Those employed in every craft and business, while discussing its mysteries with one another, make use of certain words and expressions of which the meaning is known only to themselves. Such expressions are invented for a double purpose: firstly, in order to facilitate the understanding of difficulties and bring them nearer to the comprehension of the novice; and secondly, in order to conceal the mysteries of that science from the uninitiated. The Sufis also have technical terms for the purpose of expressing the matter of their discourse and in order that they may reveal or disguise their meaning as they please. I will now explain some of these terms and distinguish between the significations attached to various pairs of words.
Hal and Waqt
Waqt. (time) is a term with which Sufis are familiar, and concerning which
much has been said by the Shaykhs, but my object is to establish the truth, not
to give long explanations. Waqt is that whereby a man becomes independent of the
past and the future, as, for example, when an influence from God descends into
his soul and makes his heart collected (mujtami') he has no memory of the past
and no thought of that which is not yet come. All people fail in this, and do
not know what our past has been or what our future will be, except the
possessors of waqt, who say: "Our knowledge cannot apprehend the future and the
past, and we are happy with God in the present (andar waqt). If wc occupy
ourselves with tomorrow, or let any thought of it enter our minds, wc shall be
veiled (from God), and a veil is a great, distraction (paragandagi)." It is
absurd to think of the unattainable. Thus Abu Sa'id Kharraz says: "Do not occupy
your precious time except with the most prccious of things, and the most
precious of human things is the state of being occupied between the past and the
future." And the Apostle said: "I have a time (waqt) with God, in which none of
the cherubim nor any prophet rivals me," that is to say, "in which the eighteen
thousand worlds do not occur to my mind and have no worth in my eyes."
Therefore, on the night of the Ascension, when the kingdom of earth and heaven
was arrayed before him in all its beauty, he did not look at anything (Qur.liii,
17), for Mustafa was noble ('aziz), and the noble are not engrossed save by that
which is noble. The "times" (awqat) of the Unitarian are two: one in the state
of loss (f'aqd) and one in the state of gain (wqjd), one in the place of union
and one in the place of separation. At both these times he is overpowered (maqhur),
because both his union and his separation are effected by God without such
volition or acquisition on his part as would make it possible to invest him with
any attribute. When a man's power of volition is cut off from him, whatever he
does or experiences is the result of "time" (waqt). It is related that Junayd
said: "I saw a dervish in the desert, sitting under a mimosa tree in a hard and
uncomfortable spot, and asked him what made him sit there so still. He answered:
'I had a "time" and lost it here; now I am sitting and mourning.' I inquired how
long he had been there. He answered: 'Twelve years. Will not the Shaykh offer up
a prayer (himmati kunad) on my behalf, that pcrchance I may find my "time"
again?' I left him," said Junayd, "and performed the pilgrimage and prayed for
him. My prayer was granted. On my return 1 found him seated in the same place.
'Why,' I said, 'do you not go from here, since you have obtained your wish?' He
replied: 'O Shaykh, 1 settled myself in this place of desolation where I lost my
capital: is it right that 1 should leave the place where I have found my capital
once more and where 1 enjoy the society of God? Let the Shaykh go in peace, for
I will mix my dust with the dust of this spot, that 1 may rise at the
Resurrection from this dust which is the abode of my delight," No man can attain
to the reality of "time" by exerting his choice, for "time" is a thing that does
not come within the scope of human acquisition, that it should be gained by
effort, nor is it sold in the market, that anyone should give his life in
exchange for it, and the will has no power either to attact or to repel it. The
Shaykhs have said, "Time is a cutting sword," because it is characteristic of a
sword to cut, and "time" cuts the root of the future and the past, and
obliterates care of yesterday and tomorrow from the heart. The sword is a
dangerous companion: either it makes its master a king or it destroys him.
Although one should pay homage to the sword and carry it on one's own shoulder
for a thousand years, in the moment of cutting it does not discriminate between
its master's neck and the neck of another. Violence (qahr) is its
characteristic, and violence will not depart from it at the wish of its master.
Hal (state) is that which descends upon "time" (waqt) and adorns it, as the
spirit adorns the body. Waqt has need of hal, for waqt is beautified by hal and
subsists thereby. When the owner of waqt comes into possession of hal, he is no
more subject to change and is made steadfast (mustaqim) in his state; for, when
he has waqt without hal, he may lose it, but when hal attaches itself to him,
all his state (ruzgar) becomes waqt., and that cannot be lost: what seems to be
coming and going (amad shud) is really the result of becoming and manifestation
(takawwun u zuhur), just as, before this, waqt descended on him who has it. He
who is in the ■ state of becoming (mutakawwin) maybe forgetful, and on him who
is thus forgetful hal descends and waqt is made stable (mutamakkin); for the
possessor of waqt may become forgetful, but the possessor of hal cannot possibly
be so. The tongue of the possessor of hal is silent concerning his hal, but his
actions proclaim the reality of his hal. Hence that spiritual director said: "To
ask about hal is absurd," because hal is the annihilation of speech (maqal).
Master Abu 'Ali Daqqaq says: "If there is joy or woe in this world or the next
world, the portion of waqt is that (feeling) in which thou art." But hal is not
like this; when hal come.s on a man from God, it banishes all these feelings
from his heart. Thus Jacob was a possessor of waqt: now he was blinded by
separation, now he was restored to sight by union, now he was mouning and
wailing, now he was calm and joyful. But Abraham was a possessor of hal: he was
not conscious of separation, that he should be stricken with grief, nor of
union, that he should be filled with joy. The sun and moon and stars contributed
to his hal, but he, while he gazed, was independent of them: whatever he looked
on, he saw only God, and he said: "I love not them that set" (Qur.vi,76).
Accordingly, the world sometimes becomes a hell to the possessor of waqt,
because he is contemplating absence (ghaybat) and his heart is distressed by the
loss of his beloved; and sometimes his heart is like a Paradise in the
blessedness of contemplation, and every moment brings to him a gift and a glad
message from God. On the other hand, it makes no difference to the possessor of
hal whether he is veiled by affliction or unveiled by happiness; for he is
always in the place of actual vision ('iyan). Hal is an attribute of the object
desired (murad), while waqt is the rank of the desirer (murid). The latter is
with himself in the pleasure of waqt, the former with God in the delight of hal.
How far apart are the two degrees!
Maqam and Tamkin, and the difference between them
Maqam (station) denotes the perserverance of the seeker in fulfilling his obligations towards the object of his search with strenuous exertion and flawless intention. Everyone who desires God has a station (maqam), which, in the beginning of his search, is a means whereby he seeks God. Although the seeker derives some benefit from every station through which he passes, he finally rests in one, because a station and the quest thereof involve contrivance and design (tarkib u hila), not conduct and practice (rawish u mu'amalat). God hath said: "None of us but hath a certain station" (Qur.xxxvii,164). The station of Adam was repentance (tawbah), that of Noah was renunciation (zuhd), that of Abraham was resignation (taslim), that of Moses was contrition (inabat), that of David was sorrow (huzn), that of Jesus was hope (raja), that of John (the Baptist) was fear (khaw), and that of our Apostle was praise (dhikr). They drew something from other sources by which they abode, but each of them returned at last to his original station. In discussing the doctrine of the Muhasibis, I gave a partial explanation of the stations and distinguished between hal and maqam. Here, however, it is necessary to make some further remarks on this subject. You must know that the Way to God is of three kinds: (1) maqam, (2) hal, (3) tamkin. God sent all the prophets to explain the Way and to elucidate the principle of the different stations. One hundred and twenty four thousand apostles, and a few over that number, came with as many stations. On the advent of our Apostle a hal appeared to those in each station and attained a pitch where all human acquisition was left behind, until religion was made perfect unto men, as God hath said: "To-day I have perfected your religion for you and have completed My bounty unto you" (Qur.v,5); then the tamkin (steadfastness) of the steadfast appeared; but if 1 were to enumerate every hal and explain every maqam, my purpose would be defeated.
Tamkin denotes the residence of spiritual adepts in the abode of perfection
and in the highest grade. Those in stations can pass on from their stations, but
it is impossible to pass beyond the grade of tamkin, because maqam is the grade
of beginners, whereas tamkin is the resting place of adepts, and maqamat
(stations) are stages on the way, whereas tamkin is repose within the shrine.
The friends of God are absent (from themselves) on the way and are strangers (to
themselves) in the stages: their hearts are in the presence (of God), and in the
presence every instrument is evil and every tool is (a token of) absence (from
God) and infirmity. In the epoch of Paganism the poets used to praise men for
noble deeds, but they did not recite their panegyric until some time had
elapsed. When a poet came into the presence of the person whom he had
celebrated, he used to draw his sword and hamstring his camel and then break his
sword, as though to say: "I needed a camel to bring me from a far distance to
thy presence, and a sword to repel the envious who would have hindered me from
paying homage to thee: now that I have reached thee, 1 kill my camel, for I will
never depart from thee again; and I break my sword, for I will not admit into my
mind the thought of being severed from thy court." Then, after a few days, he
used to recite his poem. Similarly, when Moses attained to tamkin, God bade him
put off his shoes and cast away his staff (Qur.xx,12), these being articles of
travel and Moses being in the presence of God. The beginning of love is search,
but the end is rest: water flows in the river bed, but when it reaches the ocean
it ceases to flow and changes its taste, so that those who desire water avoid
it, but those who desire pearls devote themselves to death and fasten the
plummet of search to their feet and plunge headlong into the sea, that they may
either gain the hidden pearl or lose their dear lives. And one of the Shaykhs
says: "Tamkin is the removal of tai win." Talwin also is a technical term of the
Sufis, and is closely connectcd in meaning with tamkin, just as hal is connected
with maqam. The signification of talwin is change and turning from one state to
another, and the above mentioned saying means that he who is steadfast (mutamakkin)
is not vacillating (mutaraddid), for he has carried all that belongs to him into
the presence of God and has erased every thought of other than God from his
mind, so that no act that passes over him alters his outward predicament and no
state changes his inward predicament. Thus Moses was subject to talwin: he fell
in a swoon (Qur.vii,139) when God revealed His glory to Mount Sinai; but
Muhammad was steadfast: he suffered no change, although he was in the very
revelation of glory from Makkah to a space of two bow-lengths from God; and this
is the highest grade. Now tamkin is of two kinds - one referring to the dominant
influence of God (shahid-i haqq), and the other referring to the dominant
influence of one's self (shahid-i khud). He whose tamkin is of the latter kind
retains his attributes unimpaired, but he whose tamkin is of the former kind has
no attributes; and the terms effacement (mahw), sobriety (sahw), attainment (lahq),
destruction (mahq),] annihilation (fana), subsistence (baqa), being (wujud), and
not being ('adam) are not properly applied to one whose attributes are
annihilated, because a subject is necessary for the maintenance of these
qualities, and when the subject is absorbed (mustaghriq) he loses the capacity
for maintaining them.
Muhadarat and Mukashafat, and the difference between them.
Muhadarat denotes the presence of the heart in the subtleties of demonstration (bayan),
while mukashafat denotes the presence of the spirit (sirr) in the domain of
actual vision ('iyan), Muhadarat refers to the evidences of God's signs (ayat),
and mukashafat to the evidences of contemplation (mitshahadah). The mark of
muhadarat is continual meditation upon God's signs, while the mark of mukashafat
is continual amazement at God's infinite greatness. There is a difference
between one who meditates upon the Divine acts and one who is amazed at the
Divine majesty: the one is a follower of friendship, the other is a companion of
love. When the Friend of God (Abraham) looked on the kingdom of heaven and
meditated on the reality of its existence, his heart was made "present" (hadir)
thereby: through beholding the act he became a seeker of the Agent; his
"presence" (hudur) made the act a proof of the Agent, and in perfect gnosis he
exclaimed: "I turn my face with true belief unto Him who created the heavens and
the earth" (Qur.vi,79). But when the Beloved of God (Muhammad) was borne to
Heaven he shut his eyes from the sight of all things; he saw neither God's act
nor created beings nor himself, but the Agent was revealed to him, and in that
revelation (kashj) his desire increased: in vain he sought vision, proximity,
union; in proportion as the exemption (tanzih) of his Beloved (from all such
conceptions) became more manifest to him the more did his desire increase; he
could neither turn back nor go forward, hence he fell into amazement. Where
friendship was, amazement seemed infidelity, but where love was, union was
polytheism, and amazement became the sole resource, because in friendship the
object of amazement was being (hasti), and such amazement is polytheism, but in
love the object of amazement was nature and quality (chigunagi), and this
amazement is unification (tawhid). In this sense Shibli used always to say: "O
Guide of the amazed, increase my amazement!" for in contemplation (of God) the
greater one's amazement the higher one's degree. The story of Abu Sa'id Kharraz
and Ibrahim b. Sa'd 'Alawi' is well known — how they saw a friend of God on the
seashore and asked him "What is the Way to God?" and how he answered that there
are two ways to God, one for the vulgar and one for the elect. When they desired
him to explain this he said: "They way of the vulgar is that on which you are
going: you accept for some cause and you decline for some cause; but the way of
the elect is to see only the Causer, and not to see the cause." The true meaning
of these anecdotes has already been set forth.
Qabd and Bast, and the difference between them
Qabd (contraction) and bast (expansion) are two involuntary states which cannot be induced by any human act or banished by any human exertion. God hath said: "God contracts and expands" (Qur.ii,246). Qabd denotes the contraction of the heart in the state of being veiled (.hijab), and bast denotes the expansion of the heart in the state of revelation (kashf). Both states proceed from God without effort on the part of Man. The qabd of gnostics is like the fear of novices, and the bast of gnostics is like the hope of novices. This is the sense in which the Sufis use the terms qabd and bast. Some Shaykhs hold that qabd is superior in degree to bast, for two reasons: (1) it is mentioned before bast in the Quran, (2) qabd involves dissolution and oppression, whereas bast involves nutrition and favour: it is undoubtedly better to dissolve one's humanity and oppress one's lower soul than to foster and favour them, since they are the greatest veil (between Man and God). Others, again, hold that bast is superior to qabd. The fact, they say that qabd is mentioned before bast in the Quran shows the superiority of bast, for the Arabs are accustomed to mention in the first place that which is inferior in merit, e.g. God hath said: "There is one of them who injures his own soul, and one who keeps the middle way, and one who outstrips the others in good works by the permission of God" (Qur.xxxv,29). Moreover, they argue that in bast there is joy and in qabd grief; gnostics feel joy only in union with the object of knowledge, and grief only in separation from the object of desire, therefore rest in the abode of union is better than rest in the abode of separation. My Shaykh used to say that both qabd and bast are the result of one spiritual influence, which descends from God on Man, and either fills the heart with joy and subdues the lower soul or subdues the heart and fills the lower soul with joy; in the latter case contraction (qabd) of the heart is expansion (bast) of the lower soul, and in the former case expansion of the heart is contraction of the lower soul. He who interprets this matter otherwise is wasting his breath. Hence Bayazid said: "The contraction of hearts consists in the expansion of souls, and the expansion of hearts in the contraction of souls." The contracted soul is guarded from injury, and the expanded heart is restrained from falling into defect, because jealousy is the rule in love, and contraction is a sign of God's jealousy; and it is necessary that lovers should reproach one another, and expansion is a sign of mutual reproach. It is a well-known tradition that John wept ever since he was born, while Jesus smiled ever since he was born, because John was in contraction and Jesus in expansion. When they met John used to say, "O Jesus, hast thou no fear of being cut off (from God)?" and Jesus used to say, "O John, hast thou no hope of God's mercy? Neither thy tears nor my smiles will change the eternal decrec of God."
Uns and Hay bat, and the difference between them
Uns (intimacy) and hay bat (awe) are two states of the dervishes who travel on the Way to God. When God manifests His glory to a man's heart so that His majesty (jalal) predominates, he feels awe (haybat), but when God's beauty (jamal) predominates he feels intimacy (uns): those who feel awe are distressed, while those who feel intimacy are rejoiccd. There is a difference between one who is burned by His majesty in the fire of love and one who is illuminated by His beauty in the light of contemplation.
Some Shaykhs have said that haybat is the degree of gnostics and uns the
degree of novices, because the farther one has advanced in the presence of God
and in divesting Him of attributes the more his heart is overwhelmed with awe
and the more averse he is to intimacy, for one is intimate with those of one's
own kind, and intimacy with God is inconceivable, since no homogeneity or
resemblance can possibly exist between God and Man. If intimacy is possible, it
is possible only with the praise (dhikr) of Him, which is something different
from Himself, because that is an attribute of Man; and in love, to be satisfied
with another than the Beloved is falsehood and pretension and self-conceit.
Haybat, on the other hand, arises from contemplating greatness, which is an
attribute of God, and there is a vast difference between one whose experience
proceeds from himself through himself and one whose experience proceeds from the
annihilation of himself through the subsistence of God. It is related that
Shibli said: "For a long time I used to think that I was rejoicing in the love
of God and was intimate with contemplation of Him: now 1 know that intimacy is
impossible except with a congener." Some, however, allege that haybat is a
corollary of separation and punishment, while uns is the result of union and
mercy; therefore the friends of God must be guarded from the consequences of
haybat and be attached to uns, for uns involves love, and as homogeneity is
impossible in love (of God), so it is impossible in uns. My Shaykh used to say:
"I wonder at those who declare intimacy with God to be impossible, after God has
said, 'Verily My servants,' and 'Say to My servants', and 'When My servants
shall ask thee', and 'O My servants, no fear shall come on you this day, and ye
shall not grieve' (Qur.xliii,68). A servant of God, seeing this favour, cannot
fail to love Him, and when he has loved he will become intimate, because awe of
one's beloved is estrangement (ibeganagi), whereas intimacy is oneness (yaganagi).
It is characteristic of men to become intimate with their benefactors, and
inasmuch as God has conferred on us so great benefits and we have knowledge of
Him, it is impossible of Him, it is impossible that we should talk of awe." 1,
'Ali b. 'Uthman al-Jullabi, say that both parties in this controversy are right,
because the power of haybat is exerted upon the lower soul and its desires, and
tends to annihilate human nature, while the power of uns is exerted upon the
heart and tends to foster gnosis in the heart. Therefore God annihilates the
souls of those who love Him by revealing His majesty and endows their hearts
with everlasting life by revealing His beauty. The followers of annihilation {/ana)
regard haybat as superior, but the followers of subsistence (baqa) prefer uns.
Qahr and Lutf, and the difference between them
These two expressions are used by the Sufis in reference to their own state. By
qahr (violence) they signify the reinforcement given to them by God in
annihilating their desires and in restraining the lower soul from its
concupiscence; and by lutf (kindness) they signify God's help towards the
subsistence of their hearts and towards the continuance of contemplation and
towards the permanence of ecstasy in the degree of steadfastness (istiqamai).
The adherents of lutf say Divine grace (karamat) is the attainment of one's
desire, but the others say that Divine grace is this — that God through His will
should restrain a man from his own will and should overpower him with will-lessness
(bemuradi), so that if he were thirsty and plunged into a river, the river would
become dry. It is related that in Baghdad were two eminent dervishes, the one a
believer in qahr and the other a believer in lutf who were always quarrelling
and each preferring his own state to that of his neighbour. The dervish who
preferred lutf set out for Makkah and entered negated, but Man's choice is
accidental ('aradi) and admits of negation, and must be trodden under foot,,
that the eternal choice of God may subsist for ever. There has been much debate
on this matter, but my sole aim is that you should know the signification of the
terms used by the Sufis. I have mentioned some of these, e.g., jam' and tafriqa,
and fana and baqa, and ghaybat and hudur, and sukr and sahw, in the chapter
treating of the doctrines of the Sufis, and you must look there for the
explanation of them.
Musamarat and Muhadathat, and the difference between them
These terms denote two states of the perfect Sufi. Muhadathat (conversation)
is really spiritual talk conjoined with silence of the tongue, and musamarat
(nocturnal discourse) is really continuance of unrestraint (inbisat) combined
with concealment of the most secret thoughts (kitman-i sirr). The outward
meaning of musamarat is a spiritual state (waqti) existing between God and Man
at night, and muhadathat is a similar state, existing by day, in which there is
exoteric and esoteric conversation. Hence secret prayers (munajat) by night are
called musamarat, while invocations made by day are called muhadathat. The daily
state is based on revelation (kashf), and the nightly state on occulation (satr).
In love musamarat is more perfect than muhadathat, and is connected with the
state of the Apostle, when God sent Gabriel to him with Buraq and conveyed him
by night from Makkah to a space of two bow-lengths from His presence. The
Apostle conversed secretly with God, and when he reached the goal his tongue
became dumb before the revelation of God's majesty, and his heart was amazed at
His infinite greatness, and he said: "I cannot tell Thy praise." Muhadathat is
connected with the state of Moses, who, seeking communion with God, after forty
days came to Mount Sinai and heard the speech of God and asked for vision of
Him, and failed of his desire. There is a plain difference between one who was
conducted (Qur.xvii,l) and one who came (Qur.vii,139). Night is the time when
lovers are alone with each other, and day is the time when servants wait upon
their masters. When a servant transgresses he is reprimanded, but a lover has no
law by the transgression of which he should incur blame, for lovers cannot do
anything displeasing to each other.
7/m al-Yaqin and 'Ayn al-Yaqin and Haqq al- Yaqin, and the difference between
them
According to the principles of theology, all these expressions denote knowledge ('ilm). Knowledge without certain faith (yaqin) in the reality of the object known is not knowledge, but when knowledge is gained that which is hidden is as that which is actually seen. The believers who shall see God on the Day of Judgment shall see Him then in the same wise as they know Him now: if they shall see Him otherwise, either their vision will be imperfect then or their knowledge is faulty now. Both these alternatives are in contradiction with unification (tawhid), which requires that men's knowledge of God should sound today and their vision of God should be sound to-morrow. Therefore certain knowledge ('ilm-i yaqin) is like certain sight ('ayn-i yaqin), and certain truth (haqq-i yaqin) is like certain knowledge. Some have said that 'ayn al-yaqin is the complete absorption (istighraq) of knowledge in vision, but this is impossible, because vision is an instrument for the attainment of knowledge, like hearing, etc.: since knowledge cannot be absorbed in hearing, its absorption in vision is equally impossible. By 'ilm al-yaqin the Sufis mean knowledge of (religious) practice in this world according to the Divine commandments; by 'ayn al-yaqin they mean knowledge of the state of dying (naz1) and the time of departure from this world; and by haqq al-yaqin they mean intuitive knowledge of the vision (of God) that will be revealed in Paradise, and of its nature. Therefore 'ilm al-yaqin is the rank of theologians ('ulama) on account of their correct observance of the Divine commands, and 'ayn al-yaqin is the station of gnostics ('arifan) on account of their readiness for death, and haqq al-yaqin is the annihilation point of lovers (dustan) on account of their rejection of all created things. Hence 'ilm al-yaqin is obtained by self-mortification (mujahadah), and 'ayn al- yaqin by intimate familiarity (mu'anasat), and haqq al- yaqin by contemplation (mushahadah). The first is vulgar, the second is elect, and the third is super-elect (khass al- khass).
'Ilm and Ma 'rifat, and the difference between them
Theologians have made no distinction between 'ilm and ma'rifat, except when they say that God maybe called 'alim (knowing), but not 'arif (gnostic), inasmuch as the latter epithet lacks Divine blessing. But the Sufi Shaykhs give the name of ma'rifat (gnosis) to every knowledge that is allied with (religious) practice and feeling (hal), and the knower of which expresses his feeling; and the knower thereof they call 'arif On the other hand, they give the name of'ilm to every knowledge that is stripped of spiritual meaning and devoid of religious practice, and one who has such knowledge they call 'alim. One, then, who knows the meaning and reality of a thing they call 'arif (gnostic), and one who knows merely the verbal expression and keeps it in his memory without keeping the spiritual reality they call 'alim. For this reason, when the Sufis wish to disparage a rival they call him danishmand (possessing knowledge). To the vulgar this seems objectionable, but the Sufis do not intend to blame the man for having acquired knowledge, they blame him for neglecting the practice of religion, because the 'alim depends on himself, but the 'arif depends on his Lord. This question has been discussed at length in the chapter entitled "The Removal of the Veil of Gnosis", and I need not say any more now.
Shari'at and Haqiqat, and the difference between them
These terms are used by the Sufis to denote soundness of the outward state
and maintenance of the inward state. Two parties err in this matter: firstly,
the formal theologians, who assert that there is no distinction between shari'at
(law) and haqiqat (truth),' since the Law is the Truth and the Truth is the Law;
secondly, some heretics, who hold that it is possible for one of these things to
subsist without the other, and declare that when the Truth is revealed the Law
is abolished. This is the doctrine of the Carmathians (Qaramita) and the
Shi'ites and their satanically inspired followers (muwaswisan). The proof that
the Law is virtually separate from the Truth lies in the fact that in faith
belief is separate from profession; and the proof that the Law and the Truth are
not fundamentally separate, but are one, lies in the fact that belief without
profession is not faith, and conversely profession without belief is not faith;
and there is a manifest difference between profession and belief. Haqiqat, then,
signifies a reality which does not admit of abrogation and remains in equal
force from the time of Adam to the end of the world, like knowledge of God and
like religious practice, which is made perfect by sincere intention; and
shari'at signifies a reality which admits of abrogation and alteration, like
ordinances and commandments. Therefore shari'at is Man's act, while haqiqat is
God's keeping and preservation and protection, whence it follows that shari'at
cannot possibly be maintained without the existence of haqiqat, and haqiqat
cannot be maintained without observance of shari'at. Their mutual relation maybe
compared to that of body and spirit: when the spirit departs from the body the
living body becomes a corpse and the spirit vanishes like wind, for their value
depends on their conjunction with one another. Similarly, the Law without the
Truth is ostentation, and the Truth without the Law is hypocrisy. God hath said:
"Whosoever mortify themselves for Our sake, We will assuredly guide them in Our
ways" (Qur.xxix, 69): mortification is Law, guidance is Truth; the former
consists in a man's observance of the external ordinances, while the latter
consists in God's maintenance of a man's spiritual feelings. Hence the Law is
one of the acts acquired by Man, but the Truth is one of the gifts bestowed by
God.
Another class of terms and expressions are used by the Sufis metaphorically.
These metaphorical terms are more difficult to analyse and interpret, but I will
explain them concisely.
Haqq. By haqq (truth) the Sufis mean God, for haqq is one of the names of God, as He hath said: "This is because God is the Truth" (Qur.xxii,6).
Haqiqat. By this word they mean a man's dwelling in the place of union with
God, and the standing of his heart in the place of abstraction (tanzih).
Khatarat. Any judgments of separation (ahkam-i tafriq) that occur to the mind.
Watanat. Any Divine meanings that make their abode in the heart.
Tams. Negation of a substance of which some trace is
left.
Rams. Negation of a substance, together with every trace thereof, from the
heart.
'Ala'iq. Secondary causes to which seekers of God attach themselves and
thereby fail to gain the object of their desire.
Wasa'it. Secondary causes to which seekers of God attach themselves and thereby
gain the object of their desire.
Zawa'id. Excess of lights (spiritual illumination) in the heart.
Fawa'id. The apprehension by the spirit of what it cannot do without.
Malja\ The heart's confidence in the attainment of its desire.
Manja. The heart's escape from the place of imperfection.
Kulliyyat. The absorption (istighraq) of the attributes of humanity in the
Universal (kulliyyat).
Lawa'ih. Affirmation of the object of desire, notwithstanding the advent of the
negation thereof (ithbat-i murad ba wurud-i nafy-i an).
Lawami'. The manifestation of (spiritual) light to the heart while its
acquirements (fawa'id) continue to subsist.
Tawali'. The appearance of the splendours of (mystical) knowledge to the heart.
Tawariq. That which comes into the heart, either with glad tidings or with
rebuke, in secret converse (with God) at night.
Lata'if. A symbol (isharati), presented to the heart, of subtleties of feeling.
Sirr. Concealment of feelings of love.
Najwa. Concealment of imperfections from the knowledge of other (than God)
Isharat. Giving information to another of the object of desire, without uttering
it on the tongue.
Ima. Addressing anyone allusively, without spoken or unspoken explanation (be 'ibarat
u isharat).
Warid. The descent of spiritual meanings upon the heart.
Intibah. The departure of heedlessness from the heart.
Ishtibah. Perplexity felt in deciding between truth and falsehood.
Qarar. The departure of vacillation from the reality of one's feeling.
Inzi'aj. The agitation of the heart in the state of ecstasy (wajd).
Another class of technical terms are those which the Sufis employ, without
metaphor, in unification (tawhid) and in setting forth their firm belief in
spiritual realities.
'Alam. The term 'alam (world) denotes the creatures of God. It is said that
there are 18,000 or 50,000 worlds. Philosophers say there are two worlds, an
upper and a lower, while theologians say that 'alam is whatever exists between
the Throne of God and the earth. In short, 'alam is the collective mass of
created things. The Sufis speak of the world of spirits (arwah) and the world of
souls (nufus), but they do not mean the same thing as the philosophers. What
they mean is "the collective mass of spirits and souls".
Muhdath. Posterior in existence, i.e. it was not and afterwards was
Qadim. Anterior in existence, i.e. it always was, and its being was anterior to
all beings. This is nothing but God.
Azal. That which has no beginning.
Abad. That which has no end.
Dhat. The being and reality of a thing.
Sifat. That which does not admit of qualification (na't), because it is not
self-subsistent.
Ism. That which is not the object named (ghayr-i musamma).
Tasmiyat. Information concerning the object named.
Nafy. That which entails the existence of every object of affirmation.
Ithbat. That which entails the existence of every object of affirmation.
Siyyan. The possibility of the existence of one thing with another.
Diddan. The impossibility of the existence of one thing simultaneously with the
existence of another.
Ghayran. The possibility of the existence of either of two things,
notwithstanding the annihilation of the other.
Jawhar. The basis (asl) of a thing; that which is self- subsistent.
'Arad. That which subsists in jawhar (substance)
Jism. Tthat which is composed of separate parts.
Su'al. Seeking a reality.
Jawab. Giving information concerning the subject- matter of a question (su'al).
Husn. That which is conformable to the (Divine) command.
Qubh. That which is not conformable to the (Divine) command.
Safah. Neglect of the (Divine) command.
Zulm. Putting a thing in a place that is not worthy of it.
'Adl. Putting everything in its proper place.
Malik. He with whose actions it is impossible to interfere.
Another class of terms requiring explanation are those which are commonly used
by the Sufis in a mystical sense that is not familiar to philologists.
Khatir. By khatir (passing thought) the Sufis signify the occurence in the
mind of something which is quickly removed by another thought, and which its
owner is able to repel from his mind. Those who have such thoughts follow the
first thought in matters which come directly from God to Man. It is said that
the thought occurred to Khayr Nassaj that Junayd was waiting at his door, but he
wished to repel it. The same thought returned twice and thrice, whereupon he
went out and discovered Junayd, who said to him: "If you had followed the first
thought it would not have been necessary for me to stand here all this time."
How was Junayd acquainted with the thought which occurred to Khayr? This
question has been asked, and has been answered by the remark that Junayd was
Khayr's spiritual director, and a spiritual director cannot fail to be
acquainted with all that happens to one of his disciples.
Waqi'a. By waqi'a they signify a thought which appears in the mind and remains
there, unlike khatir, and which the seeker has no means whatever of repelling:
thus they say, khatara 'alaqalbi, "it occurred to my mind," but waqa'a fi qalbi,
"it sank into my mind." All minds are subject to khatir (passing thought), but
waqi'a is possible only in a mind that is entirely filled with the notion of
God. Hence, when any obstacle appears to the novice on the Way to God, they call
it "a fetter" (qayd) and say: "A waqi'a has befallen him." Philologists also use
the term waqi'a to signify any difficult question, and when it is answered
satisfactorily they say, waqi'a hall shud, "the difficulty is solved." But the
mystics say that waqi'a is that which is insoluble, and that whatever is solved
is a khatir, not a waqi'a, since the obstacles which confront mystics are not
unimportant matters on which varying judgments are continually being formed.
Ikhtiyar. By ikhtiyar they signify their preference of God's choice to their
own, i.e. they are content with the good and evil which God has chosen for them.
A man's preference of God's choice is itself the result of God's choice, for
unless God had caused him to have no choice, he would never have let his own
choice go. When Abu Yazid was asked, "Who is the prince (amir)?" he replied, "He
to whom no choice is left, and to whom God's choice has become the only choice."
It is related that Junayd, having caught fever, implored God to give him health.
A voice spoke in his heart: "Who art thou to plead in My kingdom and make a
choice? I can manage My kingdom better than thou. Do thou choose My choice
instead of coming forward with thine."
Imtihan. By this expression they signify the probation of the hearts of the
saints by diverse afflictions which come to them from God, such as fear, grief,
contraction, awe, etc. God hath said: "They whose hearts God hath proved for
piety's sake: they shall win pardon and a great reward" (Qur.xlix,3). This is a
lofty grade.
Bala. By bala (affliction) they signify the probation of the bodies of God's
friends by diverse troubles and sicknesses and tribulations. The more severely a
man is afflicted the nearer does he approach unto God, for affliction is-the
vesture of the saints and the cradle of the pure and the nourishment of the
prophets. The Apostle said, "We prophets are the most afflicted of mankind;" and
he also said, "The prophets are the most afflicted of mankind, then the saints,
and then other men according to their respective ranks." Bala is the name of a
tribulation, which descends on the heart and body of a true believer and which
is really a blessing; and inasmuch as the mystery thereof is concealed from him,
he is divinely recompensed for supporting the pains thereof. Tribulation that
befalls unbelievers is not affliction (bala), but misery (shaqawat), and
unbelievers never obtain relief from misery. The degree of bala is more
honourable than that of imtihan, for imtihan affects the heart only, whereas
bala affects both the heart and the body and is thus more powerful.
Tahalli. Imitation of praiseworthy people in word and deed. The Apostle said:
"Faith is not acquired by tahalli (adorning one's self with the qualities of
others) and tamanni (wishing), but it is that which sinks deep into the heart
and is verified by action." Tahalli, then, is to imitate people without really
acting like them. Those who seem to be what they are not will soon be put to
shame, and their secret character will be revealed. In the view of
spiritualists, however, they are already disgraced and their secret character is
clear.
Tajalli. The blessed effect of Divine illumination on the hearts of the blest,
whereby they are made capable of seeing God with their hearts. The difference
between spiritual vision (ru'yat ba-d.il) and actual vision (ru'yat-i 'iyan) is
this, that those who experience tajalli (manifestation of God) see or do not
see, according as they wish, or see at one time and do not see at another time,
while those who experience actual vision in Paradise cannot but see, even though
they wish not to see; for it is possible that tajalli should be hidden, whereas
ru'yat (vision) cannot possibly be veiled.
Takhalli. Turning away from distractions which prevent a man from attaining to
God. One of these is the present world, of which he should empty his hands;
another is desire for the next world, of which he should empty his heart; a
third is indulgence in vanity, of which he should empty his spirit; and a fourth
is association with created beings, of which he should empty himself and from
the thought of which he should disengage his mind.
Shurud. The meaning of shurud is "seeking restlessly to escape from (worldly)
corruptions and veils"; for all the misfortunes of the seeker arise from his
being veiled, and when the veil is lifted he becomes united with God. The Sufis
apply the term shurud to his becoming unveiled
(isfar) and his using every resource for that purpose; for in the beginning,
i.e. in search, he is more restless; in the end, i.e. in union, he becomes more
steadfast.
Qusud. By qusud (aims) they signify perfect resolution to seek the reality of
the object of search. The aims of the Sufis do not depend on motion and rest,
because the lover, although he be at rest in love, is still pursuing an aim (qasid).
In this respect the Sufis differ from ordinary men, whose aims produce in them
some effect outwardly or inwardly; whereas the lovers of God seek Him without
any cause and pursue their aim without movement of their own, and all their
qualities are directed towards that goal. Where love exists, all is an aim.
Istina. By this term they mean that God makes a man faultless through the
annihilation of all his selfish interests and sensual pleasures, and transforms
in him the attributes of his lower soul, so that he becomes selfless. This
degree belongs exclusively to the prophets, but some Shaykhs hold that it maybe
attained by the saints also.
Istifa. This signifies that God makes a man's heart empty to receive the
knowledge of Himself, so that His knowledge (ma'rifat) diffuses its purity
through his heart. In this degree all believers, the vulgar as well as the
elect, are alike, whether they are sinful or pious or saints or prophets, for
God hath said: "We have given the Book as a heritage unto those of our servants
whom We have chosen (istafayna)'. some of them are they who injure their own
souls; some are they who keep the mean; and some are they who excel in good
works" (Qur.xxxv,29)
Istilam. The manifestations (tajalliyat) of God which cause a man to be entirely
overpowered by a merciful probation (imtihan), while his will is reduced to
naught. Qalb-i mumtahan, "a proved heart," and qalh-i mustalam, "a destroyed
heart," bear the same meaning, although in the current usage of Sufi phraseology
istilam is more particular and exquisite than imtihan.
Rayn. A veil on the heart, i.e. the veil of infidelity and error, which cannot
be removed except by faith. God hath said, describing the hearts of the
unbelievers (Qur.lxxxiii, 14): "By no means, but what they used to do hath
covered their hearts" (rana'ala qulubihim). Some have said that rayn cannot
possibly be removed in any manner, since the hearts of unbelievers are not
capable of receiving Islam, and those who do receive it must have been, in the
fore knowledge of God, true believers.
Ghayn. A veil on the heart which is removed by asking pardon of God. It maybe
either thin or dense. The latter is for those who forget (God) and commit great
sins; the former is for all, not excepting saint or prophet. Did not the Apostle
say, "Verily, my heart is obscured (yughanu 'ala qalbi), and verily I ask pardon
of God a hundred times every day." For removing the dense veil a proper
repentance is necessary, and for removing the thin veil a sincere return to God.
Repentance (tawbah) is a turning back from disobedience to obedience, and return
(ruju') is a turning back from self to God. Repentance is repentance from sin:
the sin of common men is opposition to God's command, while the sin of lovers
(of God) is opposition to God's will: therefore, the sin of common men is
disobedience, and that of lovers in consciousness of their own existence. If
anyone turns back from wrong to right, they say, "He is repentant (ta'ib);" but
if anyone turns back from what is right to what is more right, they say, "He is
returning (a'ib)." All this I have set forth in the chapter on repentance.
Talbis. They denote by tai bis the appearance of a thing when its appearance is
contrary to its reality, as God hath
said: "We should assuredly have deceived them (lalabasna 'alayhim) as they
deceive others" (Qur.vi,9). This quality of deception cannot possibly belong to
anyone except God, who shows the unbeliever in the guise of a believer and the
believer in the guise of an unbeliever, until the time shall come for the
manifestation of His decree and of the reality in every case. When a Sufi
conceals good qualities under a mask of bad, they say: "He is practising
deception (talbis)," but they use this term in such instances only, and do not
apply it to ostentation and hypocrisy, which are fundamentally talbis, because
talbis is not used except in reference to an act performed by God.
Shurb. The Sufis call the sweetness of piety and the delight of miraculous grace
and the pleasure of intimacy shurb (drinking); and they can do nothing without
the delight of shurb. As the body's drink is of water, so the heart's drink is
of (spiritual) pleasure and sweetness. My Shaykh used to say that a novice
without shurb is a stranger to (i.e. unacquainted with the duties of) the
novitiate, and that a gnositic with shurb is a stranger to gnosis, because the
novice must derive some pleasure (shurbi) from his actions in order that he may
fulfil the obligations of a novice who is seeking God; but the gnositic ought
not to feel such pleasure, lest he should be transported with that pleasure
instead of with God: if he turn back to his lower soul he will not rest (with
God).
Dhawq. Dhawq resembles shurb, but shurb is used solely in reference to pleasure,
whereas dhawq is applied to pleasure and pain alike. One says dhuqtu 'l-halawat,
"I tasted sweetness," and dhuqtu '1-bala, "I tasted affliction;" but of shurb
they say, sharibtu bi-ka'si'l-wasl, "I drank the cup of union," and sharibtu bi-ka'si
'l-wudd, "I drank the cup of love," and so forth.4
1 Mahq denotes annihilation of a man's being in the essence of God, while
mahw denotes annihilation of his actions in the action of God (Jurjani, Ta'rifat)
2 Nafahat, No. 15.
3 Here the author refers to the example of Moses, whose prayer for vision of God
was refused (Kor.vii, 139), because he was exercising his own choice.
4 This distinction between shurb and dhawq is illustrated by citations from the
Qur. viz., lii, 19; xliv, 49; and liv, 48.