evil; it produces them under the impulsion of the inexhaustible possibilities of the Divine Self, in order to manifest the latter in virtue of Divine

Infinitude itself. In manifesting, Existence 1pso facto produces modes of separation, some of which, namely those which mani-

fest this separation least indirectly, are malefic in the measure in which they express separation as such. But Substance itself remains eternally virginal, good and blessed; it is pure and calm; and so also will be the soul which is conscious of its onto-

logical substratum, and which realizes by intelligence and will 1 Ghazäli and others have insisted on this paradox of love: if we must love for God and in God, we must also know how to hate in God. To hate the vicious man in an absolute fashion would be not to desire his conversion: now

no virtuous

man

can have this sentiment,

and this proves that ‘hate in

God’ is enveloped in ‘love in God’, just as—according to the Qoran—Divine Mercy embraces everything. The Gospel insists on love, but the attitude of Christ towards the merchants in the Temple, the scribes and the impenitent towns proves that loving all does not exclude the condemnation of concrete evil, the evil which is vehicled by souls; without these souls, vice would not exist.

133

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

a saving harmony.? Virtue is to resign oneself to the absolutely Real—which is Goodness and Bliss—from the starting point of the earthly dream which is still unaware of this felicity, except in its heavenly fissures. These are ‘everywhere and nowhere’ and we either experience them as gifts, or we obtain them actively, but not without the help of Heaven. A complete doctrine of spirituality could be established on the basis of these four key-notions: intellectual ‘discernment’ between the Real and the illusory; contemplative ‘concentration’ on the Real; ‘virtue’, the inner, active and intrinsic condition;

and ‘environment’, the outward, passive and extrinsic condition. The congenial environment is none other than the outward cosmic reflection of that which in ourselves is truth and virtue;

its forms have a profound and regulating function, illuminating as well as appeasing, with regard to the different regions of human consciousness. Paradise, be it a ‘garden’ or a ‘heavenly city’, constitutes an environment by definition and is even the prototype or quintessence of every possible spiritual environment; but it would be nothing without the supernatural virtue of the angels and the elect, just as their virtue would be inconceivable if it were not both an expression and a mirror of Divine Truth. Love of God is essentially a function of faith; without the intrinsic integrity of the latter, love could not be real. There are many possible kinds of concentration—pride too involves a contraction—but there is no spiritual interiorization without this objective and intellectual element which is truth. To conclude: interiorization is essentially connected with metaphysical discernment and with the idea of the absolute and the infinite; and it is obviously better to have only this idea, without adding the least effort thereto, than to seek a counterfeit inwardness and so fall into a trap a thousand times worse than distraction pure and simple. It is truth which ensures that every false satisfaction turns back on itself; it is truth again which neutralizes the natural egotism of the heart by intro1 The litanies of the Virgin, like the prayers on the Prophet in Islam, are in a certain respect concerned with Existence in so far as it is the first manifestation of the Self and the substance of all existential perfections.

134

LOVE

OF

GOD

ducing into contemplative alchemy a savour of death, in conformity with the saying: “Whosoever will save his life, shall lose it.” Amor Dei is at the same time mors Deo; the analogy between love and death is nowhere more real than in the presence of God.

135

CHAPTER

ro

Some observations on a

problem of the Afterlife THE great Revelations are at one and the same time, in varying degrees, both total and fragmentary: total by reason of their absolute content or their esoterism and fragmentary by reason of their particular symbolism or their exoterism; but even this exoterism always contains elements which make it possible to reconstitute the total truth. In Islam, for example, one of these

elements is the idea, expressed in various ways, of the relativity —or non-eternity—of Paradise and Hell. The Qoran mentions the blessed and the damned as abiding respectively in Paradise and Hell ‘so long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as thy! Lord wisheth’.? The everlastingness in question is thus doubly relative. As regards Paradise we may quote also the saying of the Prophet: ‘God will say (to the people of Paradise): are ye content? They will answer: wherefore should we not be content, seeing that Thou hast given us what Thou hast not given to any of Thy creation? Then He will say: I will give you better than that. They will say: What thing, O Lord, is better? Then will He say: I will let down upon you my Beatitude and never afterwards shall I be wroth with you.’® This recalls the verse of the Qoran: ‘Beatitude from God is greater (than Paradise).’4 Mention must also be made of the saying of the Sufis that Paradise is ‘the prison of the gnostic’ or that it is ‘inhabited by fools’; and the Qoran itself affirms that ‘everything is perishable but the Face (Essence) of Allah.’ 1 The remark is addressed to Muhammad. 2 xi, 107-8.

3 Bukhari, Rigdq 51. i bd 72: 5 xxviii, 88. So also the Gospel: ‘Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my Words shall not pass away’ (St Luke, xxi, 33).

136

PROBLEM

OF

THE

AFTERLIFE

The profound meaning of all these allusions is as follows: towards the completion of a major cosmic cycle, in the words of a hadith: ‘the flames of Hell will grow cold’:! correlatively, but without there being any true symmetry—for ‘My Mercy takes precedence over my Wrath’—the Paradises, at the approach of the Apocatastasis, will of metaphysical necessity reveal their limitative aspect, as if they had become less vast or as if God were less close than before; they will experience a sort of nostalgia for the One without a second or for the Essence, for proximity is not Unity and comprises an element of otherness and separativity. Without involving suffering of any kind, which would be contrary to the very definition of Heaven, the aspect ‘other than God’ will manifest itself to the detriment of the aspect ‘near to God’. This will be no more than a passing shadow, for then will come the Apocatastasis whose glory will surpass al] promises and all expectation, in conformity with the principle that God never fulfils less than he promises, but on the contrary always more.” At the very moment when, perhaps, one of the blessed will ask himself whether he is still in Paradise,

the great veil will be torn asunder and the uncreated Light will flood all and absorb all: the ‘garden’ will return to the ‘Gardener’ ;* Universal Manifestation will be transmuted and everything will be reintegrated within the ineffable Plenitude of the Principle; Being itself, together with its possibilities of creation, will no longer be detached from the indivisible Self; its possibilities will expand into what might be called, notwithstanding a certain inherent absurdity in the expression, the ‘absolute Substance’. This aspect of Paradisal ‘twilight’ reveals itself to the Sufis as a direct consequence of the contingency of the celestial states themselves; it is also implicit in the Shahädah— the testimony of Unity—which is the key to discernment be-

1'Abdul-Qädir Al-Jilani states that in the place of Hell, when it is extinguished, there will spring up a green tree called Jarjir, ‘and the best of the colours of Paradise is green’, opposed to the red of fire. 2 This explains an apparent contradiction in the Qoran which, having limited Paradise to ‘so long as the heavens and the earth endure’ immediately adds that Paradise is ‘a gift which shall not be cut off’. 8 Sufic expressions, the Qoranic term for ‘Paradise’ being ‘Garden’ in either the singular or the plural (Jannah, Jannat).

137

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

tween the Absolute and the contingent;! it is this discernment which allows them to compare Paradise—or the Paradises—to a ‘prison’; in other words, they see the effects in the causes and perceive a priori the limits of all that is not God, while at the

same time, and from another standpoint, they see God through phenomena. On the other hand, the Sufis analogically rejoin the Buddhist perspective when describing the Divine Beatitude as the ‘Paradise of the Essence’, which corresponds directly to Nirvana;? the latter is in fact ‘God’ considered from the stand-

point of Beatitude and Permanence. All this reveals an important point of contact between the Semitic and BrahmanoBuddhic eschatologies,® and illustrates the crucial idea of the ‘impermanence of all things’. We have just seen that as the final absorption of the Paradises into the Essence approaches, the aspect of separativity will be accentuated

at the expense of the aspect of nearness,

at least

in a certain measure. The case of Hell—or the Hells—is however analogically inverse, in the sense that they comprise, on the one hand an aspect of remoteness (from God) which is their raison d'être, and on the other hand, an aspect of necessity or existence which perforce attaches them to the Will of God, and thus to Reality itself; at the beginning the first aspect will predominate, but the second aspect is bound to be affirmed towards the end of the cycle, and this is precisely the reason for the ‘cooling —as the hadith expresses it—of the flames of Hell. God being Love or Mercy—more essentially than Justice or Rigour—his Goodness is included in Existence and in all existen1 Christianity possesses the same key in this saying of Jesus ‘There is none good but one, that is, God’ (Nemo bonus nisi unus Deus) (St Mark x, 18). This sentence contains the whole doctrine of the relationship of the contingent to the Absolute and consequently expresses the non-eternity of created states: Heaven, not being God, could not be ‘good’, it is thus of necessity ephemeral when considered on the scale of the ‘Lives of Brahma’ and in relation to ‘ex-sistence’. * This term has in itself a total and unchanging value which is independent not only of the secondary and contingent distinction between Nirvana and Paranirvana, but also of the different cosmic degrees of ‘extinctions’.

8 Here is another analogy: The Samyaksam-Buddha, thanks to the immensity of his merits and his knowledge, produces a Paradise situated on the fringe of transmigration, on the Nirvanic axis; Christ, before leaving the world, speaks to the Apostles of the ‘place’ that he will prepare for them ‘in his Father’s house’,

138

PROBLEM

OF

THE

AFTERLIFE

tial substances, and it will finally take possession of everything that exists. In each thing and in each creature, that which is good is firstly its pure and simple existence, then its deiformity, even the most indirect, and lastly its particular qualities; these positive aspects, without which nothing can exist, will in the end triumph over the negative accidents, and they will do so by virtue of the universal law of equilibrium with its two-fold aspect of wearing out and compensation.! Considerations of this kind, whether relating to Heaven or Hell, can only be schematic, and cannot take account of all possible modalities, which in the nature of things are unknown to us; Revelation teaches us directly or indirectly that Paradise and Hell comprise regions and degrees—in both the ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ dimensions?—,

but the ‘life’ or ‘movements’

in these abodes

cannot be penetrated by earthly understanding, unless it be through rare and fragmentary images. In any case, the metaphysical basis of the whole of this doctrine rests on the most solid of foundations, forit coincides with the very notion of contingency. Existence necessarily implies particularity and change; this is demonstrated by space and time on the plane of corporeal existence, and by the cosmic cycles on the plane of universal Existence. Existence is, analogically speaking, both a ‘form’ and a ‘movement’;

it is at once both static and dynamic, but

at the same time comprises the alternation of unfolding and crystallization; the transmigration of souls has no other meaning. At the summit of universal Existence this ‘migratory 1 A Hindu text describing the Apocatastasis says that tamas will be converted into vajas, and vajas into sattva. In the Apocalypse of St Peter, the risen Christ speaks of the Apocatastasis while at the same time forbidding the disclosure of this doctrine, in order that men may not sin the more;

it is indeed

only logical that it has not been retained in the general teaching of the church. But in our days the situation is quite different, at least as regards the opportuneness of certain truths, though not as regards the dogmas. 2 ‘There are many

mansions in my Father’s house,’ said Christ. St Irenaeus

refers to this saying when echoing a doctrine according to which some will enter Heaven, others the earthly Paradise, and others again the celestial Jerusalem; all will see the Saviour, but in different manners according to their degree of dignity. 3 The meeting point between the monotheistic eschatology and Indian

‘transmigrationism’ lies hidden—in Monotheism—in the concepts of Limbo and Hell, and also in the ‘resurrection of the flesh’, in which the being is not however invested with a new individuality.

139

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

vibration’ comes to a stop, because it turns inwards in the direction of the Immutable; there remains only a single movement, a single cycle, that of Paradise, which opens on to the Essence. In God Himself, who is beyond Existence, there is an element which pre-figures Existence, and this is the Divine Life, which the Christian doctrine attributes to the Holy Spirit and which it calls Love; towards this Life converge those existences that are plunged in the light of Glory and sustained by it; and it is this Light, this ‘Divine Halo’, which keeps the Paradises outside the ‘migratory vibrations’ of existences that are still corruptible. The sage does not strictly speaking emerge from his existential movement—although from the standpoint of the cosmic wheel he does so—but turns it inwards: the movement becomes lost in the Infinite or expands in the ‘changeless movement’ of the ‘Void’. To identify oneself with movement is to engender movement and therefore change, the series of movements; to identify oneself with pure being engenders being and therefore the interiorization and transmutation

of movement,

or the cessation

of

movement in the Immutable and the Unlimited. Desire is movement, and contemplation is being. Revelation offers truths that are not only explicit but also implicit; it presents both postulates and conclusions, causal ideas and consequential ideas; it cannot escape from reckoning with these consequences concretely once it has provided the keys to them. These keys necessarily imply the corresponding consequences, of which they are as it were the living anticipations. The ‘totality’ of love in Christianity, and the ‘sincerity’ of faith and knowledge in Islam, imply the most decisive metaphysical truths, even though these truths must needs reveal the illusory nature, not of the literal interpretations which are always valid on their own levels, but of these levels themselves. It is for this reason that the criterion of traditional orthodoxy does not necessarily consist in agreement with a particular exoteric thesis, but in agreement with the principle of knowledge or realization by which this thesis is accompanied: he who says ‘ice’ says ‘water’, even if from the point of view of immediate vision—which only counts at a certain level—there is opposition between solidity and liquidity. It is also for this reason

140

PROBLEM

OF

THE

AFTERLIFE

that it is absurd to expect from Revelation explicit teachings about every truth; it needs to be explicit in regard to those truths which necessarily concern all men, but it has no cause to be explicit in regard to truths which are neither comprehensible nor necessary to the majority of men, and which should remain in a state of potentiality that only esoterism is called upon to actualize. For example, when the Scriptures proclaim that “God is Love’, that implies metaphysically the relativity and even the end of Hell; he who says ‘relativity’, says ‘limit’, and so ‘end’; but this end derives from a ‘dimension’

that is

higher than the reality of Hell; it is not therefore Hell which comes to an end, but the end which does away with Hell. It is as though the dimension of depth were to absorb one of the other two dimensions,

or rather both of them at the same time, by

dissolving or transmuting the plane surface; neither of the two dimensions would cease to exist in relation to their common plane, it is this plane itself which would cease to exist.

IAI

GHARTHER iri

The five Divine Presences From the point of view of the world, the Divine Principle is hidden behind a number of envelopes, the first of which is matter. Matter is so to speak the outermost layer, the carapace or shell of that invisible Universe of whose main features both the Intellect and Revelation inform us. But in reality it is the Principle which envelops everything; the material world is only an infinitesimal and eminently contingent content of the invisible Universe. In the first case, God is—in the language of the Qoran—the ‘Inward’ or the ‘Hidden’ (AJ/-Batin), and in the second, He is the ‘Vast’ or ‘He who contains’ (4/-Wäsi), or ‘He who surrounds’ (Al-Muhit). The various degrees of reality contained in the Divine Principle, expressed in Guénonian terms of Vedantine inspiration— but with the addition of other equally possible designations— are in ascending order the following: first, the gross or material state, which could also be called corporeal or sensorial; secondly,

the subtle or animistic state; thirdly, formless or supra-formal Manifestation, or the paradisiac or angelic world; fourthly, Being, which is the ‘qualified’, ‘self-determined’ and ontological Principle, and which for this reason we may call, paradoxically but adequately, the ‘extrinsic’ or ‘relative Absolute’; and fifthly, Non-Being or Beyond-Being, which is the ‘non-qualified’ and ‘non-determined’ Principle, and which thus represents the ‘intrinsic’ or ‘Pure Absolute’. The material and animistic states together constitute formal Manifestation;! the latter together with supra-formal or angelic Manifestation constitutes Manifestation as a whole; and finally, Manifestation and Being together are the domain of relativity, of M/dyd. In other words, if 1Cf.

Man

Chapter 2.

142

and his Becoming

according

to the

Vedanta,

by René

Guénon,

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

Being and Beyond-Being both belong to the principial or nonmanifested degree, to which in a certain fashion Manifestation is

opposed, although ‘prolonging’ it in its relative and ‘illusory’ manner, relativity as such already begins in the realm of the Principle, for it is relativity that separates Being from BeyondBeing, and also allows us to use, provisionally, such a paradoxical expression as ‘relative Absolute’. The ontological Principle plays the part of the Absolute with regard to what it creates and governs, but it is relative with regard to the Intellect which perceives this relativity, and which in its deepest nature transcends Mäyä&, not existentially, but through its essence. It is nevertheless impossible intellectually to transcend the degree of Being without the grace of Being; there can be no effective metaphysical realization without the help of Heaven, and it is certainly not enough to immerse oneself in mental abstractions in order to escape from relativity. If someone asserts that the Intellect is strictly separate from God, he is not wrong, although the truth would only be partial; if, on the other hand, someone asserts that the Intellect is not separate from God, he would likewise be right, and even more so, but he would only be totally in the truth on condition that he also admitted the validity of the foregoing point of view. Here, as in similar cases, one reaches the truth only to the extent that one accepts positions which are seemingly opposed, but which in reality are situated on the same circumference, invisible at first sight. But if it can be said that relativity ‘encroaches’ on the Principle by detaching conceptually Being from Beyond-Being, or the personal Creator from the impersonal Self, it can equally be affirmed that the Principle ‘annexes’ a part of Manifestation, namely Heaven, the cosmic centre or summit which is the domain of the Paradises, the Angels, and ‘reintegrated’ souls.

In other words, if relativity includes an aspect of the Principle, the latter for its part—from the standpoint of its incorruptibility and beatitude, not from that of its exclusive reality—extrinsically includes supra-formal Manifestation, and thus everything that is within the Heavenly domain;! whoever is ‘in Heaven’ is ‘near God’, and no privative separation or fall is any longer 1 Guénon

calls this domain

‘Universal’,

thus

distinguishing

it from

the

‘individual’ domain, that is to say, from that of formal Manifestation.

143

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

possible, although the metaphysical distance is infinite. Relativity is in such a case ‘reintegrated’, so to speak, by that participation in the Absolute or Infinite which is sanctity: in and through Being, God ‘becomes the world a little’ so that, in and through Heaven, the world may ‘become God a little’. If this be possible, it is by virtue of the metaphysical identity between Principle and Manifestation, an identity which is certainly difficult to express, but witnessed to by all esoterisms. Maya ‘is —or

‘is not other than’—‘Atma’; Samsara

‘is’ Nirvana

or

Shinya; al-khalg, ‘creation’, ‘is’ Al-Haqq, ‘Truth’, for if this were not so, there would be a reality other than Allah and alongside Him. In Sufism these universal degrees are called the ‘five Divine Presences’ (al-Hadarat al-ilahiya al-khams). In Sufi terminology these are: the ‘human domain’ (nasüt), that is to say the corporeal world, since man is created of ‘earth’; then the ‘domain of royalty’ (malakit), so called because it is this domain which immediately dominates the corporeal world;! next comes the ‘domain of power’ (jabarüt) which, macrocosmically, is Heaven,? and microcosmically, the created or human intellect, this ‘supernaturally natural’ Paradise which we carry within us. The fourth degree is the ‘domain of the Divine’ (Lahut), which is Being and which coincides with the uncreated Intellect, the Logos; the final degree—if indeed this word may be used here in a provisional manner—is none other than ‘Quiddity’ or ‘Aseity’, or ‘Ipseity’ (Hahat, from Huwa, ‘He’), that is to say, the infinite Self.3 1 Malaküt is derived from malik, ‘king’, and not from malak (originally mal’ak), ‘angel’; the translation ‘angelic realm’, which one sometimes comes across, is not literal. Be that as it may, the word malak also includes the jinn,

more especially since the Angels necessarily manifest themselves in the subtle state when they wish to reach earthly man or to act on the corporeal world, so much so that experience cannot always at first sight distinguish between them and the creatures of the subtle world. * ‘Power’ indeed comes from the Angels in the sense that it is they who govern all physical laws, both in the subtle and gross domains. ‘Physical’ is taken as being synonymous with ‘natural’ and not with ‘material’. %In Buddhist terms, Jabarüt, Lähüt and Hähüt would be respectively: Bodhisattva,

Buddha,

and

Nirvana;

instead

of Buddha,

one

could

also

say

Dharmakéya or Adi- Buddha, and one could likewise replace Nirvana by Shinya. Whether the concepts be ‘theistic’ or ‘non-theistic’, the realities concerned are

144

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

In taking our point of departure in the Manifestation which surrounds us and in which we are as it were woven like the threads in a piece of cloth, it is possible—always on the basis of the ‘five Presences’—to fashion the following combinations and syntheses: the corporeal and animistic states together form the ‘natural’ domain or domain of ‘nature’;

supra-formal

Manifestation

together

these two states

constitute

the

and

cosmic

domain; this along with Being is, as we have seen, the domain of

relativity or Mayda; and all these domains considered together with

the Supreme

Self constitute

the total Universe,

in the

highest sense of the term. Inversely, if we begin by considering the Principle and end up at the extreme limit of the process of manifestation, we can say first of all that by ‘Principle’ may be understood both Beyond-Being and Being; as for ‘Heaven’, this is the Principle and supra-formal Manifestation taken together, if one may so put it. Finally, Heaven and the animistic part of formal Manifestation together constitute the supra-sensible or ‘invisible’ domain. Here again—when adding a final degree, ‘matter’—we reach a concept of the total Universe, this time with the Principle taken as starting point, and not Manifestation. The foregoing may be summed up as follows: if we take as our basis the distinction ‘Manifestation-Principle’, the first concept includes ‘body’, ‘soul’ and ‘intellect’, and the second includes

‘Logos’

and

‘Self’. If we

‘individual-universal’—or

distinction

take as our basis the distinction what

‘formal-essential’—the

amounts

to

the

first element

same,

the

contains the

‘body’ and the ‘soul’, while the second, the ‘essential’, is at once

the ‘intellect’, the ‘Logos’ and the ‘Self’, despite the immeasurable metaphysical distances between them. If we take the distinction ‘relativity-absoluity’, everything is relative except the ‘Self’; if, on the other hand, we distinguish—from the most

contingent point of view possible—between

the same; whoever admits, firstly, an Absolute,

the ‘mortal’ and

and secondly, the transcend-

ence of this Absolute,—for without the latter the notion would be entirely relative and consequently false,—cannot possibly be an ‘atheist’ in the conventional sense of the word.

K

145

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

the ‘immortal’, we can say that everything is immortal except the body. In order to grasp fully the purpose of the Arabic terminology mentioned

above

(nasi,

malaküt, jabarûüt,

Lahiut,

Hähüi),

it

must be appreciated that the Universe is considered as a hierarchy of Divine ‘dominions’, which is to say that God is ‘most present’ in the supreme degree and ‘least present’—or ‘most absent’—on the corporeal level; it is here that, apparently, he ‘dominates’ least, or least directly; but the word ‘apparently’ is almost a pleonasm, for illusion or appearance enter into relativity and manifestation as it were by definition. The Qoranic premisses of the doctrine of the ‘five Divine Presences’ are the following: the first ‘Presence’ is the absolute unity—or non-duality—of God (Allahu ahad); the second is God in so far as He is Creator, Revealer and Saviour;

this is the

degree of the divine Qualities. The third ‘Presence’ is the ‘Throne’ (‘Arsh), which is capable of a variety of interpretations on different levels, but which from a cosmological point of view most directly represents supra-formal Manifestation, which penetrates the whole of the rest of the created Universe and is thus identified with the world in its entirety. The fourth ‘Presence’ is the ‘Footstool’ (Kursz), on which the ‘two Feet of God’ rest; this signifies that animistic Manifestation—for it is

this that the ‘Footstool’ symbolizes—comprises both Rigour and Mercy, while the Throne—Heaven—is exclusively beatific; but the duality of the ‘Feet’ also means in this context that the world of forms—for here we are in formal Manifestation—is the world of dualities and oppositions. On this side of the ‘Footstool’ is situated the most indirect or distant of the ‘Presences’, namely the earth (ard), which corresponds to the ‘human realm’ (na&süt)? 1 The theory of the five Presences could be represented by two diagrams, each comprising five concentric regions, one of them showing the Principle at the centre, and the other at the periphery, which would respectively correspond to the two ‘ways of seeing’, the microcosmic and the macrocosmic, or the

human and the Divine. This is in the nature of things one of the meanings of yin-yang: the black part, containing a white dot, represents the night of the microcosm with its luminous Divine centre, while the white part with the black dot symbolizes the Infinite in so far as it ‘contains’ the finite. ? It is impossible to examine here all the meanings which can be given to the word nasut and other analogous terms, or to describe all the changes of perspective connected with these expressions. For example, a relationship has

146

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

because it is the plane of existence of man who was created ‘vicar on the earth’ (khalifatun fi ’l-ard). The relationship between the ‘Throne’ as the angelic world, in the macrocosm, and the ‘Throne’ as the intellect, in the micro-

cosm, is made explicit in the following saying of the Prophet Muhammad: ‘The heart of man is the Throne of God.’ Likewise our soul reflects the ‘Footstool’ and our body the earth; while our intellect is plainly the passage towards the mysteries of the Uncreated

and of the Self, in the absence of which no meta-

physical intellection whatsoever would be possible. The two fundamental formulae of Islam—the two ‘Testimonies’ (Shahädatän), one concerning Allah and the other His Prophet—likewise symbolize the degrees of reality. In the formula ld ilaha illa ’ Llah (‘no divinity if not the sole Divinity’), each of the four words denotes a degree, and the final Ada of the Name Allah symbolizes the Self (Huwa). This formula consists of two parts: the two first words, which constitute the nafy (the ‘negation’), and the two last words, which constitute the tbat (the ‘affirmation’); in the present instance the nafy refers to formal Manifestation or the individual domain, and the zthbat

to supra-formal

Manifestation

and the Principle

taken

to-

gether, these constituting the universal domain. For this reason,

the Sufi sees in every material form, including his own, the /a of the Shahädah, and so on; the microcosm that we are is nothing other than a concretization of the Shahddah, and the same is

true of the macrocosm which surrounds us and of which we are part.

The second Testimony, that concerning the Prophet, establishes an analogy between Muhammad and formal Manifestation, understood this time in a positive sense, that is to say, as a ‘Divine Presence’ and not as an absence or opposition. In this same formula Muhammadun Rasülu ’Liah (‘Muhammad is the Envoy of Allah’), the word Rasa denotes by analogy supraformal Manifestation, in so far as the latter is a prolongation of the Principle. The Sufi, who sees God everywhere, thus discerns been suggested between näsät and shari‘ah on the one hand and between malaküt and tarigah on the other, but this is a completely different way of looking at things from the one which concerns us at present.

147

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

in every physico-psychical form the perfection of existence and of symbolism, and in the intellect and the angelic realities, the quality of Risälah, of ‘Divine Message’. Thus each word of the two Testimonies marks a ‘manner of being’ of God, a ‘Divine station’, in the microcosm as well as in the macrocosm. It will perhaps be useful, in this context, to make some reference to Plotinian emanationism: the primordial One, which is the absolute Good, and which rational knowledge cannot reach, produces by emanation an image of Itself, which contemplates It. This image—the Universal Spirit (Nows)—contains the ideas or the archetypes. The Spirit produces the soul (psyche), or more precisely the animistic or subtle state, which produces in its turn matter (soma), the ‘inexistent’ or evil; this is the negation of the absolute Good, at least in a way and from a certain point of view. The Spirit, soul and matter consequently correspond analogically to the Vedantine ternary sattva, rajas, tamas. To the Plotinian Unity Iamblicus adds Beyond-Being, Plotinus having passed over in silence—without however denying—the distinction between Being and the supra-ontological Absolute;1 and if Plotinus seems to envisage the archetypes only on the level of supra-formal Manifestation and not on that of Being— which is a valid point of view, since ontological causality is less direct, while being more essential, than cosmic causality—the ‘intelligible world’ of Iamblicus seems to coincide with diversified Being, that is to say, with Being in so far as it contains the Divine Qualities from which are derived the angelic essences and the existential archetypes. But let us return to the Sufis. Mention has so far been made of five degrees, some cosmic the others metacosmic;

but one ob-

tains a greater number when certain subdivisions or intermediaries, or different perspectives are considered, pertaining for example either to the pole ‘knowledge’ (shud) or to the pole ‘being’ (wwjüd). It is possible to conceive, between the body and the soul—or, as regards the macrocosm,

between the corporeal

world and the animistic world—the living or animate body, which is unquestionably different from the purely material and 1 In both cases, of course, it is the Principle which is involved.

148

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

‘cadaverous’ body; this intermediary could be called the ‘vital’ or ‘sensorial’ state; according to certain cosmologies using an astronomical symbolism, this state or body corresponds to the ‘world of the spheres’. Similarly, between the soul and the intellect—or, as regards the macrocosm, between formal Manifestation and supra-formal Manifestation—a degree of intuition has been distinguished which may be said to correspond to reasoning, being no longer imagination, and not yet intellection; in the macrocosm this is the degree of the ordinary angels, who are above the 7inn and below the four Archangels or the ‘Spirit’ (Rah). In perspectives of this kind the symbolism of the degrees represented by ‘body’ and ‘soul’ borrows its imagery from astronomy where the macrocosm is concerned: one speaks of ‘spheres’ and of the ‘sublunary world’, that is, the world of matter (4yle) and of the body. In this connection it may be recalled that the ontological Principle comprises the ‘Pen’ (Qalam) and the ‘Tablet’ (Lawh). Supra-formal or celestial Manifestation, as we have seen, can be

identified with the “Throne’ (‘Aysh), which in astronomical symbolism is the Empyrean. The subtle order of formal Manifestation is the ‘Footstool’ (Kwursz), or the sphere of the fixed stars; and finally, the gross order of formal Manifestation has from this point of view two degrees, namely, the sensorial and the material: the first corresponds to the seven planetary spheres, and the second to the four sensible elements. The ‘five Divine Presences’ have been enumerated above under

the

designations

nasñt,

malahküt, jabarut,

Lahiit,

and

Hahut. According to a slightly different terminology, one may distinguish, in the same ascending order, the following degrees: the ‘world of the kingdom’ (‘dalam al-mulk), the ‘world of royalty’ (‘dlam al-malakit), the ‘world of power’ (‘dalam aljabarät), and the ‘world of glory’ (‘dlam al-‘tzzah). In his Istilähät as-Süfiyah, Ibn Arabi defines al-mulk as the ‘world of the manifested’ (‘dalam ash-shahädah), and al-malahüt as the ‘world of the occult’ (‘dalam al-ghayb); according to him al-ghayb is ‘everything that God (‘‘the Truth”, Al-Hagqq) hides from thee, but not from Himself’. The terms malahüt and jabarüt are interchangeable; thus, according to Abu Talib

Al-Makki, quoted by ‘Ibn Arabi, al-jabarüt is the ‘world of the K*

149

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

Infinite’ (‘alam al-‘ Azamah)—which, according to Jurjani, means the ‘world of the Names and Qualities of God’ (‘dlam al-asmd” wa’ s-sifat al-ilahiyyah)'—while for most authors a/-jabarüt is the ‘intermediate world’ (‘alam al-wasat). According to Ghazali, al-jabarit is situated between al-mulk and al-malakut: compared with the pure stability of al-mulk, he says, and with the pure movement of al-malakit, the intermediate nature of al-jabariut may be compared with the movement one feels on a boat, an obvious reference to the animistic or subtle domain; but it was

the terminology of Makki which finally prevailed. Let us also mention Jili who states that ‘everything in existence is divided into three parts, an outward part called al-mulk, an inward part

al-malaküt, and a third part which transcends both and is called al-qism al-jabaruti al-tlaht; and he adds that by ‘outward part’ he means ‘form’ (s%rah) and by ‘inward part’ the ‘soul’ (nafs); the third part is the ‘secret’ or ‘essential truth’ (kagiqah) of the thing concerned, that is to say its link, on the one hand with Being as such, and on the other with a certain aspect of Being, or with a certain aspect of the Divine Intellect or the creative Will. The doctrine of the ‘five Divine Presences’ is sometimes presented—notably by certain commentators of Ibn ‘ Arabi—in the following terminology: the first ‘Presence’ is the name of the ‘body’ (77sm); the second, that of the ‘imagination’ (khayal), thus the psychic domain; the third, that of the ‘intellect’ (‘agl), that is to say, the angelic world; the fourth, ‘Unity’ (Wdahidiyah), in other words Being, the world of ontological possibilities; and the fifth, ‘Oneness’ (Ahadiyah), Beyond-Being. Some mention in addition ‘Essence’ (Dat) as a sixth ‘Presence’: in this case Essence is conceived as being situated above the other Presences, and at the same time as being immanent within them; Wahidiyah and Ahadiyah are then interpreted as two aspects of Being, the first being extrinsic Unity or ‘inassociability’, and the second, intrinsic Unity or ‘indivisibility’. In this 1 The ‘Qualities’ (Sifat) are distinguished from the ‘Names’ (A smda’)—in so far as they can be distinguished—by the fact that they are already situated on the plane of relativity, whereas the Names may represent aspects of the Absolute as such; that is to say a distinction is made between ‘Names of Essence’ (A sma’ Dhatiyah) and ‘Names of Qualities’ (Asmda’ Sifatiyah).

150

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

connection it is perhaps as well to add that although Hahit (‘Ipseity’) corresponds to Huwa (‘He’) and to Huwiyah (the quality of being ‘Him’), Lait (‘Divinity’, Being) nevertheless does not strictly correspond to Allah nor to Ulihiyah (the quality of being Allah), for the simple reason that the last two terms are in no wise exclusive and limitative, whereas

Lähüt

refers only to the ontological side of the Principle. Sometimes, on the other hand, the doctrine of the ‘Divine Presences’ is limited to a four-fold division: naäsüt, malakit,

gabarit and Lahit. In this case, the first term stands for formal Manifestation—without any internal distinction—and the second term for supra-formal Manifestation; jabarüt is not this time the world of angelic powers, but that of the Divine Powers or Qualities, and thus of the ontological Principle, while Lahait is the absolute Principle or Supreme Self. Another variant of the doctrine of the Presences is the following: Hadrat al-ghayb al-mutlaq, the ‘Presence of the absolute Occult’, is the Principle;

Hadrat al-ghayb al-mudafi, the ‘Presence of the relative Occult’, is the ‘intermediate region’ between God and matter and is subdivided into two degrees, namely, al-jabarut, supra-formal Manifestation,

and ‘dalam al-mithäl, the ‘world of the symbol’,

identified with the subtle or animistic order of formal Manifestation; then comes Hadrat ash-shahädat al-mutlagah, the ‘Presence of the totally manifest’, that is to say, the corporeal world.

Finally, all taken together form Hadrat al-jami‘ah, the ‘Presence-Synthesis’. The doctrine of the ‘five Presences’ explains the relationships between the Principle and Manifestation, which can be conceived in various ways. First of all—to return to the geometrical symbolism—there is the relationship ‘point-circumference’: here there is no contact between the centre and the periphery, or between the middle and the concentric circles; Manifestation

is strictly separate from the Principle, just as, within Manifestation, the natural is strictly separate from the supernatural. 1 The terms ghayb and shahädah are coupled together several times in the Qoran, notably in the verse: ‘He is Al/ah—there is none other than He—the Knower of the occult and of the manifest’ (‘alim al-ghayb wa’sh-shahädah), (LIX, 22). The word shahädah means here not ‘testimony’, but ‘that of which one may be a witness’, namely the visible.

151

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

But there is also the relationship ‘centre-radii’: the radii may travel an indefinite distance away from the centre, but they nonetheless remain prolongations of the centre; water ‘symbolizes’ Universal Substance,

and thus, in a certain way,

‘is’

Universal Substance; existential segmentation is only illusory, and this takes us back to the ‘sacrifice of Purusha’. The difference between the relationships ‘point-circumference’ and ‘centre-radii’ is the same as that between ‘existential analogy’ and ‘essential identity’. If we replace the concentric circles by a spiral, we obtain the image of the cosmogonic ‘unfolding’—or ‘emanation —and at the same time that of the initiatory ‘folding up’; here there is analogy and identity at one and the same time. And if we surround the central point, not with radii forming a star, but simply with other points indicating the directions of space, we obtain an image of creative multiplication: the Principle repeats itself by a multitude of reflections each of which is a unity symbolizing the One, but none of which is the One; there is ‘repercussion’ rather than ‘emanation’. However the degrees of Reality possess not only a static aspect or an aspect of simultaneity, but also a dynamic aspect or an aspect of succession, and this brings us to the doctrine of universal cycles: each of the degrees of the Universe comprises a different cyclical rhythm, which means that this rhythm of appearance or manifestation—or of principial or existential ‘crystallization’, as the case may be—becomes increasingly ‘rapid’ or ‘multiple’ the greater the distance from the Immutable Centre; and this is expressed geometrically by the increase in surface as one approaches the periphery. Therein lies the whole doctrine of the ‘days’, ‘years’, and ‘lives’ of Brahma. A reservation needs to be made concerning Being, or pure Mayda," since it is obviously impossible to attribute a ‘rhythm’ to the ontological Principle, which is beyond time. To the question whether there can be something resembling a ‘movement’ 77 divinis, the answer is both yes and no, for the following

reason: as there can be nothing in God in the nature of a privation, there is in Him neither ‘inertia’ nor ‘modification’; God 1 The Vedantists distinguish between a ‘pure’ Maya—Being or Ishvara— and an ‘impure’ Maya, namely souls or manifestations in general.

152

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

cannot be wanting, either in necessity or in liberty—or in immutability or life—and in this sense it can be said that if, on the one hand, God possesses the perfection of immutability because He is absolute, on the other hand He possesses the perfection of ‘mobility’ because He is infinite; but this is not a contingent mobility determined by change, and is therefore in no sense contradictory. In so far as movement is a quality—and only in this respect—it cannot but have its prototype and source in the Divine order; it is thus quite permissible to conceive of a ‘respiration’ going from Being to Beyond-Being, which is the model and cause of all movements and cycles. The foregoing presentation—or reminder—of the traditional concepts relating to the cosmogonic emanations has a particular significance in that all the philosophic and scientific errors of the modern world can be said to proceed essentially from the denial of the doctrine in question. In other words, what invalidates modern interpretations of the world and of man at their very root and robs them of every possibility of being valid, is their monotonous and besetting ignorance of the supra-sensible

degrees of Reality, or of the ‘five Divine Presences’. This is an observation which cannot escape anyone who is more than a simple logician of sensory experience. For example, evolutionism—that most typical of all the products of the modern spirit—is no more than a sort of substitute: it is a compensation ‘on a plane surface’ for the missing dimensions. Because one no longer admits, or wishes to admit, the supra-sensible dimensions proceeding from the outward to the inward through the ‘igneous’ and ‘luminous’ states? to the Divine Centre, one seeks the solution to the cosmogonic problem on the sensory plane and one replaces true causes with imaginary ones which, in appearance at least, conform with the possibilities of the corporeal world. In the place of the hierarchy of invisible worlds, and in the place of creative emanation— which, it may be said, is not opposed to the theological idea of the creatio ex nihilo, but in fact explains its meaning—one puts 1 There is a relationship here with the Christian Trinity, or the “Trinitarian

Life’, understood in the deepest sense, which is supra-ontological. 2 Heat and light symbolize respectively formal and supra-formal Manifestation.

153

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

evolution and the transformation

of species, and

with

them

inevitably the idea of human progress, the only possible answer to satisfy the materialists’ need of causality. In doing this, one forgets what man is, and one forgets also that a purely physical science, when it reaches vast proportions, can only lead to catastrophe, either by violent destruction or by degeneration, which in practice comes to the same thing. The denial of the animistic world, in which we are plunged like crystals floating in a liquid,—though appearances make us think that this world is within our bodies or behind the material shell of things,—involves a reduction of psychic realities to mere material causes, and this leads to a completely false evaluation of everything that is of a mental order; it is the death of all spirituality. Apart from the fact that no longer is anything known of the vast domain to which magic pertains, the higher is explained in terms of the lower, and so one ends up with a complete dehumanization of the human. Even when the existence of the animistic domain is accepted, so long as the higher planes are denied the dehumanization is scarcely less, since there is a rejection of supernatural causes, that is to say, of causes which belong to supra-formal manifestation and are thus incapable of being contained within the limits of natural and ‘horizonal’ causality; this is the source of ‘psychologism’, that is, the prejudice of wishing to reduce everything to psychological—and thus completely individual and profane—causes. Everything then becomes the fruit of a contingent elaboration: Revelation becomes poetry, the Religions are inventions, sages are ‘thinkers’ and ‘seekers’, that

is to say, simple logicians, if indeed they are considered even that; infallibility and inspiration do not exist, error becomes a

quantitative and ‘interesting’ contribution to ‘culture’, and so on; if every mental phenomenon

is not reduced to material

+ It is a most pernicious abuse of language to call modern scientists ‘sages’: their intelligence—apart from their genius, if they have it—is usually very ordinary, and they ignore everything that transcends the physical world, and so everything that constitutes wisdom. Never has there been so much talk of ‘intelligence’ and ‘genius’ as in our own age of intellectual night, and it has never been so difficult to agree on the meaning of these words; the truth of the matter is that men have in all probability never been as cunning and ingenious as they are today. At this level there is ‘intelligence’ in plenty, but as for truth,

that is another matter!

154

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

causes, there is at least a denial of every supernatural, or even

every suprasensory, cause, and by the same token of every principial truth. According to this way of seeing things, man, if not simply equated with his body, is reduced to the state of being a human animal, which means he is no longer anything, for man limited to himself is no longer really human. For those who believe in it, psychoanalysis thus has the same compensatory function as evolutionism: because one cannot, or will not, admit real causes, one invents false ones. In other

words, because causality is not conceived ‘in depth’, it is projected ‘on the surface’, rather as if, instead of explaining an act by the thought that precedes it, one sought the cause in the blood or in the bones; but this would still be of little moment,

were it not that in order to replace the highest causes, one sought out the very lowest. The denial of the five degrees of reality precludes an understanding, not simply of magic, but also of miracles; and it is not for nothing that the Church declares anathema whosoever rejects the one or the other. The first argument which one must set against this double rejection is the following: since the subtle or animistic state exists, it cannot but irrupt—when certain more or less exceptional conditions are fulfilled—into the realm of material or sensory phenomena; and since the supra-formal world, the world of essences and incorruptibility, also exists (and does so even before the formal world), it cannot but intervene ‘vertically —and contrarily to the so-called ‘natural’ laws—in the world of forms and matter. To avoid every possibility of misunderstanding, it is necessary to be quite clear about the meaning of the word ‘natural’; what transcends ‘nature’ is in no wise ‘irrational’ or ‘absurd’, but simply that of which the causality escapes the measures and laws of the world of matter and sensations. If the ‘natural’ coincided with the whole realm of the ‘logical’ or of the ‘possible’, one would have to say that God too was ‘natural’, and a miracle likewise, but this would be an abuse of language which would take away every means of distinguishing verbally between causality in a ‘horizontal’ sense and causality in a ‘vertical’ sense. Be that as it

may, when scientists hear the ‘supernatural’ spoken of, they imagine that basically what is involved is a belief in phenomena

155

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

which have no cause, or more precisely, which have no real and possible cause.1 In view of the fact that modern science is unaware of the degrees of reality, it is consequently nul and inoperative as regards everything that can be explained only by them, whether it be a case of magic or of spirituality, or indeed of any belief or practice of any people; it is in particular incapable of accounting for human or other phenomena of the historic or prehistoric past, the nature of which and the key to which are totally unknown to it as a matter of principle. There is scarcely a more desperately vain or naïve illusion—far more naïve than is Aristotelian astronomy!—than to believe that modern science, in its vertiginous course towards the ‘infinitely small’ and the ‘infinitely great’, will end up by re-joining religious and metaphysical truths and doctrines. It is necessary to make quite clear at this point what is meant by ‘form’ and ‘essence’: form is a coagulated essence, which is to say that the relationship resembles that between ice and water; the formal world—the corporeal and animistic states—thus possesses the property of ‘congealing’ spiritual substance, of individualizing them and at the same time separating them one from another. This is not to say that in the higher spheres of Existence there is no longer any ego, but the ego of the blessed is supra-formal or essential, in the sense that it does not constitute an exclusive limit or an opaque screen with regard to other spiritual substances; moreover, the blessed can assume divers forms without thereby ceasing to be a transparent mirror of God and of the angelic worlds. The earthly form—‘gross’ and ‘subtle’—is re-absorbed in its essential substance; the ‘immortal

person’, far from being thereby dissolved, is on the contrary delivered from a limitative condition, though remaining limited by virtue of being a manifestation. What form is with regard to essence, manifestation—whether essential or not—is with regard to the Principle. In the heavenly beyond, the ‘person’ subsists and, by this fact, can

always re-assume

his individual

and

1 ‘The essence of criticism’, said Renan, ‘is the denial of the supernatural’—

which amounts to saying that the essence of knowing is ignorance of all that is essential.

156

THE

FIVE

DIVINE

PRESENCES

earthly form; ‘re-absorption’ is not ‘annihilation’, but ‘trans-

figuration’. The same is true a priori of Angels, who, for their part, have never possessed earthly individuality, but who can nevertheless assume a form and an ego, an assumption of which the sacred Scriptures furnish us with many examples. In a word, the fact that the heavenly beings have transcended the formal condition cannot have a privative sense; quite the contrary, for whoever possesses the ‘greater’ also possesses the less’. There is still a question of proportions which must be considered. The material state extends around us and loses itself in the abysses of space; and yet space, with its galaxies and metagalaxies, and with its milliards of light-years, is only a grain of dust in comparison with the animistic state that surrounds it and contains it—though not of course spatially. The animistic state in its turn is only an infinitesimal particle alongside supra-formal or celestial manifestation; and the latter is nothing in comparison with the Principle. This ‘mathematical regression’ from the higher to the lower is compensated, so to speak—but this is only a manner of speaking —by a ‘progression’ in the same descending direction: the regions shrink as they become more distant from the Principle, but at the same time they multiply; the analogous antipode of the Infinite is quantity. The most outward region, the material or gross state, is not only the sensory world which we know, for the outward limit of Universal Manifestation can only be contingent and approximative and has nothing absolute about it; the animistic or subtle state ‘envelops’ myriads of crystallizations or materializations comparable to our sensory world, but unconnected with it, and completely inaccessible to our faculties of sensation. Similarly, viewed from the supra-formal or angelic cosmos, there are many worlds of a subtle or ‘igneous’ nature;

and viewed

from

the Principle,

the

worlds

of light

which are the Paradises extend in unimaginable profusion, like the drops of a water jet illumined by a ray of sunlight. This law of ‘mathematical progression’ towards the ‘outward’ is prefigured im divinis by the aspects of Being—the Names of Quality (Asmda’ Sifatiyah)—and also by the richness of the

possibilities of manifestation which, on ‘flowing’ into the womb

157

DIMENSIONS

OF

ISLAM

of Natura naturans or Materia prima, crystallize in a vertiginous multitude of creations and creatures. The supra-ontological Self is the absolute One, but Its ‘internal reflection’ comprises the first diversification which, on being manifested, gives rise to a series of projections which are increasingly diversified, but which are incapable of rejoining the plenitude of the indivisible Infinite. Of all this, experimental and pragmatic science knows nothing; the unanimous and millenary intuition of human intelligence means nothing to it; and scientists are obviously not ready to admit that if myths and dogmas are very diverse despite their agreement on the essential—namely, one absolute and transcendent Reality and, for man, a beyond conforming to his earthly attitudes—, this is because the supra-sensory is unimaginable

and

undescribable,

and

permits

an

indefinite

variety of ways of seeing, adapted to different spiritual needs. Truth is one, but Mercy is diverse. Scientistic philosophy is unaware, not only of the ‘Divine Presences’, but also of their rhythms or ‘life’; it is ignorant not

only of the degrees of reality and the fact of our imprisonment in the sensory world, but also of the cycles, the universal solve et coagula; that is to say it knows nothing either of the ‘gushing forth’ of our world from an invisible and effulgent Reality, or of its re-absorption into the ‘dark’ light of this same Reality. All the Real is in the Invisible; it is this above all that must be

felt or understood

before one can speak of knowledge

effectiveness. But this will not be understood,

world will continue inexorably on its course.

158

and

and the human

Index

Aaron, 94, 97 Al-Abad, 31 ‘abd, 46, 48 ff.

Al-‘Alawi, Shaikh, 84 Alhambra, 17 Al-‘Ali, 109

‘Abdu ’ Liah, 115

“Ali, Sayyidna, 105

‘Abdu’l-Qadir Al-Jilani, 74, 137 Abraham, 59, 68 ff., 73, 88, 97,

Altf, 106, 111

100, 106 Absolute, the, 15 f., 24, 28 f., 78, 134, 1429 E.

|

‘älim al-ghayb wa’sh-shahädah, 151 Allahu ahad, 146 Alphabet, Divine, 106, 111

Abii Bakr As-Saydlani, 49

amr, 77 Î., 85, 113

Abi Bakr Al-Wasiti, 52

Ananda, 47, 50, 105

Abü’I-Hasan Al-Khirqäni, 48, 52 Abü’l-Hasan Ash-Shadhili, 46

Anandamaya-kosha, 108

Abi Talib Al-Makki, 149 f. Adam, 77, 82, 96, 106, 108, 112,

II5, 120

Angels, 64, 82, 108 ff., 120, 143 f.,

157 Anne, St, 90

‘adam, 62 Al-‘Adl, 26, 103

apatheia, 87 Apocalypse of St Peter, 139 Apocatastasis, 34 ff., 137, 139

ages, the four (Yugas), 117

Apostles, the, 79, 138

Ahadiyah, 150 ahankära, 110

‘Agl, 48, 103

Ahmad, 79 f.

Al-‘Aql al-awwal, 103 Al-‘Aql al-awwal makhlag 103 Arabic language, 14 f., 69

Ahmadis, of Lahore, 64

Al-Akhir, 30 ff. ‘alam al-asma’ wa’s-sifàt al- ilah1yyah, 150 ‘alam al-a‘zamah, 150

‘alam al-ghayb, 108, 149 ‘alam al-‘izzah, 108, 149

‘alam al-jabbarit, 108, 149 ‘alam al-malakit, 108, 149

‘alam al-mithdal, 151 ‘alam al-mulk, 108, 149

‘alam ash-shahädah, 149 ‘alam al-wasat, 150

‘agl, 150

bihi,

Arabs, 13 4. 23, 26, 57, 61,00 Archangels, 105, 11 ff., 120 Archetypes, Divine, 123

ard, 146 al-‘arif bi’ Llah, 44 arka‘i, 85 Al-‘Arsh, 103, 110 f., 114, 119 f.,

146 f., 149 Al-‘Arsh al-azim, 103 Al-‘Arsh al-karim, 103

159

INDEX

Al-‘ Arsh ar-vahmani, 103 art, sacred, 122 f.

beauty, I9, 40, 42, 56, 127, 130 Being, 32f., 36f., 40, 44, 47, 40'f, 62 1.595 4., 102; 104,207,

Artemis, 95 asceticism, 42 Asma’ Dhiatiyah, 104, 150

IT8, 137; 142 514679550, 1524.9157 Benedict, St, 39, 63

Al-‘Arsh al-majid, 103

Al-Asma@

al-husna,

26,

30-45,

104 f. Asma’ Sifatiyah, 104, 150, 157 Asrar, 104 astronomical symbolism, 149 astronomy, 66, 156 athanor, 132

atheism, 24, 145 Aimd, 27, 32, 36, 50f., 65 f., 75, 144 Attributes

or Qualities,

Divine;

see Sifat Augustine, St, 64, 83

Avatara, 56, 58, 71 f., 79, 83, 97, 123 Al-Awwal, 30 ff. ayat, 128 Al-Azal, 31 Al-‘Azim, 109

Bernard, St, 86, 89 Bhagavadgita, 28, 65

Bible, Holy, 28, 47, 54, 57, 65, 08 ff. bitterness, 39, 63

Black Virgins, 15 Bodhisattva, 121, 144 Brahma, 107 Brahma, 15, 138, 152 bu‘d, 32, 52

Buddha,

65, rioff.,

118f.,

40, 56, 72ff., 76, 84,

121, 126, 138, 144 Buddht, 107, 110

Buddhism, 22, 57 f., 67, 72, 74, 89, 121 f. Bukhari, 136 Burckhardt, Titus, 60 f.

JET Tole), ane

calligraphy, 15, 17

Al-Badi', 31 al-bahr al-muhit, 110

Calumet, 31 charity, 24 Chit, 47, 50 Christ, 34, 56, 58 ff., 63 ff., 69 f.,

bahrayn, 107 Baidawi, 82

73,75.

balaghah, Al-Baqi, Al-Baqli, Al-Baäri,

133,

13 31 93 108

barzakh, 109

77 Ma Sb

138f.;

NON:

also

Jesus

(Sayyidna ‘Isa) Christianity, 23, 47, 56, 58 f., 64, 66, O81. 734, 83,7925 05:48. £20, IS, 153

Basmalah, 93, 127 Al-Batin, 30 ff., 142

Confucius, 39

Bayazid (Abi Yazid Al-Bistami), 48 ff., 52 Beatitude, 35, 40, 47, 49 f., 136, 138

Cordoba, 95 cosmology, 117

160

see

Consciousness, 41, 47, 49 f.

Creation,

108, 144

32 ff, 35, 103 f., 106,

INDEX

Creator, 48, 51, 78, 143, 146

fish, symbolism of the, 79

cross, the, 63

jitrah, 24

Curé d’Ars, 125 cycles, cosmic or universal,

130,

‘form’ and ‘essence’, 156 Al-Furqan, 80

152, 158 Generosity, Divine, 90, 92 Ad-Da@’im, 31

Genesis, 47, 100, II2, I1g, 126

Dante, 83, 86 death, 118, 135

geography, sacred, 130 Ghadab, 109 Al-Ghaffar, 104 ghamam, 109, 118 ghayb, 151

Denys the Areopagite, St, 112 Dharma, 117 Adh-Dhat, 32, 40, 45, 48, 104,

107, 150 dhikru ’Llah (Remembrance God) 17, 22, 71, 90, 128 Dhi’n-Nin Al-Misri, 49 donkey, 59

Al-Ghazäli, 22, 59, 109, 133, 150

of

Golden Legend, the, 59, 81, 84 Gospels, 14,57 1. 60,169 6,70; 84,06, 100) 121 893307 36.0135 Grace, 52, 88

dress, sacred, 123

Greek Church, 107 Guadalupe, Our Lady of, 95

Eckhart, 47, 54, 90 earth, the (al-ard), 146 f. Egg, primordial, 110 f. €20, 50,40

7401, 78,1131,

Guénon, René, 107, 109, 142 f. gunas, 102, 108

1233;

156 f. emanation, 33, 148, 152 f. Emmerich, Anne-Catherine, 81

Ephesus, 86, 95 esoterism, 79 Essence, the, 34, 40, 45 f., 48 ff., 62, 104, 107, 136 ff., 140, 150

Eucharist, 60, 79 Europe, 66, 69 Eve, 96, 126

evil, 18, 25 ff., 41 f., 133 evolutionism, 153, 155 Existence,

30f.,

33, 40f.,

133, 139 f.

gnosis, 39, 41, 74, 78, 8o ff., 87

II0,

Al-Haba’, 103 hadith, pl. ahddith, 14, 16 f., 20, 24, 48, 75, 83, 96, 102, 105f., III, 120, 125 ff., 136, 138, 147

Hadrat al-ghayb al-mudafi, 151 Hadrat al-ghayb al-mutlaq, 151 al-Hadarat al-ilahiyah al-khams, 144 ff., 149 ff., 158 Hadrat al-jami‘ah, 151 Hadrat ash-shahädat al-mutlaqgah, 151 Hagia Sophia, 90 Hahit, 144, 146, 149 Hammurabi, 69

Hagigqah, 84, 86, 150

fav’, 62 faraqa, 80 fasähah, 13

Al-Haqq, 33, 48, 50, 103, 144, 149

First, the; see Al-Awwal

Al-Hayila, 103

Harmony, Universal, 100

haybah, 103 f. 161

INDEX

Heaven, 58 ff., 81, 85, 89, 109 ff., Hell, 40, 52, 136 ff.

Hermetic symbolism, 63 Hinduism, 36f., 58, 66, 79, 84, 108, I17, 125 Hindus. 20,32, 96, 06 70 118, 125 hijab, 32; see also veil hikmah ‘isawiyah, 81

02

Hiranyagarbha, 110 f., 118 f. houris, 19 humanism,

Ink, the (Midäd), 104, 107 Intellect, 36, 44, 46 ff., 75, 142 f. Inward, the; see Al-Batin

121, 134057 1.543 fl

24

humility, 23, 59, 90 Hurüf, 104 husnä, 128

Huwa, 144, 147 Huwïyah, 151 hyle, 103, 148 hyperholé rs 161 017722) 28 hypocrisy, 18 f., 24 f., 52, 73 Iamblicus, 148

Ibn ‘Abbas, 103 ff., IIO, 113 Ibn Abi Hatim, 109

Ibn ‘Arabi, Muhyi’d-Din, 84, 86, OS LOS eLO7 ES 240 4, ibn al-wagt, 19

Ipseity (Hähüt), 144, 151 Irenaeus, St, 46, 139 Iroquois, 31 Isaac, 88

Isaiah, 99 f. Ishmael, 68, 70

Ishvara, 36, 47 Israel, 81, 88, 97, 99 Israfil, 111 ff., 116 f.

Istilahat as-Siifiyah, “Arabi, 149 ithbat, 147 ittisdlan, 104 CE AMAL TER

by

Ibn

AO:

gabarit, 144, 146, 149 f., 151 jaläliyah, 104 Jamäl, 109 jamäliyah, 104 Jannah, pl. Jannat, 137 Jannat adh-Dhat, 40, 43

Japan, 95

Jarjir, 137 Jawhar al-haba’, 102 f.

idolatry, 17, 40, 56

Al-Jawhar al-hayilani, 103 Jerusalem, 15, 35, 70, 90

Idris, Sayyidna (Enoch), 86

Jesus (Sayyidna ‘Isa), 60, 68 ff.,

Ibrahim ibn Adham, 52

tkhtiyar, 106 ‘Ilm, 47 f.

77 ff., 86, 96 ff., 120, 138

In the Tracks of Buddhism, 67

Jibr@il, 105, 111 ff. Jili, Abdu’l-Karim, 150 jinn, 108, II4, 149 jism, 150 qnana, 125 Job, 100

Indians, North American, 117

Joseph, the Patriarch, 99

Infinite, the, 16, 78, 144, 146 infisälan, 104

Judgement, Last, 35, 37, 64, 112

images, sacred, 118 iman, islam, thsan, 70 f. Immaculate Conception, 68, 106 ‘Imran, 93 f.

162

Judaism, 58, 69 f., 8o f., 96 f.

INDEX

Junayd, Abi’l-Qasim, 17 f., 49 Jurjani, 150 Justice, Divine, 100, 138

Lord, the, 46, 48 ff.

Louis-Marie

Grignon

de Mont-

fort, St, 83 f.

Love of God, 41, 52 f., 121-135 Kaaba, 70 hafarü, 91

Karabi' iin, 115

Ma'ärij, 112 macrocosm, 147 ff. magic, 155 f. Magnificat, 88 ff., 98, 100

Al-Katibiin, 114

Mahat, 107, 110 f.

khalifatun fi al-ard, 147 Khalgq, 103, 108, 144 Khamriyah (by Ibn al-Farid), 84

Mahayana, 50 Maistre, Joseph de, 58

Khatam an-nubuwwah, 70 Khatam al-wiläyat, 81, 96 khayal, 150

II4 malakit, 144, 146, 149 f.

al-Khidr, Sayyidna (Elias), 86 kinayah, 13

Man and his Becoming according

Al-Kiram, 114 kismet, 106 Al-Kitab, 103

man as synthesis, 125 manas, I10

Kali, 116 Kalimatu ’ Llah, 82, 98

Kitab ad-durar al-hisän, by AsSuyüti, 117 Knowledge, 50, 81 Krishna, 56, 73, 84, 127

kufr, 19 Kun, 15, 82

Mala’ ikatu hamalat al-‘ Arsh, 111

man, modern, 39

to the Vedanta, 107, 142

Manava - Dharma - Shastra,

86,

1101: Manifestation, 30 ff., 38, 102, 104, O0. 10, 11912 ero Ter

TA,

1901189715.

Manifestation, animistic or subtle,

108, 142, 154, 157

145f., 148 ff, 150,

Al-Kursi, 103, 109, 146 f., 149 Kwannon, 95

Manifestation,

Lahit, 144, 146, 149, 151

IIO, IIO, 142, 145 ff., 149, ISI Manifestation, formless or supra-

Lailat al-Mi‘raj, 72 language, 19, 28f., 35, 54 ff., 66 Lao-Tzu, 63 Last, the; see Al-Akhir Law Divine, 37, 42, 97 Lawh al-mahfiz, 102, 105 ff., 149

Letters (Hurüf), 104, 106, 111 Liberty, 38 f.

Light Verse, of the Qoran, 91 f. Logos, 65, 70 ff., 75 f., 80, 96, 98, 103, 145

formal,

102,

106,

formal, 102 f., 106, 108, 142 f.,

145 ff., 149, 151, 157 Manifestation, gross or material,

108, 142, 145 f., 148 f., 157 Manu, 59 maqam, pl. magämät, 29, 86 marriage, 125 f. Mary, the Virgin (Sayyidatna Maryam), 56, 59, 68, 70, 77, 79, 8I-I00, 102, 105f., 129, 134

163

INDEX

Narayana, 119 nasüt, 144, 146, 149

Materia prima, 85, 158

Materia secunda, 103 Matsya-Avatära, 79 matter, 142, 145 148 ff.

Natura naturans, 103, 158

al-mawt, 118 Mayda, 27, 32,

35f., 46, 49 ff. T4201, 1455-152

Mecca, 69 f. Mercy,

24,

TOOT

Natura naturata, 103 nature, virgin, 44, 122 ff., 130 Negroes, African, 61

Neo-Platonism, 29 Nicodemus, 86

41,

64,

88ff.,

T00 12133137)

93,

nifaq, 19, 52; see also hypocrisy

AUS

nirukta, 81 Nirvana, Parinirvana, 27, 40, 50,

146, 158

microcosm, 36, 51, 146 ff. Midäd, 104, 107

67, 121, 138, 144 Non-Being or Beyond-Being, 104,

mihrab, 90, 92 f., 95, 97 Mik@ il, 111 ff. mim, 118 miracles, 39, 68, 86, 97, 155

Nous, 148 nudity, sacred, 37, 123

1105142 £2:°746) 153

nur, 108 An-Nür, 102 f., 108 f., 112, 119 f.

Mitatriin, Sayyidna, 112 Monotheism, 67 ff., 139 Moses, 26, 68, 70, 79, 94, 97

obedience, 17 f., 25, 38 f., 41

Moslems, 15, 23, 29, 48, 54, 56f., OLA sill 77 1 OO de iOG,

go, 125 Al-Mw akhkhir, 31 Al-Mubd1’, 31

Omar, the Caliph, 69

Origen, 55, 64 f. orthodoxy, 67, 73, 97 Outward, the; see Az-Zahir

Muhammad, the Prophet, 14 ff., 20.127,20; 50:1, 870-75 77, 70 HO 10 7s 10: LION EES a,

paganism, Greco-Roman, 76 palm-tree (nakhlah), 93 pantheism, 27, 30, 51

126 ff., 134, 136, 147; see also hadith Al-Muhit, 111, 142

Paraclete, the, 80 Paradise, 16, 19 ff., 39 ff., 43, 52,

76 f., 81, 122, 134, 136 ff., 144, 157

al-mulk, 149 f. munafiqun, 24 Al-Mu‘id, 31 Al-Muntaqim, 104 Mugarrabün, 82, 114

Paradiso, 83, 86 Paul, St, 60, 81, 88 Pen, the (Qalam), 102 ff., 111,

149

perfumes, 128 An-Nafs, 103, 107

phenomena, 36 f., 42, 122 f., 127, F330 495

nafy, 147 Names, Divine, 26, 30-45, 104 f.

128 f., 150 nar, 108

164

»

piety, 130

Plotinus, 107, 131, 148 Prajna, 36, 78

INDEX

Prajnaparamuta, 95

Ar-Razzäq, 97

Prakriti, 85 f., 92, 103, 107 f.

Reality, 29, 33, 37, 41, 47, 51,

pralaya, 105 pratikas, 118 predestination, 106 Presences,

five

144 ff.,

72, 75, 87, 110, 138, 152, f., 158 relativity, 32, 141 ff. Religio perennis, 81 f. Resurrection, 16, 37, 91, 104 ff.,

30 ff., 38,

Revelation, 22, 32 ff., 40, 58, 67,

Divine,

149 ff., 158 Principle, the Divine,

Ta fT

A4t, a7t., 50 À, 72;-100, 104, TION MIRE NI SANTA 151,150 f

(LAS:

72/70, CA, O4, 10S; F14/*120, 123, 130, 130 fl, 142, 154 revolt, spirit of, 25, 30, 42

Proverbs, 85 Psalms, 95, 99 f. psyche, 148 psychoanalysis, 155 ‘psychologism’, 154 Ptolemy, 66

rhetoric, Arab, 14-29 riches, 89 Ridwan, 2x

Puranas, 66 Purusha, 92, 102, 107 f., 152

Al-Qadim, 31 Qalam, 102 ff., III, 149 Al-Qalam al-a‘la, 103 ganitin, 95 al-qism al-jabariti al-tlahi, 150 gismah, kismet, 106 Nora 14, 16) TO 20,

145330

Rigour, 64, 89. 138, 146 Risälah, 148 ri2q, 97 Î. Ruah Elohim, 119 Ar-Rüh, 36, 8off., 103, Tir LIU Rah al-Bayan, 62 Ar-Ruh al-kulli, 103

Rähäniyän, 115 Rühu ‘ Lläh, 120

saddaga, 86, 94 fos st:

sahab, 109

29 ff., 44, 54 ff., 67, 77-86, 90-

Sa ‘id ibn Mansür, 105

07-105, 1007 111, 12657, IRL 1324/1301 LAS

salam, 84 f., 128

151 Al-Quddüs, 26, 104 qurb, 32, 52

Rabb, 46, 48 ff. Ar-Rahim, 26, 35, 105, 127 Rahmah, 93, 106 Ar-Rahman, 26, 35, 105, 127 Rahmatun li’l-‘dlamin, 20 Ramana Maharshi, Shri, 130 rajas, 108, 139, 148

Rasül, 147

109,

10, 146,

salat, 84 f.

salth, 25, 77 As-Samarqandi, 18, 22 Samsara, 27, 50 Sanätana-Dharma, 58 Sat, 47, 50, 123

Sat, Chit, Ananda, 47, 50 Satan, 58 f., 62 f., OI satsanga, 123 sattva, 86, 92, 108, 139, 148

science, modern, 33, 154, 156, 158 Scriptures, 54 ff., 63 ff., 66f., 77,

86, 94, 141, 157 165

INDEX

Self, the, 29, 36 f., 41, 44 ff., 65,

74 £., 78, 92, 137, 145, 147, 151, 158 Semitic, 13 £.217, 00277 80,04, 96 f., 118 senses, the, 33, 42

servant, the, 46, 48 ff. sexual union, sacred character of,

105 sexuality, 43, 125 Shahädah, 30, 52, 77 f., 8I, 115, 137, 147 shahädah, 151 Shakti, 83 ff., 92, 95 ff., 106, 116 Shankaracharya, 50, 65, 125 shari‘ah, 147 Shibli, Abi Bakr Ash-, 49

shirk, 19 SHIVA TS, 105,11), 117 shruti, 65

Shrimad Bhägavata Mahäpurana, 31 Shuhüd, 47, 148 Shunya, 74, 144 sidrat al-muntaha, 117 f.

Sifat, 32 f., 48, I04, 107, 150 Sinai, 97 Sioux, 117 soma, 148 Song of Solomon, 15, 84, 87, 126 sophia, 48 Sophia Perennis, 92 soul, the, 64, 83, 145, 148 Spirit, Divine, or Universal, 75, 85, 94, 96, 148; see also ArRüh Stations of Wisdom, 62

sthüla-sharïra, 108 submission, 39 ff. Substance,

Divine

FL Sufism, 29, 144 sukshma-sharira, 108 sun, 62, 75 Sunnah, 22, 29, 62

stirah, 150

Surya-Siddhanta, 66 As-Suyüti, 117 Svayambhü, 111, 118

T'abi'at al-kull, 102 f. Tablet, the guarded, 102, 105 ff.,

149 tajalli, 84 tanzth, 128

Tao-Te-King, 57 tashbih, 128

Tauler, 63

tawfig, 86 tawhid, 49

tayytbat, 77 ta'ayyän, 108 tamas, 108, 139, 148 tariqah, 147 tea ceremony, 74 Texts, Sacred, 66 f. theism, non-theism, 67, 144 Thomas, St, 23 Throne, the, 105, 117; see also

Al-‘Arsh tin, 108 tin lazib, 120

Torah, 57 f., 77, 79, 81 transmigration, 139 f. Trimürti, 15, III

or Universal,

19, 33, 40, 45, 49, 52, 55, 86, 80,

92, 102 f., III, 133, 137, 152 166

Sufi texts, 103 Sufis, AT4AMNTO 27, 34,230 11540; AT fh. P52) 91; Fase, egos

True Devotion Virgin, 83 Turiya, 36

to

the

Holy

INDEX

‘ulamä', 61, 71

Walidiyah,

Ulithiyah, 151

Wajhu ’ Lläh, 45, 128, 136 Al-Warith, 31

Umm al-Kitab, 61 f., 103 ummi, 105 Î.

150

wast'a, 109

Understanding Islam, 84 Union, 46 f., 49, 51 f.

AI-Wäsi', 142

Unity, 32, 120, 150 Al-‘Unsur al-a‘zam, 103, 107

woman compared with man, 129 ‘Women, perfumes and prayer’, 126 ff.

upaya 22, 78 ‘Uqlat al-mustawfiz,

Waters, the, 86, 107, rrof.

by

Ibn

‘Arabi, 103 ugnuti, 85

usjudi, 85 Vaishvänara, 36 Veda, the, 57 Vedanta, 29, 125 veil, 32, 35 f., 44, 137

vijnamaya-kosha, 108 Vihriti, 103 virtue, 17f., 26, 29, 40, 44, 63, 130, 134 Vishnu, 15, 66, 79, 96, 112, 119

Void, the, 74, 140

Wrath, Divine, 64, 105, 137

Wujüd, 47, 148 Yaum al-Qiyämah, 104 yin-yang, 146 Yogi, the, 50

yugas, 117 Zachariah, 90 zähid, 22 Az-Zähir, 30 ff. Zen, 28 zill, 62 zulmah, 62

167

>

:

LEA

oH

e

1 S

+

€

De Le
= orl}

1

iy

é

i,

=

=

»

&

| | .

fout

>

a

+

|

i :

di

‘

Lis

We

À A.

“al 4

Peart

SAAS

Fy

AR

|

bo ‘lé

RAT

Sk

re RS)

di ee ip ae tae

(SAN *

da

L

LES

4

|

"

a!

By FRITHJOF

SCHUON

UNDERSTANDING

:

ISLAM

‘The best work in English on the meaning of Islam.’ SEYYED HOSSEIN NASR

‘,.. a masterpiece of comparative religion, in the light of which certain other attempts to compare Islam with Christianity seem like crude and biased simplifications. Such objectivity as Frithjof Schuon’s, though it is the only legitimate basis for comparative religion, is in fact exceedingly rare.’ Islamic Quarterly

IN THE TRACKS OF BUDDHISM ‘.. . yet another profound work by Schuon in English . . . the volume needs and repays repeated readings and meditation from time to time.” World Faiths ‘, . . the brilliant manner in which he sheds light on the intellectual exposition of the Buddhist experience.’ World Buddhist ‘The author is . . . a fine scholar and, even more important,

a man of profound religious sensibility.” The Middle Way

By G. E. VON GRUNEBAUM CLASSICAL ISLAM In an unbelievably brief span, the religion of Islam united the Arab people and within less than a hundred years dominated the Mediterranean and spread deep into central Asia and across the borders of India. In this study the author examines the relationship, both cultural and political, between the Islamic world and these other lands, and at the same time

elaborates the economic, social and intellectual factors and forces which shaped the Muslim world and moulded its relationship with the ‘infidels’. Dr. von Grunebaum has written an authoritative work which will prove invaluable not only to Islamic students and scholars but to historians, (particularly mediaevalists), sociologists and political scientists as well.

SBN 04 297021 0