Chapter XVII: Section I: ――of Some of Their Tenets

These sectaries, like other philosophers, always were, and are, scattered among all nations of the world, and are called in Persian _vèzhahderún_, “internally pure,” or _róuchen-dil_, “enlightened minds,” or _Yékána-bín_, “seers of unity;” in the Hindu language, _Rakhísher_ (Rakshasas) and _Tapísher_ (Tapasis), _Gyanisher_ and _Gyáni_ (Jnánis), or _Atma-jnánis_. The lord _Maulavi Jámi_, in his work entitled _Resálah-i-vajudíah_, “treatise upon existence,”[163] states, that the universal Being is distinct from any intellectual and exterior existence, inasmuch as every individual from among the intellectual and exterior beings belongs to some class of beings; but the universal Being is not subordinate to the condition of any thing; he is absolute and sovereign, and not general, not partial, not special, not common, and not one by (the number of) unity; for, it is neither a substance nor an accident, but by itself one, and not a multiple. These things however are necessary in the sovereign being, according to their degrees and stations,[164] but the real Being, under the condition of no substance whatever, is distinguished by the name _martibah-ahadiyat_,[165] “degree of unity,” and all names and attributes are (as it were) consumed by this degree, which the Yogis express by the title _hakiket al hakáyek_,[166] “reality of realities.” But the real Being, under the condition of all things which are necessarily himself, according to generalities and specialities, is called by names and attributes of the divine degree, and this degree is entitled _Vahedet-i-mokam_,[167] “solitariness of station,” and _jamah_,[168] “union.” The real Being, under no condition of “a thing” (_shí_),[169] and under no condition of “nothing” (_láshi_),[170] is called _húvíyat_,[171] “essence, absolute being, objectivity,” and it is manifesting itself[172] in all existences, and under the condition of “a thing and nothing,” is the form of the universe.[173]

Some of the sagacious have stated that, in the same manner as the sun is radiant, so the real Being manifests himself at once for in opposition to it is _âdem_, “non-entity,” and from the superabundance of manifestation the tongue and language (in the effort) to express and to describe, to define and to explain, become dumb. The final explanation of the two words, _vojud_, “existence,” and _âdem_, “non-entity” may be, that existence is the negation of non-entity, and non-entity the negation of existence; and the Lord of unity is the grand origin of the multiplicity of names and attributes. The first attribute, which emerged into manifestation by this Lord from within, was intelligence; and in this degree all _aâyán sabitah_, “fixed realities,”[174] were under intellectual forms, and in this degree the Súfís give to the true highest and absolute Being the name of “All-Wise.” The impulsion of divine wisdom to procure to his fixed ideals the superiority over non-entity is by them entitled _irádet_,[175] “providence,” and the name of _murid_, “he who wills,” attached to God. As often as the divine knowledge becomes joined to accomplishment and victory, as having given to the existence of knowledge the superiority over contingencies, in this degree they call this victory _kadaret_, “might;” and in this degree originated the name of _Kadir_, “Almighty.” With respect to the seeing of God, as the meaning of knowledge is his presence in face of the existing external figures of contingencies, in this degree, the name of _Básír_, “the All-Seeing,” offered itself. Likewise, the meditation upon God, by those who, praying, recite his emblematic attributes, is the time of propitiating; and the granting of these prayers is called _samíâ_, “hearing:” whence proceeded the name samíâ, “hearer.” Further, the will of God, the Highest, becoming concentrated in this state, having joined the letter _kaf_ (k) to the letter _nún_ (n), so as to manifest by action _kun faíkun_,[176] “Be, and it is:” this state they called _kalám_, “the word,” and the name of _mutkalem_, “speaker,” was produced on this account.

The lord Shaikh Muhammed Shosterí,[177] in his treatise _Hak al yakín_,[178] “the truth of conviction,” has stated, that the action of choice prevails with the self-existent Being over necessity, because choice is presupposed in the nature of might, and provident choice, as well as vicissitudes and excitement, are parts suitable to a purpose, and providence came to succour every one of the necessitous crowd, by procreating remedies against the evils without number which are determined by necessity, in opposition to that necessity whence pure procreation proceeds. When the free agent is straightened in his choice, then choice assumes the nature of necessity. Thus _Ibn Mâyín eddin Maibedí_[179] relates, in his _Favátah_, “Prolegomena,” that the Súfis say: The wished for, but never-found Being proceeds from the field of pure non-entity, and the bare negation puts no foot into the station of evidence and habitation of bodily existence, in the same manner as the wished-for but never-found Being never assumes the color of bodily existence; certainly, the real Being also does not take the color of non-entity. The substance of any thing cannot be caused to vanish into non-existence; thus, if thou consumest a stick in the fire, its substance is not annihilated although its form changes, and becomes manifest in the form of ashes. The self-existent Being is an essence which is stable in all conditions, and in the accidents of existence, in the forms and states which undergo changes, the divine procreation of the world is the manifested light of his absolute reality, under the shape of divers combinations which thou beholdest.

“Certainly God made the heaven and earth to shine.”

In the book of the sagacious is found that the beautiful of this world enjoys the advantage of his beauty, when he beholds and considers its reflexion in a looking-glass; on that account, the absolute Being, having been revealed in the mirror of existences and appropriate places, and having seen his beauty in various mirrors, and in every one of them being exhibited under a shape worthy of himself, become manifest in a series of multitudinous appearances.

The Súfis further say: God is pure, conformable to his essence, above all purity and comparison, and in the gradations of names and attributes praised in both ways. Whoever dispenses with the comparison of something which has no equal, does not know that, declaring God to be without an equal, is comparing him with pure beings. The friends of God say that his name is of three kinds, viz.: he is _itlák_, “absolute,” by his essence, or considered as an unsubstantial (abstract) thing;[180] and they give him the name of _zát_, “essence,” like that of _kadus_, “pure, holy;” that is, considered as a substance, he is the Being the meaning of which is not dependent upon the meaning of another; they call him _sifet_, “excelling in attributes,” and _háí_, “living;” that is, considered as a substance, he is a Being whose meaning is dependent upon that of another. They name him _fâl_, “action,” like _khálik_, “Creator,” which is the general name of God, as well as _rahmen_, “mercy;” but the great name is at last _khafá_, “the concealed (mysterious).” A person asked the lord Shaikh _Bayezíd Bastámí_:[181] “Which is the great name of God?” The Shaikh answered: “Communicate thou to me his least name, that I may give thee in return his greatest:” that is to say, the names of God are all great.

The sagacious say: Every era is the epoch of the fame and dominion of a name, and when this epoch expires, it becomes concealed under the name which it had at the epoch of its flourishing state.[182]

They say, the names of the Deity contain the distinct forms in the divine science, and these are called _aâyan sábitah_, “fixed substances,”[183] whether general or partial, and these intellectual forms received existence in eternity without beginning,[183] by _fayz_,[184] “emanation,” from the essence of God endowed with most holy emanation. Further, the intellectual forms rise into evidence with all dependencies and necessary consequences of the most holy emanation. The fixed substances have a relation to the names of bodies, and to the external substances[185] of spirits, and between all beings there arises an interposition dependent on the degree of excellence which it has with respect to God. All the reality of accidental beings lies in the external existence; the reality of individuals is dependent upon fixed times, and every one emerges into existence at his time.[186]

The Súfis maintain that all attributes of perfection are necessarily inherent in the supreme holy essence; that is, are fixed by the purity of his essence. What in the accidental substance is fixed by properties, for instance, thy substance, is not sufficient for the revelation of thyself; as long as the attribute of God’s essence, which is the principle of that revelation, has not taken firm hold of thee, this revelation cannot be obtained. On the contrary, God, the most High, stands not in need of that revelation of things, on account of the purity which is inherent in him; but his essence is the principle of that revelation; that is, his essence and attributes are one. On this account, the Amir of the believers, Alí, said:

“The perfection of the belief in the unity of God consists in
the negation of attributes.”

The lord Shaikh Dáud Kaiśerí says in the _Sherah-fes us_, “Commentary upon the bezels:”[187] the knowledge of God the most High, in his essence, is the identity of the essence, and the knowledge of this world is that of the forms of things in it, whether generally or partially; and if one essence is _said to be_ the receptacle of manifold things, this _acceptation_ is not to be feared, as the things are identic with God according to the acceptation of “existence,” and in truth are different _only_ according to the acceptation of being either involved or manifested. Further, in reality, there is neither state nor place, but there is one object exhibited under forms of decoration and portraiture by external appearances. _Kasá_, “God’s universal judgment or decree (predestination)” is the summary decision of the conditions of existence, as the decision for the death of all mankind; and _Kadr_[188] is “the interpretation of that decision by determined means, and in consequence of results conformable to the faculties;” for instance, the decision of the death of Záid, on such a day, by such a malady. _Kas a_, “predestination,” is the eternal knowledge concerning existences, and this knowledge is dependent on the _âyán sábitah_, “fixed substances.” Each thing demands, by disposition,[189] a peculiar emanation of God.

The Súfis say, according to the sacred text:

“God created man according to his image.”

We have the power of acting on account of our being the mirror of the supreme essence; if we say: “The action is ours,” it may be right; and if we say: “It is of God,” it is equally true. The master of the rose-bower says:

“_Masnavi._ Recognise the mark of God in every place,
Never place the foot without its own limit.
Whoever has a faith other than that of Jabr[190]
Is, according to the word of the prophet, to be accounted a Guéber.
In like manner as that Guéber said: ‘Yezdán, Aherman,’
So was it as if that ignorant blockhead had said: ‘He and me;’
The actions have but a metaphorical connection with us,
A connection with him in reality is a ludicrous play.
How came it, O man without intelligence, that, from eternity,
This man should be Muhammed, and the other Abú Jehel?”

It is written in the glorious Koran:

“If any thing good happens to them, they say: ‘It comes from
God;’ and if any thing bad, they say: ‘It comes from me,’
say: ‘Every thing comes from God.’”

The Súfis say that the whole heaven is a body, the first intelligence its soul, the breath of the whole his heart, and the spirits of the seven planets, of the fixed stars and the rest, are his power.

“Your creation and your resurrection are as those of one man.”

The Shaikh Mohí eddin[191] says in his _Faś hawdí_, “chapter of repentance:” The world is the image of God, and he the soul and governor of the universe, further he is the great mankind. The lord Maulavi Jámí, in the _Nakd-al faśus_, “the ready money of bezels,” states, that there are two divisions of the beings of the universe: the first consists of those who on no account have any sort of connection with the bodily world, in conformity to office and direction; these, called _Cherubim_, are divided into two classes: the one take not the least notice of the world and its inhabitants, and are named “the great Angels;” the other, although not connected with the bodily world, are yet entranced in astonishment as witnesses and valuers _of God’s power_, standing at the curtain of the divine court, and being the ministers of the supreme bounty; before them is an angel entitled “the great spirit,” greater than whom no angel exists. According to another interpretation he is said to be “the highest secretary and first intelligence.” This great spirit (the blessing of God be upon him!) holds the first rank of this class. The spirit, who is called _Jabríil_, follows after him in this legion.

“The rank which he possesses is a place known.”

Another division is composed of those who have connection with the bodily world according to order and office; these are named “spirits,” also divided into two classes: the one are spirits who perform their office in the heavens, and these are entitled “the high angels;” the other class are those who perform their office upon earth, and these bear the name of “lower angels.” Many thousands of them are appointed to the human race, and many thousands to minerals, to plants, and the animal kingdom. The people of the revelation (prophets) say: “There, where seven angels are not assembled, not a leaf can germinate from a branch;” the seven angels are meant to be seven divine powers. Thus, the spirits of fire, who are called _Jin_ and _Siátín_, “genii and demons,” belong to the kind of lower angels, and _Iblis_ is their chief and ruler. The lord Shaikh Mahmúd Shósterí says, that Iblis is the power of imagination, which the learned call “the material.” The Súfis give it the name of “the foundation of material substance,” or _Enka_.[192] According to the Súfis, _matter_ is _mâdum_, “not eternally existent.” They call the absolute body “the universal body.” The Súfis say, as is found in the _Favátah_, that the spirit of mankind is the absolute spirit of the divinity; thus the spirit of mankind, for the sake of elocution――that is, excellence――expresses itself by sound; and sound, for the sake of elocution, by various distinct modulations, which in utterance are made sensible, becomes a word, and by the combination of words a language acquires reality. The Shaikh Muhammed _Láhaji_[193] says, in his Commentary on _Gulshen raz_,[194] “the Mystery of the Rosebower,” that the meaning of the expression “the divine spirit,” is “the revelation of truth in the circus of multiplicity,” and in the _Sharh mahtaśer_, “abridged Commentary (epitome)” on _Gulshen_, is found that, in like manner as the spirit of mankind becomes sound, and sound a word, so also the divine spirit becomes _jawher_, “substance,” and substances become spirits and forms; thus human nature is determined in a manner that its hidden conditions proceed from the interior to manifestation.

The presence of the universal deity, which is expansive in the divine spirit and soul), is fivefold. The first is _hazeret ghaib mut´lak_, “the presence of the absolute mystery,” and this is one with the _aâyían sábatah_, “the invariable prototypes (realities of things).” The second is the _hazeret ghaib muśáf_,[195] “the presence of the relative mystery,” which is nearest the absolute mystery, and this belongs to pure intellects and spirits. The third is the _hazeret musáf ghaib_,[196] “the presence of the mysterious relation,” which is nearest the absolute evidence; this is the world of similitude, or dream. The fourth is the _hazeret shahádet mut´lak_,[197] “the presence of the absolute evidence,” which reaches from the centre of the earth to the middle of the ninth empyrean heaven. The fifth is the _hazerát jámâh_,[198] “the presence of the vest,” and this is the universe in an extensive, and mankind in a restricted, acceptation.[199]

The Súfis besides say: The world is life and intellect, as far as the mineral kingdom; but the manifestation of intellect in every body is determined by the temperature of the human constitution. Sometimes bounty attains an excellence which is uttered with ecstacy, and becomes a modulation more powerful than that which strikes the ear: and this is the mode of the prophet (blessing upon him!). Thus is it commonly related that Jabrííl brought to the blessed prophet the happy news, that his poor followers will enter heaven five hundred years sooner than the rich. The prophet, full of joy, said: “Can none of you recite a verse?” A person proffered these distichs:

“The serpent of desire bit my heart:
There is, to cure me, neither doctor nor magician,
If not the friend whom I adore:
He alone possesses the theriac and the amulet suitable to my cure.”

Upon this the lord prophet, with his companions, moved about in ecstacy, with such a violence that the cloak fell from his shoulder.[200]

Further, the sagacious say that the forms of the sensible world are shades of seeming forms. The Súfis also maintain that a spirit cannot exist without a body;[201] when it breaks forth from a body, it obtains, according to its deeds and actions, an apparent body, which they call _acquired_.

[162] Several derivations are given to the word _Sufí_; it
may be here sufficient to adduce the three most specious of
them. Some derive the name from the verb صفا, _Safá_, “he
was sincere, pure;” this derivation is claimed by these
sectaries themselves, who frequently call themselves اصفيا,
_Asfíá_, “pure,” as may be seen in Jami’s work, _Tohfat ol
ebrar_, “a present offered to the pious:” and in
_Gulshenraz_ (work quoted). To this etymology is objected,
that a substantive derived from the said verb should be
صفى, and not صوفى. Others deduce it with grammatical
strictness from صوف _súf_, “wool,” and _sufí_ signifies
therefore “wool-dressed.” But the fact is, that not all
wool-dressed persons are Súfis, and not all Súfis are
wool-dressed: a Súfi may wear a Durvish’s patched coat, or
satin, as it was said by a true Súfi. If, of the two
etymologies quoted, the first does not answer the
grammatical construction, the second does not render the
meaning to be expressed. The latter appears to me so much
more important, that I am disposed to pass over an anomalous
construction, which in other names is not without numerous
examples. Nor would I be averse to derive the word, with
other etymologists, from the Greek σοφος, “wise,” or σαφες,
“pure;” notwithstanding the general use of representing in
words of Greek derivation the _sigma_, Σ, by a _sin_, س, and
not by a _sad_, ص, if I did not perceive a great difference
between the doctrine of a _Sofos_ and that of a _Súfi_,
which latter bears most especially an Asiatic character, and
the origin of which remounts to the kings Mahabad and
Jemshid (_Dasá tir_, Eng. Transl., pp. 23, 97). Our author
says: “Súfism is to be found among all nations.” The first
Muhammedan Súfi is said to have been _Abu Hashem_, a native
of Kufa, who died in the year of the Hejira 150 (A. D.
767).――(See _Notices et Extraits des manuscrits de la
bibliothèque du Roi et d’autres bibliothèques_, vol. X. p.
290.) The origin of such a character among Muselmans, if not
in name, yet in fact, may be traced further back to the
first century of the Hejira.――(See note 2, p. 18.)

[163] The more correct title of this work is _Resalah fil
vujud_.――(See _Geshichte der Schönen Redekünste Persiens von
Joseph von Hammer, S. 314_).

[164] بحسب مراتب و مقامات.

[165] مرتبه احديت.

[166] حقيقت الحقايق.

[167] وحدت مقام.

[168] جمع.

[169] شيء.

[170] لاشى.

[171] هويت, a substantive formed from هو, _hu_, “he is”
(_Yahu Yehovah_).

[172] I interpret in this place the word _sárí_ in the sense
which is given to it by the commentator of the Gulshen Raz,
in a passage of that work which will be quoted hereafter.

[173] The above _shí_ and _láshí_ is evidently the _sad
asat_, “being, not being,” of the Hindus, an attribute of
the divinity, combined with its unity. “For,” says the
author of Gulshen Raz (see German Transl., p. 17), “unity
exists in non-existence as well as in existence;
multiplicity proceeds but from relation; difference and
variety of things proceed from the change of the possible:
as the existence of both is but one, they furnish the proof
that God is but one.”

[174] اعيان الثابته. _Aâyan_ signifies “substances:” these
are things which maintain themselves by themselves; or
realities, which occupy a space by themselves, without their
existence in space depending upon the concomitant existence
of another thing. This is the contrary of accidents, the
existence of which depends upon the concomitant existence of
the substance which serves to support them, or which is the
place by which they are supported. _Aâyán sabitah_, that
is, “fixed substances,” are realities of things inclosed in
the science of God, that is to say, the figures of realities
of divine names in the _scientific presence_. They are
posterior to God only as to essence, and not as to time; for
they are eternal, as much on the side of the past as on the
side of the future. When it is said, that God produces them
by emanation, the posteriority which is thereby expressed,
refers but to essence, and is not true in any other
sense.――(See _Jorjani’s Definitions in Ext. et Not. des
MSS._, vol. X. p. 65.)――We may, in a language more familiar
to us perhaps, express them by “eternal ideals,” or
“prototypes of realities.” Silvestre de Sacy adds to
Jorjani’s explanation, that the question is here about
divine names, that is, attributes of God as emanating from
his essence, and residing in him, but not yet produced
externally by any action. _The scientific presence_
mentioned in this explanation appears, to him, to signify
the divine majesty, inasmuch as manifesting its presence to
beings which have no other existence but in the science of
God.

[175] ارادت, “inclination, design, will,” According to
_Jorjáni’s Definitions_ (see _Ext. et Not. des MSS._, vol.
X. p. 37), _iradet_ is a quality which produces in a living
being a state, the effect of which is that he acts in one
manner rather than in another. In its exact sense, it is a
faculty which has no other object in view but that which
does not exist; for “the will” is an attribute, the special
object of which is to give existence to any thing, and to
produce it conformably with the words of the Koran: “_When
he wills a thing he says to it: “Be,” and it is._” _Iradet_
is also interpreted an inclination to any thing which
follows the opinion of utility, and in this sense I have
translated it above “providence.”

[176] كن فيكون.

[177] I think it ought to be _Shabisteri_ instead of
_Shosteri_, as I find in Baron von Hammer’s _Gulshen-raz_
(pp. 27-32) a treatise entitled _Hak ol yakin_, as above,
attributed to the before quoted Mahmud Shebisteri (vol. I.
p. 82), of whom more hereafter. The whole title of the
above-mentioned work is _Hak ol yukin fi mâarifet-i-rebbil
âalemin_, “the truth of conviction in the knowledge of the
Lord of the world.”

[178] The word _yakin_ signifies “an intuitive certainty,”
produced by energy of faith, and not by arguments and
proofs.

[179] See page 217, note 2.

[180] The original text has here باعتبار امر ادمى _ba
itibár-i-amr âdemí_. _Itibar_ has in the Dictionary, among
other significations, that of “reasoning or computing by
comparison; considering with attention; calculating
properly,” which appears to me the only meaning applicable
in this place; _ba itibar_ may perhaps here be better
interpreted by “in the acceptation (assumption) of.” This
word occurs twice with امور, _amur_ (the plural of _amr_),
in the following important passage of _Gulshen raz_:

وجود اندر كالش حويش ساريست
تعينها امور اعتباريست
امور اعتبارى نيست موجود
عدو بسيار و يكجيزست معدود
جهانرا نيست هستى جز مجازي
سراسر حال او لهوست و بازي

Baron von Hammer interprets _amúri itibarí_ by “Gegenstande
der Erscheinung,” that is “objects of appearance;” I dare
differ somewhat in the expression, but not in the meaning of
these words: “Existence manifests itself (see p. 222, note
9) in its own place; things perceived by senses are mere
objects of acceptation; things of acceptation are not real.
There are many numbers, but one only is numbered (that is,
numbers are only one unit, repeatedly employed). The world
has no existence but as a metaphoric image: its state is
entirely a farce and a play.”

[181] Bastam is a town of Khorassan, the native place of
_Abu Yezid Taifer ben Issa_, one of the most celebrated
Súfis of Persia. He had inherited the frock of another
mystical personage, called Habib Ajemi. Bastami attained the
supreme degree of spirituality――perfect union with God. He
occasionally branched out into all the enthusiasm
imaginable, saying that God was with him and near him, nay
in the sleeve of his garment; and then again he came at
times into the regular order of piety and devotion, hoping
that God would forgive him his sins, and let his latter end
be that of the righteous. It is said of him (see the third
_Majalis_, “conference,” of Sâdi) that, having once called
out to God for union with the supreme Being, he heard the
voice from above: “Abu Yezid, thy _thou_ is still with thee;
if thou wilt come to me, abandon thyself and come.” He died
in the year of the Hejira 261 (A. D. 874).――(See Transact.
of the Lit. Soc. of Bombay, vol. I. p. 100; Malcolm’s Hist.
of Persia, p. 395; _Pend nameh_, edit. and transl. by
Silvestre de Sacy, p. 231.)

[182] Silvestre de Sacy, in the translation of a part of the
Definitions of Jorjáni, gives the following note as
translated from the Persian (see _Notices et Extraits des
MSS._, vol. X. p. 67): “The Súfis declare that every time is
the turn of the manifestation of a name (divine); when the
turn of this name is terminated, it conceals itself under
another name, for which the turn of denomination is arrived.
The periods of the seven planets, each of one thousand
years, are attached to it; and the words of the Koran,
speaking of God: “_Every day he is in action_, indicate it;
_because one day of thy Lord is equivalent to one thousand
years of yours_. Verse. _O thou whose light manifests itself
in the vest of the world, thy names are manifested in the
nature of man; thy science shows itself by the science of_
(Muhammed) _the seal_ (of prophets); _thy bounty is
manifested by the bounty of khatem_ (the seal). The divine
names are distinct forms, which are called _aâyan sabitah_,
“fixed realities.”――Extracted from the Diván of Alí.)

[183] The word in the text is ازل, _azl_, which means
duration of existence during a series of _finite_ times, and
_infinite_ on the side of the _past_, as ابد, _abad_,
signifies duration of existence during a series of _finite_
times, and _infinite_ on the side of the _future_.――(See
Definitions of Jorjáni, in _Not. et Ext. des MSS._, vol. X.
p. 39.)

[184] فيض is translated by Silvestre de Sacy “emanation;”
and فيض اللقدس _fayz al kudis_, by “émanation très sainte”
(see _Ibid._, p. 66). In common acceptation, _fayz_
signifies “plenty, abundance, bounty, grace;” _fayz-al
akdes_ means also “communication of divine grace made to
angels, prophets, and other superior intelligences without
the intervention of the Holy Ghost.”

[185] اعيان خارجيه, _aâyan kharjíah_. The scholastics have
distinguished fixed and external substances; the Súfis
distinguish substances in and without God.

[186] The word وقت, _wakt_, “time,” has a technical
signification.――According to Jorjáni, it means: “Your state,
that is, that which is required by your actual disposition,
and is not produced by design.” _Shehab eddin Omar
Sohrawerdi_ (who died A. D. 1234) says: “_Time_ is what
dominates man; man is not dominated by any thing more than
by his _time_; for time is like a sword, it executes its
decrees and cuts. By _time_ is therefore meant what comes
forcibly upon a man without being the fruit of his action;
so that, subject to its power, he is constrained to conform
to it. It is said: ‘_Such a one is under the dominion of
time_,’ that is, he is retired from things which are his
own, and transported to things which belong to God.”

[187] _Feśuś ol hikem_, “the bezels of philosophemes,” is
one of the most celebrated works composed by Mohi eddin Ibn
Arabi, upon whom see a subsequent note. This work was
commented, not only by the above-mentioned Daúd Kaiśieri (of
Cæsarea), but also by Anif-eddin Telmesani, and others.――See
Baron von Hammer’s _Geschichte des Osm. Reiches, II^{ter}
Band, Seite 657._)

[188] Upon Kaśa and Kadr see vol. II. pp. 352-353, note 1.

[189] استعداد, _istidad_, “disposition,” that is, when a
thing possesses the near or remote quality for
action.――(Jorjáni’s Definitions.)

[190] The name of _Jabr_ is common to several doctors of
Muselmanism. The most ancient of them is _Abu Abd-allah Jabr
Ben Abd allah al Ansari_, a native of Medina, as it is
indicated by his surname. Jabr, according to Mirkhond, first
a pagan, after having examined the sacred books of all other
nations, Jews and Christians, was vanquished by Muhammed’s
eloquence, and adopted his faith.

Another Jabr is _Abu Mussa Jabr Ben Haíían al Sufi_, author
of the book _Kitab al Jafr_, and of many other, some say
five hundred, works upon the philosopher’s stone. He lived
in the middle of the third century of the Hejira (about A.
D. 864).

A third Jabr, an Andalusian, is surnamed _Shems-eddin_.

[191] _Mohi-eddin_, “he who makes religion revive and
flourish,” is a surname borne by several Muselman doctors.
The above-mentioned is _Mohi-eddin Ibn al Arabi_, born in
Kordua, in Spain, of an Arabian family, called _Tayí_, in
the year of the Hejira 560 (A. D. 1164). He studied in the
academy of Seville, and then visited Asia Minor, Syria, and
Egypt, where he heard the most distinguished Shaikhs of his
time. He became the founder of a mystic school from which,
among other remarkable disciples, the great _Maulana
Jelal-eddin Rumí_ issued; he is called “the Pole of the
mystic world.” He died in the year of the Hejira 638 (A. D.
1240), in his seventy-sixth year, and was buried at the foot
of mount Cassius, near Damascus, where his sepulchral
monument is still well preserved. He left thirty-three
works, which are enumerated by Baron von Hammer, the
illustrious historian of the Ottoman empire.――(See vol. II.
pp. 490. 657 of the German work.)

The Muselmans in India revere, under the name of Mohi-eddin,
a saint, son of Zangui and Bibí Fatima, called also Shaikh
Saddo. He lived at Sambhal, in Rohilkunt, according to
others, at Amroha, in the province of Delhi, where his tomb
still exists. There the devotees assemble every year, on the
11th day of the 2nd Rabiâ (the 4th month of the Arabian
year) and celebrate the saint’s memory, by particular
fatihas, “prayers,” addressed to him, and other acts of
devotion.――(See _Mémoire sur les particularités de la Relig.
Muselm. dans l’Inde, par M. Garcin de Tassy_, pp. 46-54.)

[192] See hereafter an explanatory note upon Enka.

[193] See page 141, note 3.

[194] A work already quoted (vol. I. p. 82) composed by
_Mahmud Shebisterí_. His native place was _Shebister_,
distant eight parasangs (about twenty-eight miles) from
Tabriz, near which place he was buried in A. D. 1320. He
wrote the _Gulshen-raz_ three years before his death, as an
answer to fifteen questions addressed to him by the great
Shaikh Hussein, of Khorassan, who died A. D. 1318, one year
after the composition of the just-mentioned most celebrated
didactical work upon the doctrine of the Súfis.

[195] حضرت غيب مضاف.

[196] حضرت مضاف غير.

[197] حضرت شهادت مطلقه. _Shahádet_, interpreted in common
acceptation by “testimony, attestation, witnessing,
confession, evidence,” is translated by Silvestre de Sacy,
in a note of Jorjáni (see a subsequent note), by
“assistance.” It takes in the terminology of Súfis, a
meaning varying according to the particular opinion of their
sects; thus it coincides sometimes with “presence,” whether
with the qualifications of attentive expectation, whether
with that of perfect intuition.

[198] حضرت جامعه.

[199] This is a very abstruse doctrine. To throw more light
upon it, I shall subjoin the explanation given by Jorjáni
upon this subject, according to the French translation of
Silvestre de Sacy (see _Not. et Ext. des MSS._, vol. X. p.
66): “The five divine presences are: 1. _the presence of the
absolute absence_ (or mystery); its world is the world of
_the fixed substances in the scientific presence_ (see pp.
223, 224, note 2). To the presence of the absolute mystery
is opposed:――2. _the presence of the absolute assistance_;
its world is that named _Aalem al mulk_ (that is, the world
of the throne or seat of God, of the four elemental
natures); 3. _the presence of the relative absence_; this is
divided into two parts: the one, 3. _nearer the presence of
the absolute mystery_; the world of which is that of
spirits, which belong to what is called _jabrut_ and
_malkut_, that is, of intelligences and of bare souls; the
other: 4. _nearer the presence of the absolute assistance_;
and the world of which is that of models (images), called
_Aalem al mulkut_; 5. the presence which comprises the four
preceding ones; and its world is the world of mankind, a
world which reunites all the worlds, and all they contain.”
This statement differs somewhat from that of our text; to
exhibit and to develop, in all their variations, the systems
of Súfism is far beyond the compass of these notes, and
would require a separate work.

[200] Such a tradition existing, we cannot wonder that, from
early time to our days, among the religious practices of
Durvishes, Súfis, and monastic congregations, there are
different kinds of dances, accompanied by song, with or
without instrumental music.

[201] The celebrated Leibnitz entertained a similar opinion
in consequence of his great principle of “_the sufficient
reason_,” he was persuaded that all souls, after death,
remain united to an organic whole: “Because,” says he, in
his _Théodicée_ (§ 90), “there is no appearance, that there
be, in the order of nature, souls entirely separate from any
sort of body.”――(See on this subject _La Palingénésie
philosophique, par C. Bonnet_, tome II. p. 24 _et seq._)