7

M ahm ud Shabistarl and Shams al-Dln Lahljl

The com m entary o f Lahljl upon the G ulshan-i raz o f M ahm ud Shabistarl is one of
the m ost im portant texts o f philosophical Sufism in the Persian language w hile
the G ulshan-i raz (The Secret G arden o f D ivin e M ystery) itself is a suprem e
m asterpiece o f Persian Sufi poetry. In introducing this section an account must
be given, needless to say, o f both Shabistarl and Lahljl. The G ulshan-i raz w as
w ritten in a p erio d o f a few days by M ah m u d Shabistarl in response to a num ber
o f questions sent to him b y the K hurasani Sufi m aster A m ir H usayn H iraw i, w ho
w as a khalifah o f the celebrated Suhraw ardiyyah Shaykh B ah a’ al-D in Z ak ariy ya’
o f M ultan. The G ulshan-i raz, consisting o f about a thousand verses, soon becam e
extrem ely fam ous and has rem ained to this day one o f the m ost w id ely read and
oft-quoted o f Sufi poem s because it com bines heavenly-inspired beauty with
rem arkable clarity and sim plicity w hile discussing the m ost im portant elem ents
o f ‘irfan. Yet, despite the exceptional fam e o f this w ork, little is know n about the
life o f its author.
W hat we know about Sa'd al-D in M ahm ud ibn A m in al-D in ‘A bd al-Karim
Shabistari is that he was born in a town near Tabriz by the nam e o f Shabistar.
He studied in that area, and travelled in various Islam ic countries such as Egypt,
A rabia and Anatolia. He underwent Sufi training with at least two known masters
o f A zarbaijan, Shaykh A m in al-D in and Shaykh Baha’ al-D in. He was fam ous as
both a Sufi and a religious scholar and died in Shabistar where his tomb is to be
found to this day. It is believed that he was born in 687/1288 and, according to m ost
scholars o f later centuries, died in 720 /1320 -132 1 at the age o f thirty-three. Some
recent scholars, basing them selves m ostly on a w ork by H afiz H usayn K arbala’I
Tabrlzl entitled R aw dat al-jinan (The Garden o f Paradise), one o f the earliest works
to m ention Shabistarl, believe, however, that the poet died some twenty years
later in 740/1339-1340. Shabistari also wrote a few other w orks, am ong the most
im portant being H aqq al-yaqin (The Truth o f Certainty) and M ir’at al-m uhaqqiqin
(M irror o f the Verifiers).
 M a h m u d Shabistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h a m m a d L a h iji 477

It is know n that Shabistari was a Sunni in m adhhab and an A sh'arite in kalam.

But above all else he was a Sufi deeply influenced by the teachings o f the School o f
Ibn ‘Arabi. M uch o f the G ulshan-i raz is pure m etaphysics in Persian poetic form ,
som etim es one or two lines sum m arizing a whole treatise o f the Shaykh al-Akbar.
In his Sa adat-nam ah (The Treatise on Happiness), M ahm ud Shabistari writes that
he studied the Futuhat and the Fusus o f Ibn ‘A rabi thoroughly, but that despite this
deep attraction to his works and com m and o f his teachings, felt a certain unease
when reading them. His m aster explained to him that this unease came from a dark
element o f his own soul but reflected in Ibn ‘A rabi’s writings. In any case along
w ith ‘Iraqi, Shams al-D in Lahiji and Jam i, Shabistari is the greatest Sufi poet o f the
Persian language associated with the gnosis and philosophical Sufism o f the School
o f Ibn ‘Arabi. A s for his Gulshan-i raz, it is a unique w ork o f the Persian language
in com bining poetry o f celestial inspiration with the lucid exposition o f the most
profound m etaphysical teachings.
Precisely because o f its clarity and its synthesizing nature, the Gulshan-i raz
becam e the subject o f num erous com m entaries over the ages, from those o f Kam al
al-D in H usayn A rdibili, Shah D a'i ila’Llah, Nizam al-D in M ahm ud H usayni and
Q adi M ir H usayn Yazdi, to the M ishwaq (Incitement to Yearning) o fM u lla M uhsin
Fayd Kashani, which is a com m entary on a num ber o f sym bols used in the Gulshan,
to M uham m ad Iqbal’s ‘n ew ’ Gulshan-i raz. Besides Iqbal, other commentators were
form ally Sufis belonging to various schools o f tasaw w u f but one can also count an
Ism aili com m entator am ong them.
The most important com m entary is, however, that o f Shams al-Din M uham m ad
ibn Yahya Lahiji entitled M afatih a l- ija z f i sharh gulshan-i raz (Keys o f W onder in
the C om m entary upon the G ulshan-i raz) written in 877/1473. This long w ork of
over 800 pages in its current edition is based entirely on Ibn ‘A rabian term inology
and provides a complete cycle o f ‘irfan written in clear Persian and em bellished
w ith poem s o f m any other Sufis especially RumI and M aghribl. It is certainly
am ong the m ost complete and thorough texts o f philosophical Sufism in the Persian
language.
Little is known about the life o f Lahiji except that he was the forem ost khalifah
o f the fam ous Sufi m aster Sayyid M uham m ad N urbakhsh and belonged to the
N urbakhshiyyah Order. He entered the order in 849/1445 and served his master
for sixteen years. It is also known that he enjoyed great fam e as a m ajor Sufi master
during his own lifetim e, died in Shiraz in 912/1506-1507 and is buried in that city
near the Shah D a‘i Gate. He was visited by such fam ous philosophers as DawanI,
Ghiyath al-D in M ansur Dashtaki and Qadi M aybudi, all o f w hom held him in
utm ost respect. It is said that Lahiji always wore black and that when Shah Ism a'il
visited him and asked w hy he did so, Lahiji announced that he was in m ourning
throughout the year for the death o f Im am Husayn. There was, however, a more
esoteric reason. In his com m entary Lahiji speaks o f the m eaning o f black light
478 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

w hich Shabistari m entions and identifies with the state o f realization o f Reality
beyond all m anifestation and differentiation. It is said that Lahljl identified him self
w ith that station and therefore wore black.
Besides this comm entary, Lahiji com posed a m athnawi entitled A srar al-shuhud
(M ysteries o f Contemplation) and a diwan o f poetry in which he used the pen-nam e
A siri. But his most im portant w ork is without doubt the com m entary upon the
G ulshan-i raz, a selection o f which appears below.
S. H. Nasr
 C O M M E N T A R Y ON T H E S E C R E T G A R D E N OF D IV IN E M Y S T E R Y

Shark gulshan-i raz

Translated for this volum e by M oham m ad H. Fagh foory from Shams al-D in
M uham m ad Lahiji Gilani, Sharh gulshan-i raz, ed. with an introduction b y ‘A li
Q uli M ahm udi Bakhtyari (Tehran, 1381 Sh./2002), pp. 69-104.

It is gen erally held am ong the seekers o f truth that the first obligation o f those
obedient to G o d w ho reach the age o f adolescence is know ledge o f G o d (m a'rifat
A llah ), w hich is the foundation o f all realized know ledge and religious beliefs.
In relation to this, the obligation o f all the m an d ato ry rites and religious duties
becom es secondary. W ith regard to the particu lars, the paths to acquire D ivine
know ledge are countless, [for it has been said that] the roads tow ard G o d are as
num erous as the num ber o f G o d ’s creatures. In respect to the universals, however,
there are two w ays tow ard this end. One is through rational argum ents (istidlal),
and the second through intuition and unveiling (kashf), as has been discussed
previously.
The w ay o f rational argum ent is to seek p ro o f o f the Creator from the created.
The w ay o f unveiling is for the created to rem ove the veils o f [Divine] beauty.
Both o f these paths rely on the intellect and contemplation, for intellection and
contem plation are w ays o f journeying from the manifest to the non-m anifest, from
the form to the m eaning. Therefore, the contem plative m an first questions his own
intellect and says, ‘I am perplexed w ith regard to my own intellect’. One o f the first
difficulties that arises is that I am bew ildered about the nature o f m y ow n intellect
and cannot properly com prehend what is called ‘intellection’ in the term inology o f
the seekers o f truth. He [Shabistari] states that know ing the nature o f intellection
is an obligation because it is necessary for the knowledge o f G od.

Poem:
Knowledge is the foundation o f know ing God,
It is like the sight for the eye o f the heart.
On the path o f know ing God, you w ill never be on the right course,
Until you know you rself well.

Since real knowledge o f G od, that is to say becom ing connected to the Real
O rigin, is attainable only through a vertical jou rn ey toward Him , and because the
dom inance o f the contingent rules o f m ultiplicities prevent seeing the beauty o f
the One N ecessary Being, [Shabistari] alludes to the special jou rn ey upon w hich
knowledge o f G od depends.
480 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

Poem:
You asked, ‘Tell me what is intellection?
For I have rem ained perplexed about its m eaning’.
Since you asked this question repeatedly [I shall answer] so that the eager
Seeker is encouraged and devotes his total attention to the answer.

[Shabistari] says:
Intellection is a jou rn ey from falsehood to Truth.
It is to see in the particular the Absolute Universal.

Falsehood stands in opposition to the truth. Truth is o f two categories: the real
(h a q iq i) and that w hich is relational to it ( id a fi), and so is false. The Real Truth
is the Being o f the One A bsolute Being w ho stands opposite to non-existence.
T herefore, the real false is non-existence, ‘Be aware that all things except G od
are false’.
Relative falsehood is that which is real only in relation to som ething lower than
itself. For example, honey is useful and real only in relation to m oist and cold na­
tures, and harm ful and false in relation to hot and dry natures. The skin o f melon
and rice and the straw o f wheat are false in relation to man because they are not
edible, but they are real and useful in relation to anim als, and so forth.
The relatively real and relatively false are both categories o f the real Truth, for
they are under the category o f existence and not outside o f it. B y the true and false
o f this group we mean ‘real true’ and ‘real false’. The m eaning o f this poem is that
intellection, according to this group, is the w ayfarer’s jou rn ey toward unveiling
m ultiplicities and entifications, which are in reality non-existence in relation to the
Truth, that is to say, in relation to the Absolute U nity o f Being which is the Real
Truth. This jou rn ey consists o f the wayfarer reaching the station o f the annihilation
in G od (fana f i ’Llah), and the disappearance o f all particles o f engendered things
in the rays o f the light o f the unity o f His Essence like a drop in the ocean.

Poem:
Travel on this path in such a m anner
that duality disappears.
A n d if duality still remains,
It w ill begin to disappear
As you proceed on the path.
You shall not becom e H im , but if you try,
You w ill reach a station where your ‘I-ness’ w ill disappear.

The second stanza o f the [previous] poem , which asserts, ‘It is to see in the
particulars the Absolute U niversal’, is an allusion to [attaining] utmost perfection
 M a h m u d Sh abistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h am m a d L a h iji 481

in knowing G od (m a'rifah), which is finding subsistence in G od (baqa b i’Llah).

There is no station above this station. There are differences among stations o f those
w ho have reached union [with G od], because often entification and individuation
prevent witnessing true Unity. He says that in the term inology o f the people o f the
path [i.e. Sufis], intellection, which is the means o f acquiring G od’s knowledge,
refers to the path on which the w ayfarer finds that his own individuality and all
other individualities are im m ersed in the ocean o f D ivine Unity. A fter annihilation
and return to his original nothingness, he [a Sufi] w ould find subsistence in G od
(baqa b i’Llah). Hence he w ill see all visible and invisible things and those phenom ­
ena which are the locus o f the m anifestation o f a single Truth that is m anifested in
different form s and in different places. He w ould see the single Truth m anifested
in all contingent things.

Poem:
For the sake o f those who have discernm ent,
The One G o d m ade the six directions
The locus o f m anifestation o f His signs o f power.
That is w hy the Noble Being told us,
‘W herever you turn, there is His Face.’
If I drin k water in a pitcher to quench m y thirst,
I am witnessing the Truth hidden in the water.

W ith discernm ent and a truth-seeking eye, the wayfarer w ill becom e free o f the
pain o f otherness {ghayriyyah) and see the Absolute Truth in every single entity
that is in fact part o f the totality o f Truth. If one looks w ith discernm ent [one will
realize that] all entifications are the very same Absolute which is entified. In reality,
entification is a contingent being that has not been actualized in the external w orld,
and other than the Absolute Being there is no reality. This station is the utmost
degree o f witnessing by those who have attained perfection.
Since he [the Shaykh] has presented the description o f intellection in the term i­
n ology o f the people o f vision and witness, he also alludes to the w ay o f the people
o f opinion and rational argum ent and says: A n d to A llah belongs the East and the
West, so w herever to turn you shall see Allah’s Countenance. V erily A llah is All-
Encom passing and A ll-K n ow in g’ (Q ur’an 2:115). Philosophers who have reflected
on this, have confirm ed it.
A philosopher {hakim) is a person who knows through rational argum ent and
acts on the basis o f that knowledge. A ccording to truth-seeking people, one is not
called a philosopher {hakim) m erely on the basis o f one’s knowledge o f things. [The
m eaning o f the poem is that] the wise who have contemplated and com m entated
on the m eaning o f intellection, have defined it as follows:
482 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

Poem:
W hen a hypothesis appears in one’s heart,
First it is called recollection.

It means w henever a form from among form s appears in the soul, it finds
its w ay to the heart. A ccording to the definition o f people it is the rational soul
that differentiates among m eanings. Before discussing the notion o f intellectual
conception, by which we mean knowledge, there is a form that appears first in
the m in d called recollection (tadhakkur). W hen a philosopher wants to prove
an unknow n through rational argum ent and reason, he must first gather desired
principles and precepts so that he can demonstrate the known principles from the
unknow n. Therefore, w henever he conceptualizes the prelim inary inform ation
that he knows [whether its principles are known or unknown] he is recollecting or
being rem inded (tadhakkur). This is because he had forgotten [the truth] and now
he has rem em bered it, for there is a thirst to know the unknow n. That is to say,
understanding that which is known and perceived in general terms has to reach
the heart, but because o f physical im purities and obstacles one forgets what he has
perceived but m ay rem em ber with full concentration and rem oval o f obstacles.
T hose things becom e known because o f the rem oval o f the obstacles. A s some phi­
losophers have stated, although in the beginning he knew the principles o f things,
he had forgotten them because he did not pay attention to them. W hen he pays
attention to rem em bering them , he is thus rem inded o f them. [H owever], m erely
rem em bering those principles is not enough to learn them. Further consideration
and contem plation are needed.

Poem:
W hen you recollect som ething during contem plation,
In com m on usage it is called taking heed (‘ibrat).

The above lines state that when one com es across the principles one seeks, one
should think about the quality o f the known and the unknown. If what one seeks
is conceptual (tasaw w uri), how should its universal or particular aspects, or genus
fin s ) and specific differentia (fa sl), be arranged and prioritized so that it can
lead toward know ing that which is sought? A n d if the unknow n is a conceptual
judgm ent (tasdiq), how should the hierarchical order o f the two initial concepts
be in the general (iqtirani) and exceptional (istith n ai) analogy to lead toward the
desired result?
As for the second part o f the poem , it tells us that the philosophical term for the
concept that was just m entioned, according to his interpretation, is 'ibrat, which
derives from 'ubur, m eaning ‘transition’. That is w hy bridges built over rivers and
passages are called m a'bar, which m eans ‘the place o f transition’, because people use
 M a h m u d Sh abistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h am m a d L a h iji 483

them to pass from one point to another. At this point a philosopher has gone past
conceptualizing prelim inary precepts, and in a special way has attained that w hich
he was seeking. That is w hy it is called ‘ibrat, because conceptualizing precepts in
such a m anner leads to the desired results, as he said:

Poem:
A hypothesis upon which one reflects
Is called intellection by the people o f reason.
W hen conceptualization is accom panied by contem plation, as described,
By the people o f intellect who are m asters o f rational discourse,
and know things according to the laws o f intellect,
Th is is called intellection (tafakkur).

N ow Shabistari describes intellection according to the definition o f the people

o f intellect and says:

Poem:
Through hierarchical order o f know n hypotheses,
The unknow n is proved and becom es know n.

Since intellect is defined as the hierarchical order (tartib) o f known principles

that lead to the discovery o f the unknown, know that the view o f the people o f
knowledge is that meditation and intellection require finding the unknown through
that w hich is known. Undoubtedly, it is not possible to fin d every unknow n just
through every known, and therefore it is necessary to fin d each unknow n through
the known that corresponds to it. In addition, there is no doubt that acquiring a
particular unknow n from what is known is not possible in every sense that one
m ay desire; rather, it requires a particular order ( tartib) o f those known things,
w hich are contingent on whether they are in relation to a concept {tasawwur) or a
judgm ent {tasdiq), as was m entioned previously.
The known consist o f those known subjects that are the basis {m abadi) o f the
objective that is sought. From that particular hierarchical order, the p ro o f o f the
unknow n becom es known, in other words, the p roof o f the unknow n objective
becom es known. For exam ple, the reality o f a hum an being is an unknown hypoth­
esis com posed o f two parts, that o f an anim al and a rational faculty, in a special
hierarchical order that prioritizes the universal over the particular. The creation
o f the w orld, a conceptual unknow n, is com posed o f the concept o f a changing
w orld and the concept o f a created universal that undergoes change. This is how the
particular hierarchical order, that is the priority o f the m ajor prem ise over m inor
prem ise, and the necessity o f the m inor and the universality o f m ajor and the like
are understood, that is to say, how the conclusion becom es known and proved.
484 From the School o f Illum ination to P hilosophical Mysticism

Know that a conceptual hypotheses (m ajhul-i tasaw w uri) is derived from a con­
cept and a conceptual judgment (majhul-i tasdiqi) is derived from concepts. However,
no one has presented an explanation why tasawwur cannot be derived from tasdiq
and vice-versa. Therefore, it is possible that it could also happen. Here, his statement
that the proof o f the unknown becomes known could be an allusion to the fact that
it could be possible for it to happen. Although proving a concept among the seekers
o f truth is defined as knowledge based upon a hypothetical subject that is predicated
upon the relationship between the two, among the possessors o f intuition, in fact,
tasdiq is taken to denote its literal meaning, not a logical concept. Since during the
formation o f the unknown concepts, the known concepts must be prioritized and
their hierarchies determined, the two must meet in the middle so that they would
lead to the p ro o f o f the concept that is desired. A s he said:

Poem:
The m ajor prem ise is like a father,
Followed by the m inor prem ise, which is like a mother.
O brother! K now that the result is like a child.

In predicative propositions, the m inor and m ajor premises and in conditional

propositions (qadaya-yi shartiyyah), the two premises that are technically one after
the other, are like a man (father) and a wom an (mother) who m arry each other, and
a child is born out o f their marriage. Shabistari expressed this in philosophical term i­
nology and said that the details o f such a disposition need to observe certain rules:

Poem:
But such an order in its details,
Is in need o f following certain rules.

The above discourse advocates contemplation in the style of philosophers, and says
that the way people o f intellect obtain knowledge requires them to ascertain the rules.
These rules are universal and correspond to all their particulars and components in
order to be applicable to them. Here, by ‘rule’ we mean the science o f logic whose rules
are universal and explain the order o f existents o f the known in a manner that would
lead to the discovery o f the hypothetical or conceptual unknown. However, attaining real
certainty, which is peace of heart and liberation from the anxiety o f doubt, is not possible
except through witnessing and examining that which corresponds to ‘ayn al-yaqin and
haqq al-yaqin (The Truth o f Certainty). As he said:

Poem:
If all those efforts are not accom panied by G o d ’s help,
Indeed it w ould be nothing but sheer emulation.
 M a h m u d Sh abistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h a m m a d L a h iji 485

I f the special order and the rules o f logic, argum entation, and proofs are not
accom panied b y D ivine Guidance, which includes also spiritual preparedness and
inner purity, and if the heart is not illum inated by Divine Light, nothing w ill be
accom plished except pure imitation and repetition.

Poem:
That imitating m an is like a handicapped person;
Although he possesses reason and sound argument,
The depth o f his argum ent and form o f presentation
Distance him from discernm ent and sound judgm ent.

Since m ultiplicity and unity are contradictory, it is hardly possible for m an to

attain Divine knowledge by m erely relying on the hierarchical order o f prem ises
(m uqaddam at). A s he points out:

The road is long and tedious, abandon that.

Like M oses cast thy staff aside for a while.

Philosophers and theologians unanim ously agree that understanding the real­
ity o f things by w ay o f rational argum entation and reason alone is m ost difficult.
A cquirin g knowledge o f G o d ’s Attributes and Essence is im possible, as it has been
said: ‘The reality o f G o d ’s Attributes and Essence is hidden from the understand­
ing o f reason.’ W henever we perceive a conceptual judgm ent (tasdiqi) and seek to
understand it in the m ost perfect m anner, our m ind m ust be directed toward that
w hich it knows so that it can pass from one object o f knowledge to another in an
undifferentiated manner until it can fin d its desired object o f knowledge. Our m ind
already knows those knowables as principles (m abadi), but the m ind must put the
principles in a special order that leads it toward the unknown which it is looking
for. O bviously that special order requires paying attention to that which is sought,
detaching the m ind from ties and attachments and directing the m in d toward the
intelligibles (m a'qulat).
In spite o f all this, that which is related to the [Divine] Essence m ust be appropri­
ately differentiated from that which is concerned with Attributes. Otherwise, truths
w ill rem ain hidden. That is w hy he [Shabistari] said: ‘ That jou rn ey is long and tedi­
ous, abandon it.’ For after endless troubles, the ultimate result is that understanding
the reality o f things can only be attained through attributes and characteristics o f
things. A cquiring Divine knowledge, exalted is He, is a spiritual jou rn ey to His
im m anent, negative Attributes, and this kin d o f knowledge (m a rifa h ) w ill not
be free o f doubts and can be understood through illusive im aginations. Gaining
perfect knowledge about things is thus im possible by this method. A cquirin g true
knowledge will not be possible except through purification and illum ination o f the
486 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

heart. Purification is contingent upon the negation o f all that is other than God,
for as long as a pungent substance is not cleansed from the heart with the water o f
invocation, the inscription o f real taw hid w ill not be engraved upon it. The way o f
reason that is based on proving som ething on the basis o f logical dem onstration
(burhan) is the opposite o f the way o f purification. For a m an o f discursive orien­
tation, reason is the explanation and elaboration o f the reasoned, whereas for the
gnostic, reason is a veil for the reasoned. Therefore, the m ore reasons one presents,
the more hidden the object o f inquiry becom es. Indeed the utmost perfection o f
taw hid is negation o f otherness, as it has been said: ‘The perfect form o f taw hid is
negation o f attributes from it.’ That w hich is a rational argum entation for a scholar
is intuitively dem onstrated for a gnostic fa r if) ; that which is the veil o f the Face
o f the Veiled is the m irror o f the beauty o f the Beloved held before the people o f
vision and discovery.

Poem:
The perfection o f the man on the path o f certainty is that
He w ill see G o d in whatever he sees.

As for the second part o f the poem which says, ‘Like M oses cast thy staff aside
for a while’, the staff represents rational argum entation (istidlali). The correspond­
ence between these two is very obvious, for just as the blind m an relies on his staff
to w alk, those w hose hearts are not illum inated with the ‘sta ff’ o f unveiling, and
cannot see true unity with a spiritual eye, w alk on the path o f gnosis (m a'rifah)
w ith the help o f the ‘sta ff’ o f rational argum entation.

Poem:
The abode o f our intellect and reflection is the realm o f [Divine] Attributes.
Divine Essence is far superior to knowledge and gnosis.
His Light is enough to be the guide o f the caravan,
N obody who follow s the Truth w ill ever get lost.
One should know the com m and and creation only from G od,
[Do you know anyone] who came to know o f G od through this or that person?

In other words, as long as M oses was saying, ‘The Lord o f Heaven and Earth’,
the Pharaoh did not believe him and kept saying, ‘V erily your prophet w hom G od
sent to you is mad.’ W hen [God] com m anded [Moses] to ‘cast aw ay thy sta ff’, the
light o f unity appeared from behind the veil o f that which was visible and destroyed
all the illusions and im aginary realities that the Pharaoh had accum ulated, for ‘It
sw allowed up whatever they [sorcerers] had brought forth’ (Q ur’an 7:117). There­
fore, the seeker o f G o d m ust totally abandon the w ay o f rational argum ent and
pay attention to the Real Originator. W ith the guidance o f a perfect spiritual guide
 M ah m u d Sh abistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h a m m a d L a h iji 487

he m ust p u rify his heart from the dust o f strangers so that the beauty o f the True
Beloved w ill be shown in that m irror. W hatever other people have heard w ill then
becom e visible to him.

Poem:
Because it was m ade possible for me to see [the Face o f the Beloved],
Today, I am not a hostage to the D ay o f Judgment.

D ha'lab Yam ani once asked His H oliness Hazrat ‘A ll, ‘D id you see your Lord?’
‘A ll replied, ‘W ould I w orship that which I do not see?’ and added, ‘I saw Him,
then I recognized Him, then I w orshipped Him. I w ould not worship a lord which
I do not see.’ A s the Q ur’an says: ‘W hoever hopes to meet his Lord, he m ust do
righteous deeds and must worship his Lord and not assign a partner unto his Lord’
(Q ur’an 18:110).

Poem:
I [am the one] who can see the Beauty o f the Friend eye to eye,
I do not need any description o f His Face.
The eye that is weak in its sight,
Is blind during the day like a bat.

Since the path that leads to the Friend is the path o f lovers who are the people
o f purity, and because these people go toward the path o f D ivine U nity through
unveiling and witnessing, he [Shabistari] said:

Poem:
Com e to the abode o f peace where suddenly,
A bush w ill tell you ‘Verily I am God.’

In the above poem, the abode o f peace consists o f purifying the heart in a manner
that m akes it w orthy o f G o d ’s theophany, for witnessing the Beauty o f the Possessor
o f M ajesty is not possible through the aforementioned path. The bush is the reality
o f hum anity that is the locus o f the manifestation o f Divine Attributes and Essence.
This m eaning is taken from the verse o f the Q ur’an where G od says: ‘When [Moses]
reached [the bush] he was called from the right side o f the valley in the blessed field
from the bush: O M oses verily I am God, the Lord o f this world and the next.’
In other w ords, from the abode o f peace that is the goal o f the path o f pu rifica­
tion o f the heart and adornm ent o f the soul comes D ivine em anation and opening,
especially for the people o f witness and unveiling. In the blessed field, where the
realm o f the Perfect M an lies, one seeks what one seeks. In the w orld o f m ultiplici­
ties there is no realm m ore blessed than that where a special bush alludes to its
488 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

own perfection, which is the reality o f the bush, and says to M oses, ‘verily I am the
nurturer o f the people o f this w orld and the next.’

Poem:
I[ness] and we[ness] are the veils o f the path,
W hen we [ness] disappears, we are not ‘we’.

In this poem the Shaykh calls the aspiring w ayfarer on the path and advises
him to follow the path o f purification and cleanse the m irror o f the heart from the
dust o f strangers so that by virtue o f the dom inance o f the theophany o f the One,
and unity o f the sym bol and the sym bolized, with the ear o f his heart he w ill hear
the call o f ‘Verily I am A llah’ and with the truth-seeing eye he w ill see and know
him self and God.
W hen a gnostic reaches the utmost degree o f witnessing and unveiling o f [the
truth] without the disturbance o f illusions by im purities, he sees in all things the
Beauty o f the U nity o f the Absolute One, as he said:

Poem:
For the truth-seeking m an for w hom unity is in witnessing,
The first glance is to the light o f Being.

A seeker o f truth is that Perfect M an for w hom the reality o f things have been
disclosed and revealed as they are. This station is only attainable for the person who
has reached the station o f D ivine W itnessing and who, with the eye o f vision, has
seen that the reality o f all things is, in fact, the Truth. Other than the One Absolute
Being no other being exists. The existence o f other things is nothing m ore than
pure attribution.

Poem:
The eye that sees the Truth cannot see anything other than the Truth,
The falsity lies only in the eyes o f those without vision.

What is meant by unity (w ahdah) is Unity o f the Truth as it is m anifested by Itself

in the realm o f multiplicities, for it has illuminated the created order with the light o f
existence. It is the witnessing o f the vision o f the Truth by the Truth. In other words,
the Perfect Man has traversed the illusive stations o f multiplicities o f form s and
m eanings and has reached the station o f witnessing Divine Unity (tawhid) with the
truth-seeing eye, and he who possesses the eye o f the Truth sees the Truth in all form s
o f existing things. Since he sees him self and all created things as subsisting in God,
inevitably ‘otherness’ and ‘duality’ are removed from his sight. Therefore, whatever he
sees is seen by the Truth and known by the Truth. In seeing all things he first sees the
 M a h m u d Shabistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h a m m a d L a h iji 489

light o f the Being o f the Absolute One. He who witnesses in this way is like a person
who has two pairs o f eyes by which he sees G od manifested and the created world
as non-manifested. Creation for him is the m irror o f the Truth in which the Truth is
m anifested and creation veiled, as the m irror itself is hidden by the face.

Poem:
In the theophany o f that Essence,
Existence m anifested Itself to m y eye.
So whatever I see, I see in His vision.

Poem:
W hatever I look at, I see T h y Face.
That is because only Thou com est before m y sight.

In some m anuscripts the first part o f the poem ‘The seeker o f truth for w hom
U nity is in witnessing’ is recorded as ‘The seeker o f Truth who has witnessed Divine
Unity! In this case it m eans that the seeker o f Truth is the one who has attained
divine knowledge through witnessing and unveiling, and not by w ay o f reason
and rational argum entation. This is because for a gnostic, the Truth consists o f the
Absolute Being. The Shaykh [Shabistari] considers the Absolute Being and Truth
as synonym ous. He says:

The heart that witnessed the light and purity o f Divine Knowledge,
In whatever he saw, he saw G o d first.

This indicates that the one who grasps the reality o f things in the creation o f
hum an beings, w hich is the essence o f the form s o f engendered things, possesses
a heart that is illum inated with purity and the light o f knowledge (m a rifa h ). The
heart is the locus o f the m anifestation o f the Divine Station (sha’n ) and the essence
o f hum an beings. A s M aghribi said:

You are that Treasure which becam e hidden

From the sight o f the two worlds in the ruins o f the heart.

A gnostic is a person w hom Divine Presence has elevated to the station o f

w itnessing H is Attributes and Essence. This station comes by w ay o f attaining
certain states and through the unveiling [of Truth], which descends upon such a
person not m erely by virtue o f his knowledge, for it has been said that knowledge
is like an eye for such a person and m a rifa h is the state o f being a gnostic. A heart
that is adorned with this perfection sees G o d first in whatever he sees. This is the
station o f d h u ’Waynayn, that is to say, where one possesses two [a pair of] eyes.
49 0 From the School o f Illum ination to P hilosophical M ysticism

A s was m entioned before, [such a person] sees G od as m anifest and creation as

non-m anifest. The m ost visible thing in creation is G od, w ho is the Truth, because
He is m anifest by H im self whereas other things are m anifested through Him. Do
you not see that, for example, if an object is seen from a far distance, its existence
is perceived first? However, som etim es it happens that because the distance is too
far, it is not clear whether it is an object, or a bear, or som ething else. But under
all circum stances it is perceived by the reality o f its existence. Otherwise it does
not exist, because other than that form everything is non-existent. That is w hy the
seeker o f truth says, ‘G o d is perceived and creation is intelligible’.

Poem:
T h y Face is m anifest in the universe but is hidden in essence.
I f It is hidden, then what is m anifest in the universe?
The universe has becom e the locus o f m anifestation o f T h y G oodness
and Beauty,
O m y Beloved, tell m e where the locus o f m anifestation and the soul o f
the Universe is?

In the previous poem , [the Shaykh] says that the first glance is upon the light
o f Being. In the above poem he adds, ‘W hatever he saw, he first saw G o d in it’. To
clarify, according to this group w ho seeks the Truth, G o d is the One Being that is
m anifested in a [specific] form in each place. Since the witnessing o f the people o f
vision varies according to their dispositions in different tim es, in his description
o f Divine Nam es each person has inform ed us from another station. One says, ‘ I
saw nothing unless I saw G o d before if.

Poem:
By G od, in whatever we set our sight,
We did not see other than God.

We explained this station before. Another person says, ‘I saw nothing unless I
saw G od after it! Since Reality is hidden and veiled by certain accidents and entifica-
tions, the seeker first sees the veil and then witnesses the Truth.

Poem:
Beyond this veil I have a Beloved,
The beauty o f Her face is w orthy o f being veiled.
The whole universe is like a curtain filled by m any form s,
A n d all things are designed over that curtain.
This veil separated m e from Thee,
This is what a veil does by nature.
 M a h m u d Shabistari an d Shams al-D in M u h a m m a d L a h iji 491

No! No! There is never separation between us,

Never w ould this veil separate Thee from me.

The person who possesses this station is called ‘possessor o f intellect* and sees
creation as manifest and G od as non-manifest and hidden. For him G od is the m irror
o f creation, and like the hiding o f the Absolute in the relative, the m irror itself appears
hidden in that station. This station is the opposite o f the previous one (Possessor o f
Eye) which we described. Another person said, ‘I saw nothing unless I saw G od in it!
Sim ilar to the contingent archetypal entities that are reflected in their manifestations,
the cup and the bowl are realities in which wine has been contained.

Poem:
A re these bow ls that are illum inated with wine,
Or suns that are covered by clouds?

Poem:
From the purity o f the wine and the subtlety o f the cup,
The colour o f the wine becam e m ixed and transform ed.
As though all is cup, and wine is not,
Or all is w ine, and cup is not.

Still som ebody else utters, ‘ I saw nothing unless I saw G o d with it! For according
to the law o f union, the sym bol and the sym bolized, and the lover and the Beloved,
do not possess existence outside o f each other, although the intellect m akes such
a distinction between the two and regards the reality o f each one as independent
and different from the other.

Poem:
If you can differentiate the lover from the Beloved,
You shall see with certainty that—
The king and the beggar are com panions o f each other.

The one who reaches this station is called ‘the possessor o f intellect and eye’ and
sees G o d in creation and creation in G od, and by witnessing one, he is not veiled
from the other. Rather, from one perspective he sees the One Being as God, and
from another as a created world. By seeing the m ultiplicity o f the locus o f m anifesta­
tion, he is not veiled from w itnessing the One.

Poem:
This universe is—
But the scene o f theophany o f the Friend’s Countenance.
492 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

W hat is the m anifestation o f the universe, but all is He?

Although in appearance the universe is the locus o f H is m anifestation,
I f you look with discernm ent,
Both the sym bol and the sym bolized is He.
In reality, there is no existent other than the Beloved,
Reflection o f everything else is your illusive imagination.
The Friend H im self is the m irror o f His Face,
In the reflection o f the m irror where is any other than the Friend?

Since for the people o f vision attaining that which is sought through intellection
is contingent upon detachment o f the m ind from inhibiting preoccupations, the
Shaykh asserts:

Proper intellection is based on detachment,

A n d the Light o f Divine providence.

Those people who reach what they seek through reason and rational argum enta­
tion believe that reasoning has a special kin d o f hierarchical order. It necessitates
contem plating that which is sought and detaching the m in d from intelligibles so
that the desired result is achieved. For the people o f the tariqah (spiritual journey),
w ho are the people o f spiritual unveiling and witnessing, intellection, which con­
sists o f journeying toward God, (sayr ila’L la h ), journ eyin g in G o d {sayr f i ’Llah),
and journeying with G o d {sayr b i’Llah), is contingent upon detachment from the
outward {tajrid-i zahir) and keeping the inward alone with G od {tafrid-i batin).
In other words, intellection am ong the people o f the tariqah is the abandonm ent
o f preoccupation with wealth, property, position and am bition in the realm o f the
m anifest world. It is abandoning and detaching oneself and turning away from all
that distracts one from rem em brance o f the Friend.1
Know that the N ecessary Being is the One w hose Being is necessitated b y His
Essence. Possible being is that w hose existence is not necessitated by its essence.
In order for possible being to exist it is in need o f another thing that is its cause for
existence. For philosophers, possible being (caused) by the N ecessary Being is a
possibility. That is w hy he [Shabistari] said: ‘T hey try to prove the N ecessary Being
b y m eans o f contingent being.’
Since in this approach rationalist philosophers equate existence and non-exist­
ence in regards to the essence o f the contingent [beings], they treat them as equals.
N either side o f this equation has preference over the other except b y m eans o f its
opposite. For a theologian, the reason for contingent beings is that the Cause wanted
a created order. Contingent beings are made to exist by a Cause through emanation

l. Several pages o f the text have been omitted due to the repetition o f the content.
 M a h m u d Shabistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h am m a d L a h iji 493

(sudur) from non-existence to existence. That is how creation came to be. Some b e­
lieve that the reason for contingency is the need to have created beings with specific
conditions and orientations. In other words, philosophers and perhaps followers o f
reason have argued from the existence o f the contingent to prove the existence o f the
N ecessary Being in an absolute way. T h ey say that the contingent being, precisely
because o f its contingency and createdness, is in need o f a cause (creator). I f that
creator is a Necessary Being it proves their argument. If it is another contingent being,
then again precisely because o f its contingency it is in need o f another cause, which
in relation to it would be Necessary Being. So here rationalists become perplexed.
Now, if this contingent being is the same as the first one, because rationalists try to
prove the N ecessary Being through contingent being, they will fall into the trap o f a
vicious circular argument (daw r). I f it is a different one that leads to the Necessary
Being or to infinite possibilities, they shall fall into the trap o f infinite regression
(tasalsul). Therefore, since they try to prove the N ecessary Being through contingent
beings, they become perplexed in knowing the Essence o f the Necessary Being. What
is caused becom es the effect o f the Cause and the essence and attributes are all the
effects [o f the Cause]. Inevitably, there m ust be something o f the Cause in the effect,
and consequently, in the prelim inary principles o f reasoning one must include what
results from them. Since the essence o f contingent beings for rationalist philosophers
is in every aspect different from the Essence o f the N ecessary Being, the Cause could
not contain anything o f the effect. For as long as something does not exist in a person,
it inevitably follows that he cannot imagine that thing or convey it to someone else,
and that is w hy he becom es perplexed and lost.

Poem:
This long distance w ill becom e very short for you,
If you are present in His Sacred Presence.
W hat your soul is seeking is just before you,
Look at it, and do not be afraid o f it.
For fear w ould push you further from Him,
The Friend should not be associated with other than the Friend.

If there is no inherent connection between a cause and its effect, as rationalist

philosophers believe, then intellectual arguments cannot provide the perfect knowl­
edge that w ould lead to the knowledge o f certainty. That is w hy the Shaykh said:

Som etim es they are trapped in a vicious circle o f circular argum ents {dawr).
Other times they becom e prisoners o f infinite regression {tasalsul).

D aw r, or circuitous argum ent, m eans basing an argum ent on som ething upon
w hich there is no stopping. Tasalsul, or infinite regression, is w hen a contingent
494 From the School o f Illu m in ation to Philosophical M ysticism

being causes another existence that is its effect, and supports that effect b y
another cause that is the effect o f the first cause and so on ad infinitum . In such
an argum ent, since the possibility o f the equality o f existence and non-existence
is present, in order for one to have preference over the other, the contingent
needs a cause. I f the cause is the N ecessary Being, the argum ent o f the advocate
is proved, and if the cause is contingent, the possibility exists that the very same
contingent cause is the first hypothesis. I f another contingent being is the first
cause, the argum ent becom es circular. H owever, if the first possibility is con tin ­
gent upon the second possibility, and the second on the first, then it becom es
circular regression. T h is is the problem with circular argum ents and infinite
regressions. R egardless o f what they postulate regarding the cause, the argum ent
becom es circular.

Poem:
C irculatory argum ent is false, and infinite regression impossible.
Therefore, He is the Beginning, and the final destination is the Friend.

Since the necessity o f infinite regression is required for the hierarchy o f the
existing infinite affairs, the Shaykh said:

W hen the intellect contemplated His Being,

Its feet became entangled in infinite regression;

That is to say, w hen the intellect o f the [rationalist] philosopher reflects on

existence or that w hich exists in the external w orld w here one possibility is con ­
tingent on another, and another upon another and the like to infinity, infinite
regression w raps itself around the feet o f the philosopher. In accordance with the
dictum , ‘A n d your Lord ordained that you do not w orship anyone except H im ’
(Q u r’an, 17:24) he inevitably com es to believe that there is only one N ecessary
Being, for otherw ise one o f these two false things, that is, circu lato ry argum ent
or infinite regression, becom es necessary. Therefore, it becom es clear [for ra­
tionalists] that there m ust be one N ecessary Being. H owever, true knowledge
(m a r ifa h ) o f reality is not attained by the rationalist because such know ledge is
not acquired through dem onstrations and proofs, but by negating that w hich is
other than Him . The m ore philosophers try to prove N ecessary Being, the m ore
distant they becom e from D ivin e Unity.
W hoever wants to know G o d through existent beings is ignorant o f the Truth,
and w hoever tries to know things through Him is a gnostic fa rif). W hen the
Prophet (Peace be Upon Him) was asked, ‘ How did you com e to know G o d ?’ He
said, ‘ I came to know all things through God.’
 M a h m u d Shabistari a n d Sham s al-D in M u h am m a d L a h iji 495

Poem:
O m an o f excessive claims, free you rself o f knowledge,
Abandon your self so that Divine M ercy w ill descend upon you.
Intelligence is the antidote o f failure and need,
Abandon intelligence and be content with simplicity.