IBN cARASI AND HIS INTERPRETERSPART I: RECENT FRENCH TRANSLATIONS

JAMES WINSTON MOUIS

IN~ OF IsMAILI STUD~ PUIS

Part I of this review article introduces a numba' of recent U'aDllaboDl and related studies ofworb by the peat Islamic mystical thinker Ibn cArabY (d. 638/1240) that tOFther illustrate themany represeDtative faeeu of his thoqllt, writiq. aDd inteJratiOD ofearlier bI8mic traditiolll. PartII, to appear in two follown., iuues, OUtliDCISODle of the maiD lines of interpmation and influmcethat awbd the reception of his t ouPt by IIIb1equent 1J1aaUc writcn iD • wide raqe ofdiscipli and historical seuinJl, .po bMed on • survey of recent publications (primarily

truslatiODl) iD several .........

INftODUCTION

ScHOLAU wamNG (or teachin&> about the elaboratedilciplines of later Islamic thoupt-philOIOphy, kaIam,SufISm, etc.-inevitably encounter a dilemma thatmust be shared by -Oricntalists" studYina other similartraditions: in the absence of an adequate body ofappropriate translations, they can either aaume anintimate acquaintance with the texts and traditions inquestion, in which case their audieace' effectivelylimited to a handful of colleagues with the requisitephilolosical trainiq; or they can undertake the difTlCUlttask of explanation and abstraction for a hypothetical-general" audieace, an effort whose intrinsic limitationsare evident in even the best of the secoDclary literatureon these subjects. This dilemma is all the more frustrat­ins when ODe recoaniza that the interests aDd capacitiesrequired for appreciating the deeper intellectual andspiritual dimensions of those traditions, if only suffi­cient translations were available, are fortunately muchmore common than the vocation and training requiredto decipher them in their originallanpaae and culturalsetting. In this context, the recent appearance of morethan a dozen translations of works by the famousIslamic mystic: Ibn cArabI(d. 638/1240) aDd later SufISof his school is a remarkable phenomenon; thesebooks-and others promised by the same scbolan­may open the way not only to a wider appreciation andundentandina of the MGreatest M ter" (aJ-Sbaykh al­Akbar, as he is traditionally known) and his teachings,but also for substantially improved acc.a to thevarious Islamic traditions that are integrated in his

ork.The purpose of this review article is therefore twofold.

Ymt, is customary, we . h to draw the attention of

S39

interested specialists to this large body of new publica­tions aDd to fomp scholan (lome of them yaun, aDdDOt yet widely known) working in this flCld. ' ButsecoDcllr, given tbe potentially wider interest of thesubject, we shall also try to provide the non-specialistwith lome basic bactpound for approachina thesetranslations.

I We have also made ewry effort to mention the receatEnaJisb-laDpaae trauJaUons (aDd some importaDt Arabicpublicatio ) in tbe field, either in tbe tellt or footnota,have avoided any detailed commenuso _ DOt to preclude the

full-scale reviews each of those orb c1etetVa. Althoup itfalls outside the limited scope of this article, we mUll also at

IeaIt mention the recent appearance of Prof. Sucid aI-l;lakrm's

tJ-MuCjtun aJ-$UjT: 1Il-lJiJcnfII flIJudi1d td-KMi1rM (Beirut:Daodala publi hers. 1981). which is tnaly a milestone in thestudy of Ibn cArabI~the pateIt achievementiDceOsman Yallia'. bio-bibliopaphy (n. 3 be10 )-and will be aniDdilpensable tool for every serious student and translator ofthe Sbayth from now 00. This monumental ork (1311 pp.)provides (in addition to the K.oranic and lexical bacqrOUDd)defmitioos and ciWions, drawn from the FwfiI.tJI and nother orb by Ibn cArabI, iUustratiq some 706 of his key

technical terms. (The Ktual number of terms diJcuaed.liventhe additional crOll-references. synonyms, and related roou,is in the thousand..)

1 It is a sipif"lCUlt aDd iDIeratin& fact (especially for non­Islamicist raders of this J01U"DaI) tlW available Weatcm­Jaaauaae studies of IbD cArabJ baed on a comparison withcopate traditiOlll of Hindu. eopiatOllic. ChriItiaa, Budcl . toud even Tao· mystical tbouPt are perhaps more nWDerOaDd more aa:esaible thaD works praeatiDa him primarily inthe contellt of his own IsJamic tladitioDl ud soun:a.

JOumJll O/IM AmnictIn Oriental Soc~ty 106.3 (1916)

Due to the great number and diversity of the worksto be covered, this article hu been divided into parts.Part I is devoted to the translations of Ibn cArabrsown writinp, preceded by a brief introduction to thecomplexities facing all students and interpreters of theShaykh. Part II, to appear in two future issueI, willfocus on the historical trends and influcnc:cs illustratedby the recent translations of works by Ibn cArabI·slater followen, colDDlcntaton, and critics (as weD ascertain "apocrypha" widely attributed to him). How­ever, as we shall see, most of those historical tendenciesin interpretation are already reflected in the approachesof contemporary schoWs.

PAaTI

Students of Ibn cArabT, whether specialists or bcgin­nen, face four dauntins obstacles to an intqrated andcomprehensive appreciation of his wort: (I) the sheervolume and variety ofhis writinp, possibly unparalleledin Islamic civilization;) (2) the extreme divcnity ofsymbols, allusions, rhetorical forms, and subjects whichare brought tOJCthcr, often in radically new contexts,in his works; (3) his distinctive personal "inspjml" and(most often) nOD-linear writing style, with its complexparallels to the Koran itself; and (4) his presumption,in most of his worts (including all the most famousones), of a specialized audience with a high degree ofspiritual development and immersion in the practice(and vocabulary) of the Sufi path. These difficulties,which readen will find amply illustrated in the transla­tions mentioned below, have often given rise to impres­sions (whether amoDglbn <:ArabI'l historical critics orin modem secondary literature) reminiscent of Rumi'sfable of the blind men and the elephant! To transcend

J The standard biblioaraPhicai RfeRDCe wor~ Osmany.ma's two-volume Histon et Chu3ificllliorr de 1'00000red7b" CArllbr(Damucus: IDititut Fr~ de 1>aJuI, 1964),mentioDS some 846 titlcs; even if a number of these aR

apocryphal, excerpts from IlltlCr worb, or dupticale titles,Ibn cArabl'. own penonallists of his writinp (the FIJrrU aDdljaza discussed by Yama), oomposed for disciples late in his

life, e.:h contain Dearly 2SO worts. The sheer n....ber of thesewritiDp should not ObscuR the comprehensive aDd authorita­tive IWUre of Ibn cArabI' 111-FutU/.tM aI-MakId)ltl (wrbcMec:can Inspirations") which wu oomposed and added tothroupout the last 30 yean of his life, and which coventhe full ranae of subjects and disciplines treated in his manyotberworb.• One bouJd also not minimize the extent to which t~

clifrlCUlties reflect certain rhetoric:al features of Ibn CAnbY's

these initial obstacles and discover the unifying visionand intention in Ibn cArabI's works requires extraordi­nary efforts and abilities on the part of both the readerand the translator, for the translator- ifbc is seriouslytrying to communicate with the non-specialist-mustalso act 81 commentator and guide through this laby­rinth of symbols.

One traditional response to tbele problems was tofocus on a single "representative" text and interpretivepenpective, most often the philosophical, conceptualanalysis of Ibn cArabY's FUIilI al-QIkam (MBezels ofWisdomj. This approach, initiated by Ibn CAnbY'sson-in-law and close disciple SUr ai-DIn al-QOnawiaDd carried out in a line of douns of extensivecommentaries down to the present day, j is now readilyaccessible in Enatish throup the superb study byToshihito lzutsu and a complete translation of theFUlfil by R. W. J. Austin.' These two worts, because

worb that may have been oonscioUily intended either todissuade unqualif'Jed readen or-mOR, positively-to inducea state of l}tIyra(~") leadins to the traDJceDdeD<:eof establiJbcd mental eatqorics and judlJDClltl. as with the"oem-lite wla1)iit (-ecsaabc paradoxes") favored by certainfamous SufIS. In any ellie, the bizarre epithets one sometimesfinds applied to Ibn cArabr, whether in Islamic or modernWestern 10W"CCI--e.1-, -incoherent,to 16pantbeist,.. ""heretic,"""monist," 16madman;" dC.-aR undenaandablc lea as rea­

soned judpaents about tlae wbole of his wort than asreactions to tbe difficult cba11enae ofunifyina and intepatinlsucb diverse and challeoainl materials.. One of the peat

advantqa of thex new tnulllatioDl is that readers can at lastbeain to form their own judp:lenh on the basis of • morerepresentative sample of . writinp.

.s This process and referenca to QOnawl, K hlDI, andother important figures will be disaaued in Pan II. See inparticular, in O.y~ op. cit., the list of 120 commentarieson the Faqiq (I, pp. 241-S6) and the list ofsome 64 critics aDddefenden of the Fupq (I, 114-35); neither liItina is to betaken u exhaustive of the available soun::a in tbis reprd., Tr. R. W. J. Austin, TM IWuIJ of Wudom (New York:

Paulist Ina, 1980); another oomplete EaaJish translation,1M &als of Wirdo"" Ir. A. cAbd ai-Rahman at-TaIjumana(Norwich, UK: Diwan Ina, 1980), is somewhat DIOR read­able, but unfortunately inKauate in many places. Bothtran.lations should be lupplemented, WheR poaaible, by the

partial translation of T. Burckhardt (EnaJ.isb tr. from theFrench by A. Culme-Scymour), 1Jte Wwo", ofthe Prophet,(Aldlworth, UK: BesbaraPublicatioDS, 1975), hichcontainsmore of the commentary and reference to the underlyinaArabic that is often needed to follow the details of IbncArabl's 81'JU1DeDts. However, the Burckhardt translation

MoulS: Ibn 'Arabi tmd his InterptYtns. Part I S41

oftheir comprehensiveness, maturity and faithful reflec..tion of a Ionl tndition of commentary, provide anideal starting point for the study of Ibn cArabL How­ever, relyinllolely on the FU#iI-or more specifacally,on the scholastic tradition of commentary focusingprimarily on the systematic metaphysical underpimainpof Ibn cArabY's thought-ultimately gives a one-sidedaDd hiahly misleading image of the Shaykh's writinp,his historical influence, and his own character andpcnonality.

Two other aspects of Ibn cArabI's wort are at leutu essential to an adequate, intepated undentandinaof his writinp (includina the Frq;q): they are hisconcern with the practice aDd methods of Sufmn, hislifeloDl activity as teacher and spiritual guide, fromAndalusia to Anatolia; and his consistent focus on theKoran and teaching of the Prophet Muhammad as thesource and context of all his work. These two inter­related upecQ, which underly Ibn CArabI's conceptionofbia own unique role II the~ of the MuhammwlanSainthood" (/chQtm aJ-waJijytl tll-mul;Jommtltiiya) andhelp account for his subsequent veneration as the"Greatest Master" among a wide range of Islamicschools and spiritual paths, may well have been takenfor granted in the trMitionallslamic teaching context(including the commentators of the FUlfil); but theircentrality-which is most marked in the F~t-isnot at all reflected in the available English sources.7

iacluda only 9 fuU chapters (out of 27) and does Dot have the~ importaDt IDtroduetioa to the Fupq.

The recent publication of a DeW, revised editioa ofToshihikoIzutsu's Sujbm tmd Taoism: A ComptUtIliw Study of KeyPld/moplticaJ Cort«pu, (University of California Pta&, 1984)[title sliahtly different than the original two-volume edition(Totyo: Keio IDStitute, 1967)], should help mate more acces­sible this cIusic study of Ibn cArabt's "philosophic" thouaht.(For those uafamiliat with this work, it should be stressedthat Part I of the boot is an entirely independent study of theFIlfWI, relyilll especially on the famous COIlllllellWy of CAbdaI-RazzIq UshInI [see Pt. 11], separate from the relativdyshorter Taoist and comparative sections; the section on IbnCAnbY is not only cleat aDd reliable, but also com.iDI helpfultranslations of perhaps J5-2O% of the Fupq.)

7 This is in no way intended • a criticism of the modemauthon in question, who most often are the mOlt colllCious oftbe limitations of their particular studia, in view of theirdirect contact with Ibn cArabl's writinp. Unfol'tUllatdy, mostraden-includin. many .-nOOn of secondary literature andtranslaton from Wcstcm Iaa&u-.es bid into Arabic-lactinaadequate finthaacl acquaintance with IbD cArabt', actualwrit. haft naturally tended to tate the limited pcnpecti~

The point is not a minor ODe. Many of the standardcriticisms and misundentandinp of Ibn 'Arabi', work(e.g., "'incoherence," Mrepetition," Mlack of focus" orMorder,'" Mcontradictioo," Mextravapace," etc.) arisefrom misconceptions of his intention as Mapplying'" apre-cooceived doctrine or interpretation to traditionalmaterials, disciplines, etc.' For the unifying intentionsand actual rhetorica) fuDctiODl of his writinp onlybecome evident when they are viewed in their originalpenpedive of practice and realization; the same is trueifone is to appreciate the depths of his treatment of theKoran, 1)lIdrth, and blamic rites and pndicel. Sincethe actual integration of these interpretive upects ofMtheory" and pfllCtice only becomes .pparent throupextensive reading and familiarity with Ibn cArabI'swritinp (especially the Fllti1l}4t) and their culturalcontext, one of the most important contributions ofthe new translatioDl discussed below is the way theybring out more forcefully these euential and too oftenDeJIected aspeets of his work..

The translations are mentioned here roughly inorder of their accessibility and importance (in terms ofrepresentativeness and scope of issues treated) for non­specialists approachina Ibn cArabI's writings, otherthan the Frq;q aJ-IfiJuun, for the rant time. In addition,readen familiar with tbe standards and procedures ofAmerican or German scholarly publishing should becautioned that most of these books are marked by arelative lack of indexes, bibliography, adequate

intcrats, and methods of presentation found in such studiesto be lCpl'CleDtative of the Shayth's ort .. a bole. The

resultiD. distortions haft beeD especially remarkable wheremodern Muslim writcn have derived their imqe of Ibnl;Arabi from lICCountJ aDd JClectiODl inteDdecl to "introduce"him to a non-Islamicist audieDce (sec n. 21).a Unfortunately, there is Aill no inb'oduetory study Me­

quately prcscntiDl the CIIeDtia) '-rhetorical" aspect of IbncArabI's writiaat, Le.. the way be UDites many methods, styles,and traditional subjects in view of certain I'CCUJ'fCIlt spiritual

intcntiOftS-a leek that is DOt too .urprisin& liven the culturalbKklfound, profound tllOWlcdae of Arabic, aDd insi&bt thattuk would require. Howner, tbc best illustration of tbcDeeded *CIlSitivity to that crucial dimension of Ibn cArabJ'.writi.... usually phrased in terms of COIlUDCllU on -SufISm" inaeneral, is to be found ia tJac various coIledioDl of essays byF. Scbuon OD Islamic subjects; sec, &IDona others. u SowflSrM.Voile et Quinlnsenu (Paris: Dcrvy-Livrcs, 1980) and Ap­prochn du Plthtomhv ReliVna (Paris: i.e Courricr duLivre, 1914). However, those reflections BeDerally presupposea peat familiarity with both the writinp of IbD cArabI and tbebroMer Sufi traditio of which they are a pan.

JOIImtIl 01 1M Americtm OrimUJI Sod«y 106.3 (1986)

proofreadin~ and scholarly peer review, featureswhich-whether due to consideratioDJ of economy ortradition-are not limited to this particular area ofFrench publishina- Hopefully, agrowina awareness ofthe obstacles this poses for readers unfamiliar with theoriainaJ Arabic will encouraae areater attention tothese mallers in the future.' For those interested inconsultina the Arabic orilinals. each translation hasbeen identified by its number in O. Yahia's "dpertoireaelX~"the standard bibliOJl'8Ptiical reference for IbncArabJ.10

, Due to tbe rdati~ abUDdaDce of translated material (M

Ie_ compared with most areas of Islamic studies), writen on

Ibn cArabi hopeluDy will soon be&in to sift increasinathouabt to the onaoioa, cumulative aature of their on aDd

to their respoasibilitics to a widei' interested public. ODe sianof this interest (ill addition to the sheer volume of receatwritins) is the recent orpnization of a MMuhyiddin Ibn cArabr

Society" in Oxfo~ EJIIIaDd. and their publicatiOD (siDee1982) ofa biannual Jounwl, which may serve • ODe means ofcommunication and coordination in this field. In any case.readen attemptiDa to compare two or more translations willquickly recognize tbe Deed for fuD indexes of Koran andJ,tuJrt1t (inc1udin. important allusions as well • direct cita­tiODS) and of technical tmnino1o&Y (keyed to the underIyina

Arabic expressio... liven the inevitable variations in choiceof equivaleDu by many translators). likewise, ai~ thepractic:al impossibility of reaclina all relevant worb on IbDcArabi, it' important that translations (and especially DOtesand commentary) reflect the input of other qualified scholanin the fld.d-somethina that wa clearly not the case withaneral of the otb reviewed bete.

10 See n. 3 &bow. Readen unfamiliar with Prof. Yahia'swork should be amed that many of Ibn CArabi's writinp

were known under multiple titles. even in his own lifetime,and tbM the titles frequently are only vapely or symbolicallyrelated to tile primary subjects of the worb in question. Thisbelps explain why translaton-addilll to the confusion-havefrequently chosen to use their own, more representative titles.As a J"CIult, Dr. Yabia's dClCriptiOD of the contents of worbhe WU DOt able to examiJle din:c:tJY. where baled on indica­tiona in the titles, are not always completely accuraae. In

additioD, the work is by DO means complete in ill citation ofearlier tranaJatio . a correcteeI aDd updMeci list, by M.N01Cutt. is liven in tbe above mentioned JOUTIIGl of 1MMuI)yiddin Ibn cA,tlbr SocWty. In (1984). and should besupplemented in fonhc:omina issues.

For traDllatiolll from the Futlll)at (O.Y., o. 1lS), liwnthe v.t extent of that wort, we haft cited the chapter number(same in all editio ) and the volume aDd pqa KCOrdina tothe 1329 Cairo edition, frequently reprinted in Beirut (011'

I. The new translation of M. AsfN PALACIOS' classicstudy, L 7sklm chriltianlll: buM $lIT ¥ Sou.f'/RMd1bnCArabltk Mur~[Tr. B. DURANT. Pp. 379. Paris: GUYTamANIEL/ EDmONS DE LA MAUNIE. 1982.], despitethe age of the oJiaina1 (1931) and the evident limitationsof the approach IUuestcd by its title, still remains thebest available introduction to Ibn cArabY's own life andspiritual practice, and to those crucial practical andexperiential aspects of his work which were sharedwith earlier SufISm (and ultimately with mystics ofmany religious traditions). As such, it provides anindispensable complement to the metaphysical,~ret­ical" aspect emphasized in the FUIiiI 111-8iklmt and thestudies of Izutsu and most other available sources inEnglish. The fruit of decades of study and reflection onIbn cArabI'. workH (and the often unavowed inspira­tion of many subsequent studies), Alin's work containsalmost as many pages of tran lation and 81 wide arange of topics a all the other books reviewed belowtaken together. The volume is divided into what can beregarded as three distinct books: (a) a detailed bio,­raphy of Ibn cArabi, based on his own autobio­JI1lphical remarks throupout the FuttiJ;I41 (pp. 23-90);(b) an anthology of representati~excerpts, focusin,on the Sbaykh's spiritual method and experience, froma number of key works (pp. 209-378); and (c) acomparative study of Ibn cArabY's spiritual methodand "psycholol)'," to a areat extent typical of SufISmmore generally, which must be approached withcaution (pp. 91-208).

The biopaphical section, while by no means exbaina the references available in the FutQhal (and otherworks),12 does Ii e an indispensable self-portrait of the

~ldir) and dlewbere, aDd followed in Prof. aJ-l;Iakrm'slexicon of Ibn cArabI's technical vocabulary (n. 1 abo~).

(Osman Yabia'l new. 1Cieatif'Je: edition of tile FUJiiJJ4t. withextensive and invaluable indexes. has not yd reached the endof Volume I of the oIcIer editions, and a tberd'ore not usedfor any of the tranIlatioDl reviewed hac.)

II We may mention in partic:u1ar tbe (abridp) English

translation of his hl4m tIIUI t~ DiviM Comedy. tr. H.Sutherland. (London: Frank Cas and Co. Ltd.• 1968-reprintof t 1926 ("tnt edition), which retains ita usefulness u thebest available study of Ibn cArabT's esc oJoay aDd itssoun:a in Islamic t.nMlition, nm if it is no ouadated u farthe question of infIueftCCS OD Dante' coocemed.

12 It should be nOled that AJfn's refereoces are to the older.

BQ1Iq lithoarapbed cclition of t Fu~, also in fourvolumes, but with entiRly different paaination from tedition most often cited in more modern worb OD Ibn cArabi

MoulS: Ibn cArdi tmd lab IlIlnpmen. PtlTt 1 543

Shayth and his dramatic penonality-a portrait thatnot only offen a vivid sense of Ibn cArabl as a"practicing" Sufi, but also may IUgest some of theunderlyiDJ reasons for the oDJoiq hostility and uspi­cion his works encountered (both during and after hislifetime) amoDJ certain aroupl of mo~ sober-mindedtheologians, lawyen, aad philosophen.Jl This portraitof Ibn cArabI and his Sufi milieu is perfectly comple­mented by the deICriptioDS of his own masters andcompanions in the biosraphical sections of his RQl;aaI-Quds and aI-Durrat al-F4Jchira. readily available inAustin·. translation-14 In addition, Asm·. quotations(pp. 79-85) of some of Ibn cArabrs own descriptionsof his distinctive, t6inapired" method of composition invirtually all of his works. and of the way the FUlfil andFlltQ1.r4t were meant to be read. should be requiredreadinl for anyone who sets out to study thosewritinp.IS

(cairo. 1329: cf. n. 10 abo~). IsJamieists shoUld be able to

decipher the transliteration of references. proper names, etc.,

which-since the translator dearly .u unfamiliar with theunderlyina Arabic-bas sometimes taken some peculiar tumsin the passaae from Spanish to French (e.,., al-Mariq aI­Mobadam for ai-Malik aI-MuC~).

The inflUCDCe of Asfn Palacios' biographical selections inthis ort (and the pervasiveness of tbe phenomena alluded toin n. 7 above) is ill rated by the frequcoc:y with which itspanial Arabic translation by t:.A. BadawI (Ib" t:..AI'Gbr: U.yatuJru wtI MIIIiJrJuIbuJru. Cairo. 1965) is no cited in contem­porary Arabic cliscuuions of Ibn cArabr instead of referencesto the correspondina pauaJCI from the FUliU;t41 itJelf.

1) See Part II for further refcrcnca to this problem. Thesehistorical phenomena are otherwise almost impossible tocomprehend ifone approaches the problem from a "doctrinal,"purdy conceptual study of his writinp.

•• Sufu of.A1UItIJwitl, tr. R. W. J. Austin. (London: GeoraeAUcn. Unwin, 1971). The boot Ius also been translated intoFrench, by G. Leconte, us Soufu d"A1tdIJJ0ruie. (Paris:Sindbad/ Editions Orientales, 1979). but without the indexesand helpful biblioaraPhy provided in the oriainal Eoaliahversion. Althoup Asfn docs not usually quote from theRiiJ.r tIl-Qutb, be docs Jive frequent refCreocel to tbe cor­rcspondiq biographical entries, which can be c-.iIy matd1edwith Austin's translation.

IS Given the diversity and diJtiDCti'Ye1lCll of Ibn CAnbY'sstyle of writins. even in comparison with other forms of Sufiliterature, a comprehensive study of his methods of writinaand rhetorical techniques, in the laraer context ofhiJ spiritualmethod-bued on the many indications scattcred throupthe FUI~ill-issurely one of the peat needs in this fJeld. (Secalso n. 8 above.)

Probably the most valuable aspect of the work areAsfnt translations from six different treatiJa by IbncArabl (plus another work now attributed to a laterTurkish author) focusina on the Shaykh·s spiritualadvice and his own discussions-often illuminated byaccounts of his penonal experience-of ..... andconditions of the Sufi path. These seleaioDJ t althoughsystematically leavina out the more diffacult meta­physical and cosmological passages, are repreaentativeof a central and still virtually unstudied dimension ofIbn cArabI's work that is elaborated. for example, inhuDdrecb of pqes of the FlltQJ.r4t. Three of tile selec­tions areco~ primarily with what may be broadlycalled the tId4b aspect of SuflSlll, "rules" or adviceconceminl spiritual practice and method. The treatiseon "The Essence of What is Indispensable for theNovice" (O.U.• N- 352) has since become available in acomplete EnaJish translation;16 in clear aDd ItI'aipt­forward terms. it lives an excellent idea of what IbncArabi would have PR:IilPposed as the very minimalconditions for most readers of his worb. The "rmnRule Conceminl the Conditions Necessary for thePeople of God's Path" (K. a/-Amr aI-MuJ;rJcam . .• ,O.U. 28) is a considerably more advanced work.including fascinatina advice to spiritual JUides on thetypes of languaae and teachil18 they should offer todifferent audiences and types of students-remarkswhich could be usefully applied to the interpretation ofIbn cArabi's own writinp. The brief paaages from theK. aI-Tat/built al-1IahlJ'd (O.Y. 716). while not reallyrepresentative of that major work as a whole,11 includebrief but pointedre~ for both novices and moreadvanced seeken. that should be exmmely intereltiqto students of the practical and socio-historical side ofSufism. Such students will fmd that frequently IbncArabi's !lugestions-e-g., on questions of JDmiIC orthe inadvisability of frequent traveti., etc.- are often

•• "Instructions to a Postulant,"tr. Arthur Jeffery. pp. 640­SS in bis A R~ 011 lsliun, (London, 1962).

•, See the edition. and cspecially the 10Dl German introduc­tion (pp. 1-162). of H. S. Nybera's Kkltwn Sdlri/tm da IbnaJ-cArtlbl. (Lcidcn: E. J. Brill, 1919), hicb pves a detailedanalysis of some of tbe mclaphysical concepts of tho andrelated early orb. It would appear that the relative aa:es­libility of Nybcra's study ofIbn cArabJ"1 ""tbeoIophica1lystcm"(pp. 29-160)-0 account hich siva DO inklin& e.8-, of thedimensions repracntecl by Asfn's IClcctions from the Tlldbrrilt­helps cxplain the predominance of this aspect in ublequcntWestern secondary literature and popular conceptions of thcSbayth (see n. 7 abovc).

JourNIl of tM American Oriental Society /06.3 (19116)

contrary either to popularly accepted imaaa of SufISmor to common Sufi p~ in other rqions andperiods of the Islamic world.

The other three selections are primarily concernedwith the phenomenology and (in the broadest possiblesense) "psychology" of the spiritual path, subjectswhic:h in Ibn cAmbrs writings-unlike some of theearlier, "clauical" Sufi literature in this area-areusually closely integrated with his mystical theology,metaphysics, etc. The briefest treatise, the R. al-Anwar(O.Y. 33), while explicitly concerned with the phe­DOmena experienced duriDa klullwtl, or spiritual retreat,is also a concise survey of some key stages of thespiritual path, and has often been commented on inthat context. II Ibn cArabI's much longer MtlwiiqiC al­NujQm (0.Y. 443), summarized and partially translatedhere, coven an extraordinary ranae of spiritual phe­nomena and insiJhts in a relatively accasible form,·'and was even more widely read and studied by laterSufIS. The culminatina selection (pp. 337-78) is madeup of long passap from chapter 78 of the FutUl)4t, ondivine and human love; his subtle analysis of thattheme-althOUgh its overall role is by no means aspredominant in Ibn cArabI's work as with the famousSufi poets, for example-is perhaps unsurpassed inIslamic mystical literature.20

I' This work hal also recently been translated into English,under the descriptive title JOUT1WY to 1M Ltxd 0/ POwn', IT.

R. T. Harris, (New York: Inner Traditions International,1981), aloDI Yiitb iJDponant seleetio from tbe tommeotaryby cAbd al-KarrmmT(to be discussed in Part II). O. Yahia(I,p. 162) mentions ICVeO alternative titles aDd, toldher witbBroctelmann, almost SO maDusaipts. The full traD5lation oftbe staDelard title wouJd be --rhe Lipts Conceminl theMysteries (or secrets) Beatowe<l on ODe Who it in Retreat(kJuJlwIl)." Sec also the translation and extensive commentaryon tbis work-drawml especially on JfiT's commentary and

corresponding paaaga from tbe FWQ/:r4t (chapters 167 and367)-in Michel Chodkiewicz'u &ellU .$ sainu: hophltk~t Ubtltll dtmJ III docltlnt d7bn CAtabr. (Pari. Gallimard,1986), pp. 181-221. [This major new study of Ibn CArabi's

conception of prophecy aud sainthood, bued on a tboroUibstudy of the FWUl}a1 and many other writinp, appeared toorecently to be included in the body·oftbis artide.]., The subject ()( this work. which has little to do witbtrolOJY of any sort, is better indicated by the alternative title

(0. Yahia, II, p. 37S) X. Sirr III-A$'''' WII rmIIIUIIti ciJm 111­lib,., ... ;according to Yahia, it was abo commented on bycAbd a1-RazzIq al-Kisbini (also discussed in Part II).

20 Lone quotations from the same chapter (78) are alsoavailable in the EnPsh tranIlation (by R. Mannheim) ofH. Corbin's CTNIM ImtJPrIIlion in 1M S,qum o/Ibn cA'lIbT,

The central, analytical section of Asin's book isundoubtedly the most dated and problematic, Jiven hisavowed intention of"explaining" Ibn cArabrs spiritualmethod by reference to Christian mystical precunon.However, it is not too difficult for an attentive readerto transform that historicist penpedive into a moreappropriate comparative one, thereby bringing out theuniversality of the underlyina phenomena. ADd formore specialized readers with access to the Arabic textsfrequently cited, As{n's detailed references (mainly toworks other tban the FutilJ;Jat) represent tbe fruits ofyean of JaCuch that would be diff'lCUlt to duplicate.More daqerous than the explicit historicist peaspective,however, is tbe repeated UIC of alien and inappropriateinterpretive eategories-e.g., 1Jantheist," -..nonist,"...heoI0IY," "heterodox/orthodox," etc.-which, aI­houp undentaDdable in terms of Alin's intendedaudience, cannot but mislead thole lackina a finthandacquaintance with Ibn cArabl's works. Surely nothinghas done more to pRVeDt serious study and understand­ing of Ibn CArabi than the virtuaUy universal repetitionof such formulae in modern secondary literature byauthors who (unlike Asin) have had no inkling of theirappropriateness and limitations.21 Finally, readers mustbe cautioned that the author here-as in his Is/tun andthe Divine Co~dy-has offered only the evidencethat j]]ustrates his thetis; as a rauh, not surprisingly,

Bollinsen Series XCI, (Princ:eton: Princeton University Pras,1969), cspccia11y in the nota to the chapter on the -dialedic oflove." Alin'. lC~ons-toup1y IG-IS% of the orilinalcbapacr (= FUI~, II, pp. 320-62), althoup not indXated• such in tbis traDalation-lcave out the complex meta­pbysical-tbeolo,ical dilcuaioDS that fonn the pater body ofthe chapter; tbe selec:tion makes for easier readinJ, but is notwbolly representative as a result.

The fOUf openine pap (pp. 333-36) are taken fromunidentified lCCtions of the FwUJ,at, dew. witb the impor­tant diffcr~ between the -Sufi," aDd the MMiIIbtlUry,,"(or mlll4mr)'d, the foremost of whom beina the ProphetMuhammad), in Ibn cArabl's distinctive usaae of that term:this subject and related spiritual .....nks" and functions arediscussed in detail in chapter 73 (beainnina of Vol. II) of theFIdiiI.t4t.

21 The most gIarin. instana:, almost inacapable in secoocIarylileralUR refcrrin. to Ibn cArabr, is tbe formula~ 111­wujUd" (roulbly translatable as tbe "'transceodent Unity ofBeinej-a phrase have not 10Qtcd anywhere in IbncArabI'. own writ.inp (but see the remub on BalylnJ and tbeschool of Ibn SabcTn in Pan II). Sucb formulae may have acertain usefulness as a sort of .. hortband" when used byspecialists wellllCQuainted .tb their intended references (and

intrinsic limitatiODl), but their use for a wider audience

Mouu: Ibn cATllbi tmd hb InurpTetns. Part I S45

one comes away with little sense of the overwhelmingrole of Koran and ~th in all of Ibn cArabY'swritings, in his own self-image (as tbe~aI of Muham­madan Sainthood"), or in his later influence throuJboutthe Islamic world. Fortunately, however, the transla­tions discussed below offer a much more balancedimpression of that aspect of his work.

U. Despite its brevity, this translation of Ibn CArabi'sK. al-Ftma' fi al-MwhiiJu1d4 (O.Y. 125), 1.1 Livretk rExtinction dmu fa Contnnpkltion [Tr. MICHEL

V.(LSAN. pp. 57 (translation pp. 25-50). Paris: LBS

EDITIONS DE L 'OEuvRE. 1984.] offen a remarkableintroduction to some of the central and recurrentconcerns of all his writing.n Above all, Ibn cArabiexplicitly stresses throughout this treatise-what isoften only implicity elsewhere-the decisive importanceof the appropriate spiritual realization (ta/:Jqlq) for atrue awareness of each of the classical sufi topia hediscusses: the consciousness ofdivine Unicity (aJ.uuI1ya)and the illusions of M unif1C81ion" (IttiJ:JadJ; the necessityof carefully crafting one's speech and action whendiscussing the realities of spiritual "unveiling" (kahj)in the midst of those who are unaware of them;23 thefunctions of himma (Minner intention; and especiallyits highest spiritual degrees, culminating in the puredevotion (ilchliq) of the mu1}tIqqiqiin; the differencesbetween the revealed Reliaion (din) of the Prophet(and earlier prophets) and the divene teachings insti­tuted by non-prophetic saaes (the ~:J);24and the

inevitably ends up conveyina iOmcthin. quite different fromwhat •• ori.inally intended-a diff"lCulty that is especiallycompounded in tbe case of Muslim (or more secular) readersentirely unaware of tbe complex theoloaicaJ iuua and per­sonal commitments that underly the use of these and othertbeolOJica1 categories lDd judatnents in this section of Asm'swort (or, to take an even more influential cue, in the writin..of Masaianon). The most effective antidote seems to be

extended contact with the Shaykh's actual writinp tbemJclves.22 The concision and clarity of this work, which recommend

it for teaebin. and oral exposition, may also explain its plac:eat the very beJinnins of the widely reprinted Byclerabacl(1948) edition of the R/ua>iJ Ibn aJ-CA,abr, pp. 2-9. A new

EngliJb translation, with more complete commentary, wouldbe a welcome 1C1'Yice for students approacmn, this field.

23 The dimension of-csotericism" in Ibn cArabY's writinp­UDderIyin, sucb crucial problems • the interpretation of hiscosmolOlialsymbolism. his understanding of Islamic tradi­tion, the relation of his different writiup and their intendedaudiences, etc.-is still virtuaDy untouched in tbe availablescholarly discussions of his work (see notes 8 aDd IS above).

24 The contrast between the relative e1l'ectiveoas and limita­tions of Caql (unaided M reason," in this context) and Juulrf

contrast between the Sufi and both literalist andrationalist undentandinp of the realities of Faith(rman), epitomized in the famous /.uIdith on "l/p6n"(*WoRmp God as thouah you law him ...j.

The density of Ibn CArabI's allusions in this text andthe concision of his treatment of subjects developedat great length elsewhere (especially in the FutW)4t)offer a difficult challenge to any commenwor, so thatthe late translator·s annotation in this instance issomething of • model in its genre. Not only have mostof the Koranic and lpu/flh references been clearlyidentifIed and commented on,2S but the Shaykh'8 tech­nical terminology (usually with the Arabic tetms givenin parentheses) has been carefully explained wherevernecessary, often with references demonstrating a pro­found acquaintance with the FUIiiJ}at. Above all, thecommentary is clearly thought out and consistentlydirected toward the reader's undentanding of the textitself; that sort of dilciplined pedagogical unity andintelligence is a rare phenomenon not only in transla­tions of Ibn 'Arabi, but in writing on Islamic mysticismin general.26

('"illumination" or spiritual"discovery" based on tbe deepenin.of scriptural indications and prescriptions) is one of thetealrretlt themes of tbe FrlliiI)4J, especially, bcarilll on vir­tually all the topics Ibn 'ArabI disawes-most notably, hisunderstandina of spiritual practice or method, and the centralrole of tbe interiorilation of tbe ,luuc, the revealed Path of tbeProphet. The implications of these discussions, bile impos­sible to summarize bere, are certainly different from bat onemight pther simply from the analysis of the Fupq and itsphilosophic commentaries taken by thenuelves.n One of thl major diff'lCUlties witb most available transla­

tions of Ibn (ArabI (mcludina those of the Fupq, n. 6above), is the inadequate discussion of allusions (as wen asdirect quotations) to the Koran aDd 1)4drlh, witboul which

large parts of the tex~ are frequently incomprehensible or atleast quite puzzling. Even simple paae or verse references(witbout full, appropriate retranslations aDd often elaboratecontextual explanations) are often of little usc to thosewithout a serious tnowledF of clauical Arabic, ready aaasto tbe /.uuIfth collections, and a tborough acquaintance withIbn cArabi's often tecbnical use (buildina on earlier Sufiauthon) of those traditional SO\lKCl. This IOrt of apparatus­eucntial for molt modem readers, includin. many Mualims­corresponds to a bacqround and preparation Ibn cArabI

took for ....nted amons most of his intended audience;obviously the impression or rhetorical dfec:t is raciallydifferent in the t 0 caes. (See also nota 4, 8, and 15 above.)

26 In this reprinted version, the editor bas also added anindex of Arabic technical terms (thoqb not of their Frenchequivalents), wbich is very useful in this cue since tbe

Jour1lll1 of tM Amme.n Orlentlll Sockt, 106.3 (1986)

According to the editor's note, this is only the rtnt ina series of republications of the late Mr. VIIsan\ manytranslations from Ibn cArabI (including some elevenshorter chapten of the FutQ/;rill, as weD as many of thetreatises included in the Hyderabad edition of theRJu8~/) which oJiainally appeared in the journal&u.s traditionnella,11 and which together constituteperhaps the largest body of translations of Ibn cArabI<apart from the FUfiif) available in any Western lan­auaae. While not devoid of mistakes and occasionaldisputable interpretations, these translations and their1CC0mpanyina annotation and commentary are of aquality considerably above the average in this fJeld,and their republication would be a most valuablecontribution to all students of Ibn cArabY, and ofSufISm aDd Islamic spirituality more genera1ly.

DI. 1.11 Niche da LunaJirel [Tr. MUHAMMAD VXLSAN(son of preceding translator). Pp. 156. Paris: LEs EDI­

nONS DE L'OEuvu. 1983.1 a truslation of Ibn cArabrJpersonal coUcction of lOllpJdrth qudrrentitled Mbhlc4tai-Anwar (0.Y. 480 and 11),11 is marked by a sim-

translator hu si~ the underlying Arabic expression inparentheses in most places where a translation alone might be

inadequate. Although this procedure does make for a clutteredand perhaps leu immediately Mreadable" translation, it isprobably essential for any more serious study of Ibn cArabi,

especially by DOn-Arabilts, liven tbe lack of a dir~tly

equivalent tectmical vocabulary in non-Islamic 1aJl&uaIes.(The situation is no different than with translations of philo­sophic or mystical texIS from Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese, etc.)

The need for common reference to the Arabic is compoundedwhen, u is now the case, students are fKed with venioDS ofIbn cArabY's worb by a dozen or more translaton.

27 A full bibliography of those translations is Jiven in arecent collection entitled L'lslimr el hi Fonetlon de ReMGuhwn, (Paris: Les Editions de l!()euvre, 1984), pp. 194-96;the bibliolFaphy also lists the same author's many translationsof chapters from al-KllhlnI's commentary OD the Koran,often (faJsely) attributed to Ibn cArabt (sec Part 11). The samecoUection also includes the author's translations ofpart of tbeForeword to the FwQ/.tat (pp. 180-91) and of chapter 20, onthe "mowled. of Jesus" (pp. 13-82); unfortunately, theapparatus in these lattCl' two cases is more oriented to theauthor's GumoDian preoccupations, amply illustrated in theremaininl articles of this collection.

11 The full title-in this version; O. Yam. (11, 390) mentionseight other titles from other manuscripts-is "n.e Niche ofLiihts Cooceminl the Reports (aJchb6r) Related From God."(This book, incidentally, is quite distinct from a famous andfrequently translated Sufi work by aI-GbazIlI whose titlebeains with tbe &aIDe words.)

plicity~ directness, and accessibility that makes it notonly an indispensable reference for students of IbncArabl, but also an excellent introduction to thisfundamental and frequently misundentood aspect ofIslamic devotional and spiritual life. Its usefulness forstudents-liven the decepti~"simplicity" of the Arabicof many 1;Iadllh-is further enhanced by the additionof a facin& fuDy vowelcd Arabic text. The translator'sbrief but dense introduction (pp. 7-14) focuses on IbncArabl as a mubaddllh, mentioniDJ his teaehen in thatdomai~ his favorite sources, and a number of otherpenonal collections of his (most now lost) refemcl toin his writings. However~ this information, whileimportant, does not even beain to convey the funda- .mental importance of I;uldTth as sources for all of theShaykb'. work. Those who study attentively e\'CIl thelcfew examples, though, win soon recopize to wbat agreat extent worb such as the Frqiq and FuI~~in fact woven out of exteDli~ reflection and com­mentary on these and other I;uldrlh. which functionmuch like musicalleitmotifs.19 For the most part theethical and spiritual intentioDl of these 1)Gdfth (whichfrequently recall portions of the Gospels) are readilyapparent, and eschatological themet are panicularlypredominant.30

As Ibn 'ArabI expl8ins in his introduction (p. 16),this collection consists of three parts (of 40, 40, and 24

2' See the extensive indexes of /JtMl1th refereoca in eachvolume of O. Yahia's new, Ongoinl edition of IIl-FuJiIJ,4II1I­Mllklclytl, and the selcetiw dilcusaion of 44 of the mostimportant of these (nol inducled in the Ml.shk4t m-A.rrwar) atthe end of S. al-l:Iatrm;s IIl-Mu7am 1Il-$UfT (n. 2 above),pp. 12S7-69. The importaoe:e of this element in Ibn cArabY'swritinp underlies and eumplda his daim to be the aseal ofMuhammlNlan Sainthood" (ie., among other thinlS, tbeexemplary interpreter of the inner meanins of the onl and

ceadtiop of tbe Prophet), and belps to explain-far more

than his diff"lCUlt metaphyaical doctrines-the extent of hiswidespread veneration in the Islamic world u the "patestShaykh... Unfortunately, most available studies of Islam (and

of /.uIdr'h in particular) fail to convey tbe central importanceofselected J.wJa1r (maoy orwhich are often literally inseparablefrom the Koran in popular consciousness) in the reliaioUlexperience of people from all Islamic rCJioDl, sects, andperiods. This spiritual dimension, quite distinct from theMprofeaional" use of 1)tId1I1t in qat and thcolosial contextlthat has been the object 01 much modem historical raearcb,is the main foe of Ibn cArabI's interest in and pedaaoaiWuse of /.uIdIIlt.

)0 Especially intcratinc in that rcprd is the I}IMJTth tll­

mtlWik[i1 (tbe "stations" of the Resurrection), here Jiven inseveral parts in the last t 0 sections, which mates up much of

MODIS: Ibn CArabl IIItd his Intnpreter8. Part I 547

luJdrth, respectively, the fant group with their full imIldIOml back to the Prophet (who relates them from Godor via Gabriel), while the second arlHlCWI aR relateddirectly from God. (The translator has added aninterestinl appendix, pp. 14S-SI, from an 18th-centuryMaprebi Sufi writer, concerniDa the distinctions whichwere necessarily drawn between these widely recognized"divine ..yinp~and the words of the Koran iuelf.) Itmay be pointed out, given the widespread prejudices tothe contrary (at least in modem secondary literature),that the peat majority of the J.uu/1th collected here,includinl all of tbose in the first part, are taken fromthe standard canonical recensions, and were not Min_vented" by Sufi tradition. This point is further empha­sized and elaborately demonstrated in W. A. Graham'sDiv;' Word and Prophetic Word in Eiuly blilm,3' awork (apparently unknown to Mr. Vilsan) which tookIbn cArabr's collection as one of its points ofdeparture,and which contains English translations of thole hDdrthfrom the MishJcJIt that are also included in the canonicalcollections.

IV. Stcphane Ruspoli's translation of chapter 167 ofthe FllIiil)Qt, L "tIkhimit du bonheur JHUfait [Tr. S.RUSPOLI. Pp. lSI. Paris: Boo INTEINATIONAL (collec­tion"L'De verte"). 1981.] is certainly the most ambitiousand pioncerinl effort among tbe studies reviewed here,since it is the fust complete Western translation32 of a

chapten 64-6S of the Futiil)at, on the stases of the Resurrec­tion and the states of the bIeaed in Paradise.

Uafortunately, the lack of any iDdex-althoulh it wouldadmittedly have been a areat deal of ork-somewhat limitsthe usefuloeu OCth.ii translatioli ai *referenee (with reaard toother writinp of Ibn cArabI) (or those who are not able tomemorize its conteDts.

31 The H.,..e: MOutoDA Co., 1977. Prof. Graham's work is

by no means exhaustive of the I}tu/flh qudsT iDcluded in tbecanonical collections; a recent COllecb\4e survey of the -SixBoob," al-A~tJr 1I1-Q&ubfya, (Cairo: Wizlrat aI­Awqlf ... , 140(/1980), cites in fun some 400 eumples,iDdudina fun references to the originailOurca. Many oftbaeI]adTtJr qudii, not included in the Mw.Jc1J al-AnwIT, arelitewiac repeatedly cited aDd interpreted in IbD cArabl'worb (e.&-, the "'Iiiq Ill-jIuuwI," pp. 470«. iD the above­mentioned urvey, which is at the heart of his escbatoloaica1diKuaions in the FUliiblt).n The problems posed by complete translations ofextensive

sections from the FutUl)iIt (u oppoRd to translatina onlyshort, self-contained chapters or 1C1eded pusqa, • in AsfnPalacios' book above) are basically twofold: (I) wbat to dowith phrases one doesn\ really uDdentand, but wbole "'key"·pcobably liven IOmewhere else in that massiYe wort (which

long chapter of the FutUJ,iit (14 pages of Arabic text,or roughly .S% of the book)-oDe of its most complexand allusive passages, and one whose eludication andundentaDdina inevitably requires references to manyother sections of tbat immense work. The narrativeframework of the chapter is the quest for spiritualperfection undertaken by two friend , a "follower ofMuhammad 19 (with aU that implies for Ibn cArabT) andan ambitious "'hcoretician" (part mutaJudlim, partphilosopher) wbo relies on his own tbeoloaical cosmo­logical reasonings.n The contrast of their very differentpaths and experiences, in the context of the traditionalstales of the Prophet'S spiritual ascension (miCrjjj),enables Ibn cArabI to allude to many of his mostessential spiritual insiabts and reaIizations wbile con­tinually reminding tbe reader of their practical andpenona! presuppositions.

However, just as in Ibn cArabI's other works usingthe MiCrllj framework (especially tbe long chapter 367of the FutiiJ)(lt, recountinl the Sbaykb's own penonalmiCrjjj, and tbe K.. m_brjj"),M the variety of subjectsand symbols brought into play in this chapter is sogreat that an adequate commentary-which the trans­lator bas promised for a future volume-would have tobe many times longer than the actual translation. Inthe interim, this venion does provide illuminatinl andessential notes at many points,J' and readers acquainted

mi&bt take a decade to rU4 aad annOble ill its efttirety); aDd(2) what to do where, _ is often the case, adequate explana­

tion of a .inale aUusioD may require whole p8.ICI of com­mentary drawn from other cbapten or orb by Ibn cArabl1It is DO doubt the presence or lDUIy substantial collllDClltarin,ubltantidy eliminatifti taw. two IJ'C*l obstacles, that helps

explain the focus ofacademic interest on tbe Frq;q al-Qilumt.J) This symbolic exprasion of a recurrent theme in the

FutiiJ.tllt, tbe contrat betWCCD the two paths of /uuhfand clU/land their relative efficacity (see al 0 n. 24 above) raises aDUmber of diffICUlt problems for modem readers and inter­preters, and perhaps calls into question tbe adequacy of someof the traditional approaches to the FUIfJI. At tbe Yery least,this attitude wa not without its repercussions in the later

attacks on Ibn cArabt's orb and his Sufi defenden bycertain theologians and pbilosophen (see Part II).

14 Chapter 367 = FutU/:t4t III, 340-S4; K. ai-JR." ...(O.Y., o. 313) = RtuallllHr a/-cArIlbT(Hycierabad, 1948),Pt. I, 13th treatise (pp. 1-92). An ex1cnsiYe summary of the/;uIdrtlr and ~oranic soun:es and ymbolism used in thesechapters, a well _ a broad outline ( ithout interpretation) ofeach of them, can be found in ARn Palacios' [8"'" tmd tMDivine COlMdy (full ref. at D. II above).

lS The usefulness of Dr. Ruspoli'. notes and the advancethey represent can be measured apinst an earlier, partial

S48 JDUmIII 01 the Amniam OrimtDl Society 106.3 (1986)

with the FUIiJI, for example, will recognize discussionsof many of the same questions of metaphysics andmystical theology. Moreover, the discussions of 001­

mololY and principles of created beiDa in the con­cluding sections also form an exceUent complement tothe equally condensed pn:sentations of those matters inthe works translated by D. Gril and M. Gloton dis­cussed below. However, even allowing for the seriouschallenges posed by this chapter, the quality of thetranslation and commentary alike show evidence of acertain haste and carelessness that will limit its useful­ness for the general reader, and may even give amisimpression of confusion or disorder that does nottruly reflect the Arabic original.

V. The two studies dealt with in this section are likelyto prove less accessible for those approaching IbncArabI for the first time. Both of them, in highlycondensed and symbolic language, touch on limitedaspects of a complex symbolic framework of cosmol­ogy, cosmogony, and metaphysical concepts (the InslInKiimil, "Muhammadan Reality", etc.) which-in itstwofold interrelations with the traditional sources ofthe Koran and I,atulith, on the one hand, and theirspiritual realization and verifICation on the other­underlies virtually all of Ibn cArabY's writing. Unfortu­nately, there is really no single work to whichnon-specialists can refer for 16keys" (or even adequateclues) for fully decipherinl these and many similarsymbolic treatises of Ibn cArabT.l6 But even if thesetexts cannot really be "understood" in isolation,]7 they

translation of this same chapter by G. Anawatj, ML'AJchimiedu Bonheur, d1bo cArabi." pp. 353-86 in the RnIW ellrbutUut Domilllc.u. d'£tude$ OrimltJln du CiliTe, Mlhmge$6 (Cairo, 1959-61).

l6 In Western 1anIuaaes, the best introduction is certainlythe tudy of the FU#4 a1-QiJuI", by T. Izutsu (see n. 6 above),to be supplemented by the German introdue:tion to H. S.Nybera's Klmwn Sehri/tm tk$/b" cArabf(n. 11 above). Thebroadest and most useful refereDte, fOt tbose able to read IbncArabl in Arabic, is now no doubt the -.gufi lexicon" ofS. aI-"aklm (n. I above), under tbe appropriate beadinp;see, e.•., the entry for tl/-iluiln tll-Umi/ (entry no. 66,pp. 158ff.) aJJd its forty synonyms in Ibn cArabY's technicalterminology for ,hal key term alone.

)7 Nor can it be assumed that such brief symbolic writinpweR always meant to be Mgnderstood" in a systematic SCDJe;

dependifll on the case, one can hypothesize a number ofaesthetic, pedaaogical, Or eYen socio-political explanations ofcertain of these puzzlina treatises. It is worth notiaa. in thiscoDDedion, tbat Ibn cArabT often praises tbe condition of

do offer representative cases of important stylistic andrhetorical aspectl of Ibn cArabJ'. work which we havenot already encountered.

M. Oloton'. translation of the Shajorat til·KJzwn(0.Y. 660), L'Arbre du Morule [Tr. MAV.lCE GLOTON.

Pp. 230. Paris: Us DEUx OcEANS. 1982.~ previouslytranslated into Enalish by Arthur Jeffery, I is perbapmost noteworthy for its extensive commentary andadditional references (the actual translation coveringonly pp. 48-108). That e planatory material includesnot only long passages from the Koran an4 I;uItllth(e.g., those underlyiDl the notion of the "MuhammadanReality"), JurjlnI's dcfmitions of Sufi technical terms,and sections of the FUIUI not otherwise available inFrench, but aliO certain pteYio Iy UDtranllated partsof the Fut~t-themost important being chapter 63,on the borztlkh (both the intermediate, O&imaginal" levelof reality, and the esc:batologicaJ state loosely resem­bling U purgatoryj.39 Ibn cArabY's work itself is dividedinto three D'&ain ptl1U:«J (pp. 49-62) a brief cosmologicaloutline of the "Tree of Being" using primarily Koranicsymbolism; (pp. 63-92) a discussion of the levels andaspects of this cosmic whole (incJuding its microcosmiccorrespondences) in terms of tbe "Muhammadan Real­ity"; (pp. 93-1(6) a symbolic recounting, in this CO$Dliccontext, of the archetypal spiritual uc:ension of theProphet, somewhat shorter than the venion in thework translated by Dr. Ruspoli above. While theextensive references illuminate tbe many individual

""yrtl, of one'. ego beiDI"at a loss"-and thus more receptiveto tbe spiritual Truth-ill comparison with tbe (relatively)superficial and schematic son of undentaDdin, normanysoulbt by the unenJilbteDed ctlql.

31 Mlbn AI.cArabt"s Sbajarat aI-Kawa," Studis IdtllJlktl, X

(1959), pp. 43-n and XI (1960), pp. 113~ recently reprintedin boot form in Lahore, Pakistan (1980). The annotation inJeffery's venion is not as useful nor as complete as that in thisnew FRncb translation, but the translation itself IeC1I1S mORreadable, perhaps partly because it bas Dot been so syste­matically ubclivided.

)t We must note the commendable provision of a detailedIndex'alouary (COftrilll both Arabic terms and their Frenchequivalents here) and a helpful introductory bibliography. Inaeneral, while the wealth of references offered by Mr. Glotonmay be Rduftdam and poaibly even annoyin. to scholarsalready havin, such bacqroUDd. it shoulcl surely be of IervLceto students approacbinl this wort for the rust time.

40 Our description heR docs not correspond exactly to thetranslator's own far moR elaborate system of seetiODS andsubclivisions-a useful device which may have been carriedtoo far in this case.

No als: Ibn cArtlbi tIIUi IJU Interpreter'. Port I

terms and symbols of the discussion, neither they northe translator's introduction really provide the com­mentary that would be necessary to make sense of thiswork as a whole.

Prof. D. Gril's translation of the R. al-iltihild 111­ktlW1l1(O.Y. 319), L'Arbn e' 1D QlMure OIsellux [Tr.DENIS GIlIL. Pp. 73. Paris: La DEux OCEANS. 1984.] isas concise and exact as the preceding work is prolix;the poetry and symbolic prose of this text demand suchacquaintance with Ibn cArabI and careful attention tothe Arabic that a translation in the full sense isvirtually impossible:" However, this tudy does serveto point out both the central importatx:e of Arabicpoetry and poetic expression in all of the Shaykb',writings'Z and the terrible difficulties facing translatorswho would try to do justice to its mcanina (not tomention the form). This is all the more important inthat the most strikina and controversial formulationsof the Shaykh's thought-here, for example, his con­sistent use of the fmt penon sinJUlar when dilcu inathe different aspects of the "Perfect Man"-are fre­quently expressed in his poetry, althoulh one is seldomquite sure how much weight should be given therhetorical dimension of dramatic or poetic license.Perhaps more important, this work helps draw ourattention to the many aspects of Ibn cArabi's characterand expression which are profoundly and essentiallyMArab" in a way that was often nq1ected already in histransmission to the Eastern Islamic world.·)

., This study fint appeared (in subltantially the same form

• reprinted here), aloJII with a fulllCientiflC edition of theArabic text, in the AnnIIln Is/mrroloKiques XVII (1981),(Cairo,IDltitat FranpiJ d'~"losieOrienlale), pp. 53ft'.

42 In EnJlisb, the bat available illustration is the recentlyreprinted traDIIaIiOft ofIbn cArabt'l 1M TtII'jum4II.I-AMwilqby R. A. Nicholson, (London: Royal Asiatic Socidy, 1911;repro Loadon: Theosophical PublUhioa House, Ltd.• 1978).Nicholson'l book a1Jo includes an edition of the Arabic text(0.Y., No. 767) aocl a partial translation of Ibn cArabi's latermystical commentary on these poems, K. ll1-lJJuIIcM'i, WQ

tU-Aclaq If Slttlrl} ... , (O.Y. No. 116). Unfortunately, IbncArabI rarely provided such collllDentaries for the yilt numberof venea, for the most part much more opeDly metapbysical

and pedqosical in nature, which are scattered throu....out theFIIIS1]4, ancI which provide a IOrt of ultimate cbaDeaF forthe tr&nJlator, giYeD their depth of allusion and the multipleradinp and interpretatio.. they oftea contain.

4) See Part II for the relative emphasis in tbe nOD-ArabicIslamic world on the FIqiq 1Il-lIihm and the cooc:cptual,philosophic undentandina of the Shaykb's writinp. In addi­tion to the role of Arabic poetry and other rhetorical and

The subject of the treatise ('·addressed to myself,"Ibn cArabl lays), the cosmic unity ofdivine Manifesta­tion in the 11111n aI-Kiimi/, is aptly described by thelonl Arabic ti~ loosely translatable as MEpistle on theunification of manifest heinl at the level of immediatevision of the presence of the Tree of Man and the fourspiritual birds," where the tree (as in Sluljtullt 111­KlIWn) symbolizes the ....nivenal Man" and the fourbirds symbolize the four inseparable principal aspectsof manifest existence-the Intellect, Univenal Soul,universal Body, and "Dust" (luIbii') or Prime Matter­which are discussed in dozens of the Shaykh'l writinpon cosmology and cosmoaony. One point worth notingis Ibn cArabl' vigorous defense (pp. 69-70) of theequal and essential role of the principle of "universalBody" in the manifestation of the world, a key aspectof his theologyIphilosophy of flljalliy.," that bringsout its dramatic contrast with the more "dualistic"schemas (of matter and pirit, etc.) adopted by otherschools of SufllDl and otber relipoUi and philosophictraditioDS. Prof. Gri!'s concise introduction (pp. 7-31)identifaes these main "characten" and some of thestandard sources for their interpretation (see n. 36above), but-no doubt wiJely-does not attempt adetailed commentary, which would require many vol­umes of this size.

VI. The two recent boob by Mr. Charles-Andre Gills,which can only be partially considered as translationsof Ibn cArabt,·5 are curious contemporary ilIustratiollIof the perennial pheooJDena of "scholasticization,"

aesthetic tendencies in Ibn cArabl'. writiDp (sec n. 8 above),one may abo note his clistiDCtive t6etymoloJical" form ofKoranic interpRtation (amply illustrated in the F",u,)­thintinJ, or at least praentina his tbouaht, tbroup theusociation and analysis of Yerbal roots aDd derived fOnDI­aDd his aoaIolOUI empbuil on the importance of Imalldetails of the "iteral," outwanl aspect of the marrcQ andtradition to a dqree which is perhaps more bro••y typical ofArab forms of SufISm.

44 T. Izuuu, op. cit. (0. 6 above), Jives an especially clearaccount of this dimension of Ibn cArabi'l metaphysics. Seealso the important discussion or tbe basic clifJereaca betweeaIbn cArabT'. outlook and the system of Ibn Sabcln and hisfollowers, in M. Cbocltiewicz' introduction and <:ommentaryof BalylnT'l P.plt,~ su, /"Unidtl Ab$Olw (often attributed toIbn cArabJ), (Paris: lei Deux Oc:WII, 1982); the sipiflC&DCeof tbis point will be brouabt out in Part II.

45 In contrail witb the previous worts, it is the tnDIIMorIcom­mentator'. name-aDd not Ibn cArabt'l-wbich fJlUfa prom­inently on the COftC of these boob.

JoUT1lill of the Amerlc"" Orimttd~ty /06.3 (1986)

g10.S5eS, and supercommentaries that were often mani­fested in the reception of Ibn cArabI's work, especiallyin the non-Arabic Islamic world.ott As is inevitable insuch cases, the commentary tradition-rather thanserving to re-create or make accessible the spiritualand intellectual insights that motivated Ibn CArabI'swriting-easily takes on a life of its own, becoming a"doctrine" or intellectual object of study in its ownright, accessible only to members of the particularschool or sect in question. In this instance, excellentand thoughtful translations of important works of IbncArabl, and serious reflection concerninl them, havebeen clothed in an elaborate supercommentary on theauthor's "two masters" (R. Guenon and M. Vilsan)which unfortunately will tend to obscure Ibn cArabi,rather than to illuminate him, for those who are eitherunfamiliar with those writers or who happen to findthe author', distinctive melange of (among others)numerololY, astrology, Hermeticism, Masonic ritual,and Vedantic terminolo&y less congenial.4

'

Ifwe bave not simply passed over these two books insilence, it is because the underIyina works of Ibn cArabiare of substantial value in their own right, are capablyand seriously translated and, at least in the secondcase, would well repay the effort of study in abstractionfrom their exotic lurroundinp. La DoctriM lnitiDtiquedu Pllerinage a10 Maison d'AlltIh [fr. C.-A. GILlS.

pp. 331. Paris: LB EDlnONS DE L'OEVvu. 1982.].bued loosely on cha.cter 72 of the Futiil)4t ("On theHajj and Its Secretsj -althoulh it is virtuallyim~sible here to separate the author's penonal commen­taries from any translations of Ibn cArabi, even

.. See Part II for details; if the phenomenon is univenal withtbe heritage of all &real ofiainal thinken, it is still especiallyeasy to comprebcDd in the cue of Ibn cArabI, pen thediftrlity and volume of his writinp aad ahe aJroseaherexceptional variety ofsources and traditions tbat are iDtepatcdin them.

47 In all fairness, it must be noted that tbe author', com­mentaries in both volumes also include some contn"butioDlfrom two classic Islamic interpreters of tbe Sbayth', schoolwho will be encountered in Part II, CAW al-1lazzIq al­~lshInI and cAbd al-Q1dir al-Jau)irI, whose remarks 8ft

usually more obviously Rlevant to the texts of lbe cArabLHowever, tbe references to their worb ber'e are almostimpouible to separate from their occultist surroundin ... To give some idea oCtbe abridaement involved (and at the~ time of tile detail of Ibn cArabl'. intelat in thil.ubjectand the depth of his interpretation), the lithop'apbcd Arabic

witb Arabic text in hand-should at least draw atten­ion to the central position in the Shaykb'. thought andpractice of the prescriptions of Islamic law; his develop­ments in that area are more profouDd and IUbtle, aswell as more voluminous, than the better-known com­parable passap in al-GhazllT's ThY';) CUlUm td-Drn.4'

Le Cortm et ItI Fonetion d'Herml8 [Tr. C.-A. GILlS.

pp. 226. Paris: 1.Bs EDITIONS DE LUwvaE. 1984.],despite its title (which bas notbinl directly to do withIbn cArabt or the text in question), is in fact centeredon a translation of chapter 198, section 9 (II, pp.405-21) of the Futlil)lt, consistina of Ibn cArabr'ainterpretation of the thirty-six Koranic statements oftQw1;lId (the Unity of God), COrrespondinl to the81ulhiJda but each set forth in slightly different terlDl.JO

The fascinating way in which Ibn cArabT brinp outunsuspected riches of insight and meaning in each ofthose Koranic verses, in conjunction simultueouslywith the spiritual states and corresponding metaphysi­cal realities they manifest and express, is a remarkableillustration of his extraordinary capacities of interpre­tation, as well as an excellent practical introduction totbe central role of the divine Names and Attributes inhis thouabt.

One cannot read this work tbrough, challenging asthat may be, without laininl at least lome sense of thepenuasiveness of Ibn cArabI's repeated claims that aUhis writinp and inspirations are nothina more than the

text of almost 100 paaa (1, pp. 66S-763) oWd be equivaleotto some 1000 printed pap of a complete, annotated Enphtnmslalion.

49 Tbe Dlost mODumenW and accessible illustration of uu.dimeosion of Ibn cArabt', teacbinl is the seCtion, in theFu'Q/.IlIl on the "Seems of the Sharica" and the basic ritualsof Islam (ill/iii, 1}IIjj, etc.), vol. I, 322-763. equivalent tothousand. ofpap in EnJlisla translation; there an also OWly

shorter treatises by the Sbaykh alonl similar liDes, lOme ofthem diJcuuecl in Asia PalKios' wort mentioned above.

An excelleDt introduction to this stiD larFly neaJeeted areaof his thought is the article by M. Cbodkiewicz. "Ibn cArabI,la lettre d I. Loi," pp. 27-40 in the Act~s flu Co//oqwuMystique. CuJtur~ e' SociI,I': (Paris: Univ. de Paris­Sorbonne,I9M).~ Fonunately the translator', personal commentaries on

this wort are dearly separated from a complete translation ofIbn cArabT'. own remarks, following each of the 36lCCtioDl.Mr. Gw' comments, while still rcflectina (u in his title) tbesame OCJCuItiat toDCenlJ, are conaiderably mOR CIORIy relatedto Ibn cArabl's writing tbaa in the volume on tbe Hajj.

MoaRIS: Ibn CArabi tmtJ his Interpreters. Part I

fruits of reflection on, or internalization of, the Koranand 1;Iadith (and not the application to them of anexternal schema of interpretation). Nor can one studyany work of his for loog without developing a trans­formed awareness of and sensitivity to the words anddeeper dimensions of the K.orao. It is just this sort ofrealization, that can only be reached through actualmeditation on Ibn cArabi's writings-not from anyaccount of that work, no matter how capable-thathelps justify (and no doubt partly motivated) the years

of devoted effort that are represented by all these newpublications.s I

51 Certain translations of other boob frequently attributedto Ibn cArabT which one might expect to find here in Part I areinstead dealt with in Part II. In particular, these include theR. tIl-A/.uuIfya of al-Balylnl (see n. 44 above); '"La Pro/~uion

de Fol," tr. R. Deladriere; and works concerning the Tafl" ofcAbd al-Razziq al-UsbiDi.

IBN cARABI AND HIS INTERPRETERSPART II: INFLUENCES AND INTERPRETATIONS

JAMES WINSTON MODIS

INSTITUTE OF IsMAJU STUDIES, PAaIS

Part II of this article, to be coDduded in lA.OS 107.1, surveys tome repreICIltatM fuaa ofinterpretation and inftueac:e of Ibn cArabJ', wort aDlODI JUt.equeat blamic mystics and thinken(aDd their critia) • they are teYeaIcd in receat traDIIatioaa. Their coaapariJon with Ibo cAnbr,own wrilinp briDp out (I) the intellectual and institutional coDditioDi uDderlyiDa the creativeupedJ oftbe Sbayth" work and ac:couotiq for its pbcDomenallpl'ald; (2) importallt UpcctI ofhis writiq and teaehiDI often oePctcd by his later interpreten; and (3) the remarkable diversity,selectivity, aod autonomous development of I1Ib1cqueal Sufi traditiODJ • they traDlfol'lDeCl aadIdapted his worb in liabt of their own concerns. This half deals with a famous treatiIe (by BaJyIDT)repraeotiDl the -monistic" Sufism of Ibn SabcTn (and iU many critics); aa iDteratiDl apocrypbalwork (lICtually by • Wet QIdirt writer); the in8uential Persian worb of NIIafI; aod the cIec:iIiverole of the metaphysically oriented teaehinp of Ibo cArabt', ctilciple QOnawT and his JUCCaIOI'I.

degree to which Ibn cArabI'. own works are JI'Oundedin broader traditions (of common texts, vocabulary,methods, etc.) he sbared with other prominent Sufifiaura of this period, it is often very difBcult to pupthe depth and directness ofhis influence once one Joelbeyond the most prominent tradition constituted byhis commentaton and the line of his disciples aDd theirdirect students.

Despite these complicatin, facton, however, it isclear that an adequate account of Ibn cAnbY's inter­preters, in addition to (I) the direc:t line of his com­mentaton and students, would have to take intocoDlideration at least the following broader dimen­DoDJ of his inftuence; (2) the profound penetration ofhis technical vocabulary and concepts (more or less

INDODUCTION

I Historical obIerven ba\'e often noted the ran.-table-

PAaAPHaASING WHITBHBAD'S FAMOUS .BMA.~

about Plato-and with somethina of the same cIep'eeof exaggeration-one could say that the history ofIslamic thoupt subsequent to Ibn cArabt (at leastdown to the 18th century aud the radically newencounter with the modem West) JDiaht largiely beconstrued as a series of footnotes to his work. To thedesrce that such • statement is justifiable, this wide­ranpn, influence must be explained not simply byreference to the intrinsic characteristics of Ibn cArabrsown life and works discussed in Part I of this article(.uch features as the .heer volume of his writin& thediversity of intellectual disciplines he draws 00, hisconsistent focus on the Koran and /:uIdfth as hisfundamental sou.rces aDd primaty mode of P~ta­tion, or the remarkable scope of his penonal teacbinJand contacts, from Andalusia to Anatolia), but also bytheir coincidem:e with a broader historical movementof institutionalization of Sufism (with a CODCOmitantpenetration of --Sufi" forms and allusions in virtuallyevery domain of the arts and intellectual life) thatseems to have touched the most scattered rePoDl of theIslamic world at almost the same time, and with abroad ranF of inescapable intellectual aad practicalproblems posed by that iDstitutionaJization.1 Becauseof the vast extent of that larger mOYemalt and the

peatcst Sufi saints (AbO Madyan, Ibn al-cAl1f, cit.), poets(IUimt. CAtttr, Ibn al-Firi4), aDd foODden of IIIOIl of theclassical orden within the period of • century or 10 1Uf­

rotmdina the data of Ibn cArabT', life. (See, e.&-, A Schimmel,MystbJ DilMruiOIU of bltult, p. 279, who also noteJ thecoiDcidCIM:C of similar mystical movements at the AIDC periodin DOn-1sWDic pam of Europe and AIiL) One of the mostJtrikina eumples of this is the circle of Sufi acquaiDtaDca ofIbD <Arabi.. clilciple $adr al-Dln al-Qana~ddalt. later indIU article. HiitorkaJ raearcb inao the IWure and Iipj­ficancc of the wider procca of iDlUtutioaalizatiOll, in par­tic:u1ar, is still in its infancy and laraely cIdenniDed by limitedpcnpcdiva(an:hitcd~po~social, JCOpapbicaJ, etc.)that mate~ODJconcemina the broader phenomena

some would say "'providential--coincldenc::e of many of the very clifticuIt.

733

734 JOUTNII of the A~riaJn Oriental ~ty 106.4 (1986)

adequately undentood) in subsequent Islamic poetry(first in Persian, then in Janaua8es such II Turkish orUrdu influenced by Persian poetic forms), as well as intile explanation or interpretation of earlier Sufi poetssuch II RDmi or Ibn al-F'Iri4;z (3) a siJiillar spreadinSof hiJ metaphysical concepti and problems-apiawith widely varyin, dqrees of comprehension audqreement or disaareement-into subsequent scboollof philosophy (especially those descending fromAvic:enna), kalam theology, and even TweMt Shiitethoupt;' and (4) the more practical and devotional use

2 (The COBUDClltariel on Ibn aJ-FIri4'. famous NtIpft Ill­SIIJilk by .uch key fipra in Ibn cArabr. "aoo'" • S.cIdaJ-FarghInJ aDd cAbcl al-1lazzIq al-hsbinI are dilcuuedbelow, DB. 63 aDd 73.) The widest popular suney of theiDftueDCCI of IbD cAnbI\ termiDololY ad popaluizcd (aDdoften quite fallacioUl) vasiODl ofhis thoupt in the poetry ofmany blamic lanpqes is in A. Schimmel, op. cit. (indexunder "lbD cArabt,....WtJJ.u/4t IIl-wujQd," de.), whida is cape­ciaBy helpful for the Turkish aDd wlndo-Pakiltaailt rqioDl,complemeDtinl the larFly Iranian focus of IIUICh of theraearcb sammariz:ed in this uticle. Professor Schimmelfrequently ,treaea (e.,., p. 280) that the poetic integration ofIbn CArabl'. tenllinolOl)' often reftcctcd little or DO UDder­studinl of his teaebiDp, aad the pqa de¥oted to theSbaykb bimIdf(pp. 263-7., on "theosophical Saismj Ktu­

ally are belt uodentood • • rdlection of some of thosedauical stereotypelJ aDd miluDderstaDdiDp (""putbeism,It"monism,""IDOIis,It etc.). AI we haft attempted 10 point outboth ill Part I and ill IeYCI'81 ICdiODI below, thole JDis..representations are not limply a~o." or popular"limpJificatioDIt of11m cArab!'. ideal, but rather the symptolDl

ofcmaiD ollloina, historically inftuential tendenciel in Sufism(conapondina to ccrtaiu perennial poIIibilitiel in the philo­sophic UDdentanclinl and formulation of mystical experience)considerably pre-datinl the Shayth. In fact, the more~reticaJ ..pect of his writiDa (aDd the ell'ortl of his IaIa'clisciples) can belt be uDdentood .. an attempt 10 overcomethe interrelated pradiuI, philosophic, aad tbeoloP:a1 impli­eatiou of pRCilely thOle popular and m:urrent misundel'­,taIIclinpl

J A number of particular "pedS of this teDdeDcy arediscuacd in the fourth section (Qilnawt, kIIbIaJ, Amult, etc.)and .:companyiDJ noca below. The ollly broad iDtroduetionto tbis mOvmleDt, at 1eut iD Weaem 1aD.paaa, is to befound in Part II of H. Corbin', HUloir~ • J. pItIJo$opIJ~u14",lq.. ("La philolOphie islamique depuil la mortd'A~ jusqu'l nOi jouI'l,M pp. 1061-1188 in the volumeBUlow" Ie PItiJoMJfJIW-Jll iD the E1rqcJopb& • iiiPliltl«; see especially pp. 1097-1134 on -La~ysiqueduSoufiame" and pp. 1149-S2 on "11ntqraUon d'lbn •Arabi 1la

of the full ruae of his writinp (not so exclusively themetaphysical or doctrinal ones), II part of the laraercorpus of Sufi literature, by ordinary Sufis ofall raub,especially in thOle repons where Ibn cArabr. ownArabic works were more popularly acceuibJe.4 FmaUy,•• sort of secondary reflection of aD these divenestrauds of inftueDCe, there is the ongoing (and .tillvirtually unexplored) chain of critiques and attaeb on

Meuphysique SbICitej, and in its continuation, in IOmewlW&Rater detail, iD the volUllle eatitIed u.plriwopIW iT"".",.ultmtiqw tIUX XYII' ~t XYIII' $lkln (Paris, Buchct/OullteI,1981), a collection of the French introductions 10 the firstthree volumes of the Persian aDd Arabic texu edited byJ. AlbtiyloI in the~M$philOMJphn irllllleM dqubIe XYIP nick jusqu'lJ no.J jour$ (Tehran, 1971, I97S, and1978). In addition 10 the inIIerent limits of these studia-inthe case of the encydopedia article [now reprinted, withupdated bibliogaphy, ill .1iIIIIe volume with Part I, HUloir~• iii plliJo$oplrk UltImique (Paris, GaUimard, 1986»), theextreme cODCision of both the text (IarJdy limited 10 thecitation of key fiJurca aDd their major worb) and biblioa­raphy; in the cue of the AIJIltoloP, the nccasariJy penonalldection of themes~ in the Frach 11IIIlDW'ies­readen should also keep in mind that these diJcullioM areprimarily limited 10 the dIemes and individuals that weresubsequeat1y taken • important in 1aIa' I,..... (and pri­marily Twelftl' Shiiu) tboqbt. SimiI..- cIevdopmenti in theOttollWl realms aDd Maslim India aDd Central Asia, for avariety of reaIODI, haft not yet received the same kiDd ofsustained scholarly attention • the traditioDl that IUJ'Vived in1raD.

4 This is the realm in which the questiOD of IbD cArabt°.more profound spiritual inIuences-most dOIely corrapond­milO his own aim, aad iDtentioDl, • exprased in his claimto be the "aeal of Muhammadan sainthood" (1WI141)w), ancIlOhis perception by later Sufis • the "peatest muter"-isccrtaiuly mOlt pertiaeal, IiDce his uJtimale .m..clearly DOt

the promulptioD of a penooaI doctrine or teadlin&. but anindividual transformation and realizatioD whole inner dep'eeand outward manifeswioas necessarily dilI'er with each indi­vidual It is also where the IiIIlitatiOlll ofIUIaorical ancIliteraryevideac:e arc most evicIeat. AI a small but typical illustration.one can irnaaiae the cliMculties involved in tracin8 IbnCArablO, widespread "inIuences," even in DOn-MUIlim (aDdnOD-scholarly) circles, iD the modem West. As ODe C8D tee ina case lite cAbcI aI-QIdir a1-Jad'id (at the eDd of this artide),that sort of tranImiuion is often conaec:ted with Ibn cArabr.role in a nUlDber of Sufi orden (apin, lee Schimmel, op. cit.,for intaatinl casa in India and even Malaysia).

Invaluable evidence concernina lb. CArabI"J own oralteachina and practical activity • a spiritual master is provided

Mo au: Ibn 'Arilbi fIIId His Jntnprel6s 735

Ibn cArabi-or more precisely, on social movements,phenomena, and formulaic ~b tt vquely .&tedwith his name-that has likewise continued tbrouaboutthe IJIamic world down to our own day, illustrated bysuch symbolicaJJy important (and otherwise disparate)fiames as Ibn TaymIya, Ibn KhaJdOn, or AttmadSirhindT.J

In light of the scope ofeach of these perspectives andthe multitude of still largely UDexplored problems and

in the importaDt text by one of his closest aDd oldest disciples,truslalcd aDd c:ditccl by Denis GriI, tALe Kitab lI1-inbIh CtI1iIIIIIfq AlJiIh de CAbdaDah Badr a1-Babalr: UD""oiIuIe del'emeipemeDt spiritud deM~ HtIn Ibn cArmI," pp. 97­164 in A1tItGks bMmolop,ws, tome XV (1979). (Acompletcreview of Prof. Gril"ltudy, which came to our attention toolate to be inducIed in this artide, should appear in a futureissue of the MuI,yidtlin Ibn ~rdbrSockty.) Another typical

illustration of the Sbayth· wider, aDd purdy ~heo­

Rtical," influence &mODI Sufis in (at least) the Arab world canbe found in the studies of the Moroccan Sui Ibn cAjJba

(I747-1809} by J.-L. Michon: u Soufi MtlTOCtIin A!.rnuJd Ib"CA]llH1 n SO" MiCra.;: KIou4ire « 14 mystiqw IrIII.fII1IruJM

(Paris, Vrin, J973). aacI L 'AUlobloftaplW (FwtIMI) du SoufIMtITOCtIin AIpntJd Ibn CAlfbtz (2nd edition: Milan, ~,1982). In IIdclition to briqin, out the inftuenc:e of IbD CAmbI'spr8)U1 (tnWU) aDd poem in this context, .udlltUdies areextnmely importaDt-if not indeed indispensable-in sMDIa more concrete sense of the IOrt of practical aDd historicalsettiDp in which the transmission of thae MjnftueDca" and

tellchiDJi took place. We ha~ tried to sugat IOIIICthiD& ofthe declaive importaDc:c aDd diversity of tboee COIltexts­

which speci' ofteD take for gaoted. but are seldomself-evident to readen limited to tnlDIlatiODS aDd the purdyIiteraIy dimeIlsiol'1-ita the d· that foUo ., For some of the literary sources of this IoIlJ line of

critiques and defenses-in almost all cues. symptomatic ofthe IKk ofany serious intc:re:lt in Ibn cAr.brl own writinp orteachinJ, limited to a few "classic" p aaes from the FUIiiItIl-QIbm-see the refereDCel by Osman Yam. in his Hutonel cltasificGliorI ..• , vol. I, pp. 114-3S. which are co . er­ably expaDded in the Arabic introduction to his edition (withB. Corbin). dilcuucd below n. 88, of the introductionto \laydar XmuJrl COIlllDeDWy on the FuP4 tIl-fliIuurt

(K. NtqI tI1-NIIIiiI'·u Texte des TeXla," Tehran/Paris.1975), pp. 36-6S ~f the Ala· introduction. This can belupplemented. for certaiD rqio • by related rd'eRDCCI anddilcuslionl in E. L Ormsby. T1wodiey in /61iuftic 17rotchl(PriDcetou, '984), especially lor the soUJ'Ca of one aspect ofthis controversy in the Mqhreb and £&ypt (pp. 92-I3J;otberwile WlRIiab in depiction of GbuIIT, Ibn cArabI. aadlater Sufism aDd IaIamic pbilosop y in JCIICUI); for the

areas of research they IUgest,' the translations d' ­cussed in this article can only terve to biablilbt ourreJati\!e igno~-historically peaking, at Ieut-ofthis vat period of Islamic intellectual life and the

Yemen. see aDUliODI by Ahmed Atq in his article on Ibnal-cArabT ift me E12. vol.lD. pp. 710-11.

A. with the mOlt recent modem continuation of thiscontroveny-i.e., the public debate over the attempteclluppreuion of O. Yahia' new critical edition of the FIIlDh41in EJYPt in the late ItJOs-most of this dispute arefuciDatina and reveaIiD&' of uDderIyina political andsocial tcDJio and co icb' hich, with rare exccpti0Dl9

the referenca to Ibn cArabI (whether pro or COIl) sene almost

exclUli~lyan ideolop (and Dot intcIIectual or philosop . )fuoction. UDfonuutdy, mOlt secoDCIary IICCOUDtI, eYeD bymodem Western scboIan, baYe been content to repeal the

outward ~logical·remains of tbese disputes rather thaD. to

iDvestipte their actual contemporary implications in eachcase. (Two otable exceptio ,carefi By distinpiabiDl theinteUcdual and socio-poIiticaI elements of IUCb controveniain their contemporary 1CUinp. are the study of SimnlDI byH. Landok dilcuued below(n. 80], and Y. Friedman" S1rIIIkhAJ.uruu/ Sirhindl . .. , Moatreti, 197J; tbe (Me of Sitbiftdt'discuued more pnenlly in the . toricalsurwys of both Dr.Schimmel, op. ciL, pp. 367ff., and M. Mo~ 1.n myniqllnIftIUIIlmillU_ Paris, 1965, pp. J08-JO.) Hopefully the manycontemporary mswx:a ~ persecution of SuJiJ or .imiIarJl'oups (e.I.• most receatIy in Sudau aDd 1raD) wiD eacourfunber healthy dilcrimiDatioD, in . oriealltUdiel. between

the imeDectual and spirituJ serious ofsuch conuo"Cnia(DlOIt often neaJiJible, at belt) and t . icleolo,ical functionsand IipificaDce in C8Ch partjcuIar cue; see, in this reprd. theiJ]uminatinl remarks concemina tbru earlier ic -sufitrials" (of dd, J;laUIj, aDd CAyn al-Qa4Il) in C. Ernst,Words 01EcsUUy in SUjUm (Albany, 1985). pp. 97-132.• The limitations (for the most part implicit) of the trans­

lation aDd studies diJcusled below arc in fad repraentati~

of two broader problems with mOlt available ort on othertraditions of Islamic thoupt in aeneral durina this laterperiod: (I) Scbolanbip (Islamic at Ieut. ucb Western)cootin to focus mainly OIl Anbic (and PeniaD and TurtiJh)sourt.a fro the -central" IIIamic reai aDd tb frequentlyretlects catqories and judJIDCDtI (e..., of Ndccadeoce,"MmarainaIitY,••dependeocy." etc.) mayor y not beapplicable to developments in re .onl lib Malay' •Indo ia, nOD-Arab Africa, etc. (2) The limitations anddistonio of the c theoloJicai cum pbilolop:aJ treat­ment of Islaaic disciplines become quite apparent where, incontralt with eadicr periods, ~ . at historicalevidence to pm:eive mol'C cJearly both the intellectual aDd thesocio-cultural complexities or later devdopmellts; iDtcpatina

736 JOIlmIIl O/tM Amnktm 0rImI4l Sot*ty 106.4 (1986)

ricbes it contains.7 The works dealt with in this Part areintroduc:ed rouahlY in chronoloJica1 order (acc:ordinato the dates of their original author), but each seaiOD

focUlel on • dift'ereDt apeel of the Sbaykb" broaderheritqe that is exemplified by tbe trauslatioo in ques­tion. This procedure should provide a frameworkwithin which non-specialiJts caD also better appreciatethe historical context and importance of tbeIe (andother forthcoming) contributions in this area. Ofcounethis also meaDS that tbe same weipt cannot be JiveD.in the limited space of this article, to other penpectivesaDd aspects of these worb tbat-depeadiDa on eachreader's interests-are certaiDIy equally deserviDg offurther attention in each cue. Fortunately, quite apartfrom their bistorical interest which is our main focushere, DWly of these boob are themselves classici inone field or another of Sufi literature, chosen by theirtraDslators for their evident intellectual or spiritualvalue. Even in translation, tbose intrinsic qualitiesshould be readily aca:ssible to readen approachingthem in that spirit.

I. Michel Chodkiewicz's translation of Aw\1ad aI-DrnBalylnI'. K. aJ.W"'tU-MUl1tIqa[~~ ..I'UnidtlAbMJlw. pp. 8S. Paris: La DEUx OCEANS. 1982] is farmore than a new (aDd greatly improved) version of adaaic:, frequently translated Sufi text often mistakenlyattributed to Ibn cArabY.· Thanks to the author's

thole two approacbes, however, requires a breadth of trainin.aDd iDsiPt thM arc likely to remain quite rare iD tbae 6e1ds.

1 -Relative" iporance because that iponDCe (mel cone­spondiD. MJtoowm,j which CODCml our autbon bere clearlytraue::eDd any particular historical lituatioa aad neD the

b1Iditions which sene (potent"y, at least) to traDlmit aDdawaken that awareaea. OIl the purdy IIiatot'a1 plane, what isremarkable is how much our curreDt ianoranc:e rdcdJ not alack of lextuailOUfCCl, but rather a son of wiDhaI~or colleetive "aDiDaia"-extremely recent, IIiItoricallyspeakiDa-ftowiq from the traDlfol"lDation of educationalmethods aad social ItnICtUJa, aDd from JDCniaDCllU of'"reform" and "return to the IOwca"frequady iDYoIviDa theradical rejection of an immeme cultural beritalt 01 whichtbae traditio.. are one intep'a1 part. The writiDp of cAbdal-Qidir (d. 1300/1883) cIiIcuaed below-and their contraltwith his perceptioo by modem nationalism-are ODe particu­larly IlrikiDa iUUItratioD of the l'CCCDt aDd radical aature ofthis trusfonution.• The ume boot was oriJinally traDl1aled at the tuna of the

century by T. H. Weir (7J¥ nwuIR 011 Unity, in tile JRAS,October, 1901/ repriDted .. Wlr060 KtwtWlla HllltHlf,London. Beshara Publicationl, 1976), who attributed it

extremely condensed DOtes and mtroduction-dearlythe fruit ofyean of research aDd reled.ion not only onIbn cArabI but also on the many other currents (andcritiques) of later Islamic mysticism-thilltUdy actu­ally constitutes an extraordinarily rich introduction tothe new aDd diltinctiw dimensions of Ibn <Arabt'.tboUJbt. the underJyiDB motivations (both historicaland philosophic) for those coatributioDl in the contextof the development of Sufism, and the eaential reaons(or their remarkable biItoricallUCCell when comparedwith olber efforts in the same directioD. Mr. Cbod­kiewicz brio. out tbae crucial points tbrouah hissuccinct allusions to four int.errelated historical anddoctrinal developments: (1) the identification of thereal author ofthe work, • PeniaD Sufi master ofShiraz(d. 686/1288~'aDd other sourcea conceminl his teach-

directly to Iba CArab'L AD ltaliaa vtniOD •• pablilhcd in1907 by MAbdul-HIdr [lvu-Gustav Apdi; see M. Cbod­kiewicz'J references, p. 17, D. 4 of the introduetiOD], followedby a FreDCh version (in U G~, 191 I) JIIOIl rcc:eadyreprinted .. U Irtliti 1M lilnhi. Mdit d1bn (ArabI'" (pariJ.SiDdbad/EditiODS de1~ 1977). alODI with anothertranslation aDd article by Abdul-Hidl. Abdul-Hldi'. onpwiDttocluetion (pp. 19-21 of the 1m edition) clearly ..... the

quation ofattribution aad die likely audtonbip of"8abIbiDr'or -BalaylnI,.. while the IIIOSt receat editor (G. Lecollle, p. 10)foBoWl M. VIIIan in cIdiDitdy .ributin. it to Mal-BalabInI."

Osman Yabia (MJUpettoiIe ~t*I,.. Numbers 12, 181,458) also recopiza both the apocryphal nature of theattribution aDd the multiplicity of tides, which apparentlyexplains the eventual attribution to Ibn cArabT; ODe of tholetitles. the R.flIJ1-AJ.-Ir~ is ftI'Y dose to an authentic workof Ibn CArabI---on a ftI'Y different subjea-entitled K. til­Ali/. or K. td-Al}tIdrytl. (ThaI aauiDe wort of the Sbaytb burecently been traDJlaIed by Abnham Abadi: 77re Book ofAIJI(Or) 7J¥ Book of UrUIy, .... with brief commentarieJ from

the FIIIiiI.J-~IUm, in the Joumtd of 1M M~yiddbt IbnCArGbi Sodny, n [1984], pp. 1S-«).)

M. CbocItiewicz.. traIiIIMion is baled on a DeW.1Cientikeditioa (see p. -to), "willi on a Dumber of manUlCriplamainly attribatecl to al-BalyIDt (Osman Ya1Ua lilts oo1y thOleMSS apocrypbally attrilNtcd to Ibn cArabl). which • to bepublished with a col1edioa of relaud Arabic rem 00 thequestion of~t td-wujiid. He nota that the same textexiItI UDder at least leWD titIa (p. 19, n. I), aDd that hischoice in IhiI cue (R.Ill-W.., td-MU/1Iql) Mrm. on purelydoctrinal COnsideratiODl- (ic.. dose a8bIiticI with the lCboolof Ibn SabCJn). wbida are card'ully exp1aiDed in the rat of thecolDlDeDlaly., (He also dean up the loDpteDdin. CODfuaiOD~.", iD

Brockdmann-of this individual with KYen1 later writen

737

iDa; (2) tile relations of BalylDt with the inftuential"monistic" Sufi teachi... cbancteristic of Ibn SabCJn(d. 669/1270) and his followen, and the fundamentaldift'ereDCeI leParatiDa them from the views of IbncArabl; (3) the partial awamaa of thae difl'aeaces&lid of their deeper philosophic sipificaDce revealed inthe famous critiques of later Sufism by Ibn TaymTyaaud Ibn naJdOD; aDd (4) alIusioDl to the .ipificuK:eof this misattribution, as spread by the eartier traDJ­JatiODl, for the prevalent imqe of Ibn cArabl in theWest, both popularly and in much scholarly writinJ. Ineach cue, the historical refereuca, which at fiat JIaocemipt appear to be merely achoJarly details, actuallyIeI'Ve to brina out certain fUDdlmentai (aad ItiD far toooften neaJeetcd) aspeets of Ibn CArabr. wort and

thouaht·To begin with, this DeW traDIIation, far more thaD its

predccaIon, lUCCeIIfuJly caupt the extraordinary,almost lyrical rhetorical power of BalylDr brief work(pp. 45-79, iodudiDa the extensive .nota), that ria­orouslimplicity &Del "force incantatoire" (p. 38) whichDO doubt help expIaiD its favor with the earlier traJII.­

laton and succeedilll p:oerations of students. Intro­duced as a IOrt of CODDeDtary on the famous 1,JtIdflh"He who moWi his lelf, knows his Lord,,,10 it is far leu• theoIOJicaI or philosophic uaI)'1i1 than an extendedsJuzt/.l-an "c:cstatic uttennee" exprasin, directly andwithout qualification an immediate pmoDl1 rea1iza..lion of the ultimate Unity ofGod and the IOUI, and the"illusory" nature of all elle when seen from thatenlightened penpective. One cannot help but be

with the same lut name, and explaiDa at least lOme of thevariatiODi in IpelliD&. which may ba~been already current bythe time of Ibn TayDU-yL) TIlt most important DeW bio­graphical information, which is in perfect KCOnluce with tbecontent of this book (sec the uec:dote at n. II below), isdrawn from JImI's Ntl/tllfiJtlll-lbu, pp. 258-62 in the editionof M. Taw~Tpilr (Tehran, 1336/ Its7); IICCOrdiDa to thisaccount BalyIDIw. a .baykh of the SubrawanllYa order.II The traDllatGr' h. an excelJalt cliacussion (pp. 27-31)

explaininl the sipileeDCe of the form of this IpIitlr adopted

by BalylDT (i.e., with flJlllld, iJDplyina that ODe tllntlilyknowslkDew ODe', Lord), aDd UDderlinina the ftI'Y cliI'erentinterpretation sometimes liven to this ~Ir by IbD cArabI,in view of the particular, hiabJy '"individualiud- JBeaDin. of~ DotioD of -lord" (rtIbb) in his 1h0llJbt.

More pDeJ'alJy, Balyllif" use ofbtu/Dh, bucd 08 a limitedselection of tbema already dictated by a 10111 pn:cedina Sufitraditioll, iI in.tri.kiaa cont....t with Ibn cArabI.. procedure.The diJf'erenc:e does not c:oacem questions of-atbeaticity-­where, .. M. Cbodtiewicz nota. both authon adhere to

reminded at every point-and it is here that theidentification of the author aan influential Sufi abaykhof Shiraz, desceaded from a line loinl back to aI­Qushayd (d. 4(5/1074), takes on its run importaDce­of the echo of10 many famous Persian vena, re8ectedin a wide variety ofimqa, on the SlIDe ecatatic themeof t6Jumuz 061" (-All is Her"). For the individualbuildiDa blocb of thilllmost lyrical work-BalylnJ'.particular choice of ~oranicvena,~ (esptA:iIDythe recurreDt I}tuIIth ilHMwlfll), IDd SIuqMJat (fromal-6a1J1j and aJ.JIaItIm1)-were the same familiarmaterials throop wbicb pueratioDl of earlier andlater Sufi writers in that part of the IlJamic worldcontinued to exprc:ll their .piritual inliJhts in PeniIIIpoetry or Arabic prole. CJearly, then, what sets thiswork apart is Dot the on,inaJity (or euctitucle) of itstbought, but the artistry, simplicity aDd abcm all thepassion with which it repeats that overpowaina vision.

Indeed to a peat exteDt it was precisely the p'owinapervaiveaeu and familiarity of these mystical symboaDd forms of expreaioa, even outside their oriJinalSufi IettiD& and the CODCOIDitant riIb of lerio.misuDdentlDdinp-at once pnlCtical, pbiJosopbic, andtheoloJica1-tbat they pole when taken litenUy orsimplistically, without reprd to their appropriate COD­

text,11 that belp 8CCOUDt for Iba CArabI'. DlOlt diltiJlc..tive penonal contribution and the aspect of his work

criteria other than tJaoee of the strict ~-butrather the far pater ,..", of materiU aDd (at least rdati~)..,.~aDd oriIiuJity of Ibn CArabi's interpretatiODl.

which often (lite his trubDeDt of the ~oraa) reflect a JCDuioe

inspiration aad penoaal cl"ort of meditation, iDICad of the

repetition of KCepted tbemes. (See also the cliIcuuion of hiscollection of~" qutbT, the MUItk4t Ill-Anwar. in Part I.)This is abo ODe of the more obvious cIiItiDctioDi betM.en IbncArabl aacllater writers of his MlCbooi.- who Iddom departfrom his iatcrprctatio (apcciaJly in the FIlIiiI). That ia,

their familiarity with thoR interpretations, bether of ~oranor tuu/fllt, and their readiDeu to provide a c:oberent meta­physical explanation, eYeDluaUy tend to obIcure tbe (some­times DO doubt intentionally) sbockin. fra 8Dd oriai­nality of Ibn cArabrl OWD formuLatio (ThiI is anotheradvantqe to rudinl the~.where DO IUCb "inlulatiIll­body of iuterpretation exiIts.)

II TbeJe riIkJ ofa sort or placed IittFaIiaJD- ·tIl reprdto BalybJ" JaD&uaIe (_ its equivaJeDu lJarouPOut Sufili1crature) are poipaady IIated ia JImI'. story (p. 22 iD theintroduction to this traDsIation) of a dilaplc of the Shirazi.baytb who Jet himse" be bitteD by a poisonous snatebc:cauIe, .. he reproK • mater, "You youndfsaid thatthere is only Godf" M. CIaocIkiewicz ata (pp. 2M.) other

138 JOIInIiIl of 1M AnwrIcmt 0rletIUIl Sodety 106.4 (1986)

that bad me sreatett vilible Unl*t on subsequentIslamic thoupt; that is, his persistent fOQll on acomprehensive aDd elaborately baJaDced tyltematicframework (both theoIOIical and pbi1olopbic) for tholefoDowiq the spiritual Patb-a framework wbidI inthe Sbaykb's own writiDp, at least, is always at OIlCe

metaphysical mil biPIY practical. Ba1yIDI's wort,with its repeated literal insistence on the world and selfalike asnotlting but16illusion,"was the perfect exemplifi­cation of those recurrent moral daJlFn aDd &enuineillusions-antinomianism, quietism, and megjanism­aod tbote OIteDSibly ..befetiea}" tbeolopeaJ formula­tions which had to be overcome and raolwd, on boththe tbeolosica1 aDd the deeper philosophic or spirituallevels, if Sufilm was to aDlwa' the more seriousUDderlyiDa ObjectioDl ofsuch critics u Ibo Taymiya orIbn KbaldiiD.12

The "originality"-ifnot thecompre~andre~ effeetivenea-of Ibn cArabt's respoIIIe in thisreprd is often exagerated in IeCOIIdary eccounts ofhis work. Almost aU of Abu l:Iimid al-GbazIII"s(d. 1111) later writin& for example, is directed towardscouottrina the same theotetical and ptaedcal danaenand illusions tIW &Ie 10 vividly iIhutrataI throqhoutBalylDI's tratiJe; iDdeed the I"tulrth aDd shtlllIJ,iiIwhich GbazI1l repeatedly discu••el, SlId the miluoder­..aodinl' be ICeb to avoid, are preciIeIy thole chosen

JtataDenll by BalyIDI transmitted by JImI (e..., -Be God!"[kladl barIUd]) which, wbiJe compRbeIlIible in the broaderdoctrinal context of this work, would 1ikewiIe readily leadthemIelveI to rather obvious milUDdcntaDdiDp. (Whether orDOt such Itoria aR apocryphal is of relatiftly little iDlpor­

taDCe compared to their eumplaly "cance in this COft­

text.)11 The truslator cIiscusIa at lOme Jenatb the frequent

c:ondcmnatiOIll of BalyIDT (aod of the "monist" interpre­taboDi of Sufism more ameraJly) by Ibn Taymtya. It isimportant to recopize that the UDderlyinl CODCmll of theseaDd other rdatecl Islamic aitiqua are not limited to theparticular (aad to .. often seeDliJllly arbitrary) tbeolOJicaltenDI in which they were offa formulated. We have men­tioDed antinomian;'m, quietism, etc., becaUIe thae .... real,

bistoricaIly visible comcquaxa (aIMI eva'-praeul iDDa'tempta­

tions) whenever the iDIdIect fails to IJ'MP the intended

meaniq of copatc spiritual teach""', in any civilizatjonalIdtinl- Lolli before 11m cArabr or Ibn Saber. aDd thepurportedly "monist.. and "'theoretical" Suhm that is the0IteDIibIe tarFt or lUCIa critica • Ibn T~a and Ibn~OD, one can bel caentiaDy the same cribcilml andCODCCI'DI CODItaDtly repeated_ for example, in the worb ofal-GbazlIT (sec below and D. 13).

aDd emphasized (one mi&bt almost say "flaunted") bythis later shaykh of Shiraz.l] Moreover, GbazIlrsfavorite dialectical u.moJa" and vocabuiary in thateffort were drawn from tile same Ashcarite kaIam aDdAvicennan philosophy that are key dements of IbncArabrs Own systematic tbouJbt, wbile siJniIat efforts,

IJ Many of the relevant ...... by aI-GhazIJT. from this

penpective, are co1ledcd in the seria of traDIIatioDI byFather R. McCarthy to be fOUDd in his Fr«domllllt1 FulfJl­mml •. . (Boston, Twayne Publishers, 1910), which also COD­

taint a useful lMotaIed blbliopapby. Readers should bewarned that at least~ of the vall secondary IitcnIture onGbazIIT, indudiq many traDIlatioaa, betrays DO awaraaa ofthe ullifyiq spiritual (both pbilOlOphic and Sufi) penpectiYeaDd multifaceted rhetorical methods and iDlcDtiODI that tie

tOJdber his outwardly disparate writiDp. There is Itill DO

-&Ie study Ihowml bow OhazIIJ '=IatiYdy traDlformed themeaniD. of elements from other iDtdIec:tuaJ tnditioDl­Aahearite bam. Avicm..... /tI1MJftl, aod Shiite writiDp-inliPt of tbis central iDlclldon. NOI' is there a sinaIe readily

available lOurce ahowiDa where his reworkiDp of thoeetrlditioDt ate pided by an iD1emal, -dac:riplM"1IlirroriD&of metaphysical realities and their rdIectioD in spiritualexperieDce, ucI where-. is f. more colDlDOD1y the CIIIe­

their particular form. is didated by an apoloactic, dcfeDliwrelpoDK to (or intdlectual darificatioIl of) the sort of theo­logical/philosophical eritiqua evoked here.

In any eYeDt, GbuIII is certaiDly the molt importantmown ~nor" of the explicitly metapbysical upect ofIba CArabrs writiDp-the often cited -.chooI of Ibn "I.........beiD& 10 far u we know, a curious fiction inadwrtentlycreated by AslD PablciOi. (See the explanation of the temIa1misuftde,..ancti..,. 0 • that myth was built, 1ft S. M.Stem-. "Ibn Masarra, Follower of Pleudo-Empcdodel. anlDusion," pp. 32S-37 in Ad4U do W ~MO. ntut:loltIIYIba ~ uhlmico$ (Lcidaa, 1971) [now reprinted in S. M.Stem's J/~ A.,tlbk _ Rn"ew TItotcht, cd. F. W.ZiJnmennan. London, 1983, artide V); Stem-. remarks arecoDirmed by the recent dilcowry of authentic works by Ibn"luana, which have no "'pteado-Empedodean" dementi_but are typical of the early Suhm of Sabl aI-TUItaIf.)Probably the bat introduction to this side of Glwllrstboqht (Jiven the UDfOltUDale iDaclequcy of IDOIt of theexplanatory material for lIWly of the traDI1atioDI from his

l1}yI' cUIDm tJl-DrII) is his MUltIc4t IJI.A1IMJr, which shouldbe approac:becl in the exceUent recent FreDdl traM18hon byRoaer DeladriUe, 1.1 TtJhemtIck tin LwrtJlra (Paris, Edi­tions du Seuil, 1911). (The frequently reprinted EnJIiIbvenioD by W. H. T. Oaintner complddy e:tumaa the orderand diviliODI or Ghazllrs text, entirely misrepraaatiq it ..merely a sample of Sufi -exqesiaw mel livm, DO idea of the

Mot.lS: Ibtt 7frtlbi IIIId Nil Intnpnten 739

usin, a diff'erent metaphysical vocabulary, were m8deby such leaer-kDOWD earlier fipres. CAyn al-QucJaHamadlDT and SubrawardJ.14 Perhaps the IDOIt inftu­ential such systematic elaboration of the metaphysicaJ

strict technical taminoloaY and conceptual straeture UDder­JyiD& Gbat.IlT'. expotitjol'1.)

1"bc eompariJcm of Gbazilt aDd Ibn cArabJ alto brinp outthe third, aDd most problematic, cliaJcdicaI~t" intheir thoqht, aamcly, their debts to Shiite (or rdMed Nco­plMODic) authors, beyond the more apparent role of theIkbwln al-~afi;)-their commoa interat in DOt drawinaatlcDtion to mch readiap beiDa readily wadena-net-hie IfIbn Khaldtln" 1ICCUIati0DI (in his~) that evcry­tJUDI ctistiDCIive of the taler, more ~beoretical- IChooII ofSufiJID wu "borrowed" from the Shiite "exll'clDists- arc umuch mudl1inaina • they are a concrete literary judpleDl,

they do at Ieaat rat on a n_her of strikiD& lomttIl raem­bIaJx:cI. e.g., in c:osmoiOlY, utnI cyda, spiritual hienrchia,eschatololY, aDd the use of -neptive tbeo1o&Y." But quiteapart from the more obYious adaptatioDl of .uch themes in awriter lite Ibn (Arabi. there is CODIiderabIe doubt wbetber the

Neoplatonic ootolOlY aDd neptive tbeo1o&Y Olle finds inthose earlier Shiite lOurca aetua1ly repreteDti tbe ame kiMof mystical. -spiritually descriptiYeoo (and only lClCODdarily"theoretical"") fUDCtion that it taka on in lba cArabJ (alalready in GbazilI.. JlUIrIcM).

14 The relative I.ck of inftueDce of both of their dl'orlS inblamic circJa probably hal lea to do with the martyrdoms ofboth tbiakers • relaliwly yOUIII men, and more to do withtheir relative outspokennea and unwilliDpca to anpbuizctoo aclusively the in... COncordUICC between their apiritualinti...ts aDd the more popular aDd IepIistic undentancli.... ofthe ..Jamie ~Jation-featurea which, .. we have empha­Ii7Jed in Pan I, are developed witb scnipUlous tate andatIc1ltion throqhout Ibn cArabT'. writinp, ad IDOII exten­sively in the FutiiJ;Iat. (See IMlditionai dilcuaioDi of thiseaential dimension ofbis work in several placa below.)

For SubrawarcIJ (traditionally referred to .. -Ji.,ttiJ,* todistinpisb him from bis inlueutia1 Sui bODlOnymJ inBaabdad, includm, the follllClen of the Subrawudtya order.initiator of tbe.futannw movement, etc.), ICC the many ItUdiaby Henry Corbin, aud apecia1Iy hiI traDllabon of fifteenshorter mystical aDd philosophic worb, L ~rn..w" ,.1ft­pourpri (PariJ: Fayard, 1976). This should soon be .upple­mented by the publiadion (Paris, Verdier, 1917) of Corbin..tranaI8tion of the complete metaphysical pan ofSularawanlt.."...,.."" opw. the {llJcnMllIl-blv." alona with 1aqepartI ofthe COIDlDenWia by SbabrazGrl, Qutb at-Om al-ShIrIzI, aDdMuUI $adlI SbIrIzT; tOJdbcr, these texll alrady constitutesometbiDa like a history of thilltill ....ly UDknowD traditionof Islamic pIlilosopby Ofti' a period of KYerai ccaturies. (In

dimensions of Sufism, after the writinp of Ibn cArabI,wu developed in the works of bit fellow AndaJuaianSufi and near contemporary, Ibn Sabcrn, whOle dis­tinctively -monistic9t foJ'IDI of expreaion may alsohave bad an indirect inftuence on BaIyInI'. writin,. IS

Mr. Cbodkiewic%'. comparative notes (bated on exten­live refereDCCI to televant pauapa of the FIlIQI.tiU)­tbroup their detailed contrast of Balylm-. (and

Eqlilb, ruden are ItiIllarply limited to the excellent brid'introduction to his life IDd work in S. H. N....•• 11uwMuslim Sil6n [CambridF, M_., J963].)

For CAyn aI-Qu4Il aI-HamadlnI. noa-speclalilu iDteratedin his mysticall philosophical thinkiq-wlaida seems to havebeen ma.t appreciated IIIDOIlI later Indian Sufis (ICe thetranslations and comllM!llt-ria on his TtIIIIIrIdiII c:ited byA. Schimmel, ope cit., 1Dda under M(Ayn a1-Qu4It~-ItilI

have only a few rdatiYeIy short studia by T. IzutJu, dapitethe availability ofacdIeat critical editions ofhis major worbby A. CUsayrlD (aDd A. Munzavl). Izuuu'. IIlIdia include

-Creation and the Timelal Order of TbiDp: A Study in theMystical Philolopby of CAyn al-Qu41t," pp. I~ in 1JwPhilo6oplticfll F011lm IV, BO. J (FaD 19n); -rhe Concept ofPerpetual Creation in IsJalDie My.ticism aDd in ZenBuddhism," in MIItmpI ofIms j &nry CorlHn (febran,1969); aDd -Mysticism aad the Linpiltic Problem of Equivo­

cation in the Thoupt of CAyn a1-Qu4It HamadlDJ," pp. 153­51 in SIIMlM bMmktl XXI (1970). The first two artideI, wbidlbrina out his considerable aIlnities with the later thouabt ofIbn cArabI, are DOW more tadily acceaible in • Frencbtranslation (alolll with two of Prof. Izuuu'l other. IDOI'e

Fnera11tudie1 of Islamic IIIJIlicaI tJaouaht) by M.-C. Graudry.lhtidIlIM ruumt« " Critllion IWpItwIk m MynIqw16/iuniqu1' (Paris, La Deux Ocbns. 1980). A. J. Arberry'.translation of the swwa tJl-GhtItfb, aD "apoJoay" writtenshortly before his martyrdo.... is a fascinatiq autobiOIf8Pb­ical document and introduction to CAyn aJ-QueJit'. lyrical

Sufism, but does not p much idea of hiI more pbilOlOpbicaud teehrUcal writina: A~ JltII1yr: 11w Apo/ogitl of CAinIII-QIMJiIIIII-HtIIrttIIiJIanf(LoodOl1, 1969).

IS M. Cbodkiewicz-folDwinaMa.ipoo-iDdicata (pp. 23­25) that tbiI inftueocc c:oUl have p-.ed tJarvuab Ibn SabCtn"clilciple. the influential Arahic mystical poet (and df'ectivcfounder of tbc SOCiDlya ItUlqtl in E&YPt) aJ-Sbusht""(d. 661/1269), with whom Ba1yIDt may have studied dunlllapiJarimqe to Mecca. Whalcver the hiItorical relatioDl-aadmaDY exprasiona reminiscent of Ibn SabcIn'. ecstatic-moailmOO of Beina can be found, appareatJy independently,in both earlier aDd later Penian mystical poetry-the distioe­lion between that outlook aDd Ibn cArabJ·. far more IUbtle

metaphysics and theo1olY. wbiell tbe ttaDIIatot UftCIerlifteI at

many points in this text~ are certainly in.tructive. (He

JoumtIl of the Amnlam 0rienUJJ Society 106.4 (1986)

Ibn SabcYn91) rhetorically simplified. often intention­ally paradoxical metaphysical formulations with IbncArabI9s far more sophisticated "non-dualisticft meta­pbysics of tll}tl1li,at-de.Jy brilll out tbe very dill'erent(if not ultimately opposed)l6 pncticaJ and theoreticalimplications of the two penpectives. Yet at the sametime, precisely this contrast between tbeIc two wide­spread -systemsft of later Sufi metaphysics-a distinc­tion already noted by sucb critics as Ibn TaymTya aDdIbn ~baldOn-belpsmniDd us of the symbolic (andinherently relative) nature of tbe particular expres-

promises, at p. 39, a more detailed study of tlac CIODtr.... illa fut1lR book on Ibn cArabI', thouJht.)

Dapite the compIetiOD of KCalIiblc editioDl of 11m Sab'lD'smajor worb, there is ItiII a remarkable lack of aD)' cxteDli~

published Western Itudia of his tho.....t. (The available1Oun:a, Iar&dY ill Arabic or unpublished tbe8eI, me cited at

pp. 34-3S here.) Readers should be cautioDCd daM the moreopcoly mystical, Sufi side or hii thou,ln emphMiz.ecl here(which may itself, u the tnUJlJator hypothaiza, haw bceDiDtIuenced by Ibn CAnbY'. writiDp) seems to ha~ beeDintearated with other claDcnu (..ychoJoU, cpisaaDoJoay,etc.) draWJl from vanOUl1Claoo1a of bIamic pbiIoIophy (i.e.,ItIlMIftl); ICC, for eumple. the text of his III-M_>tl III­$iqIlIrytI.·C~ pltJloMJphlqw tIWCI~

FritMrlc II ,. Holtnultlll/~... ed. S. Yaltbya (and with

Fracb iotroductioD by H. CorbiD), Paris/Beirut, 1M}, whichpves lOme idea of his cxteDaivc philosophical traUUDl.strooalY recallioa SubrawanII. For a brief but rewaIiDaoverview, which abo brinp out the still uuexp10rCd diff'tI'­cncca bct1n:eD IbD SabCJD and Shusb~ ICC the IdectaI textsfrom both authol"l ill L. M.....oD·• • cwiJ,. ~xtn iItItliu~r7MIIl1'Irlstoft ,. " my"" m JHq8 47.... (Paris,)929), pp. }23-40, and JDOIt Dotably the ItraDF imU of the

,.,., MbCUr1ytl (pp. 139~), mixina Plato and AristotJc,famous Sufts (iaclUdiDa Ibn CAtabJ aad Ibft al-F-w), aDdsuch Islamic: pbiJolopben • Ibn SIDi, Ibn Tufayf, aDd IbDRusbcI!

16 M. ChocIkiewicz aeDCI'aIIy ..... to imply-DO doubtripdy. aDd foUowina a perspective that is alreadyevidcot iDboth Gbazilt aDd Ibn cArabJ-tbat BalylDJ's work aDdoudook (aDd by CX1CDIioD, that of IbD SabcJn and other Sufis,cspcciaDy poctI, cmployiDa similar cxpreuio.) can belt be

undcntoocl • a IOI't of rhetorical reduction (<< in IOIDC caaan unrdccti~".piritual reaIiam" which may be juItificd ODits own plane, provided that the racier or 1isteDcr is able toIUPply the DClCCII&rY metaphysical (and practical) qualifi­catioDL SomethiDa of tbe same sort teems to ha~ bccD trueof BaIyIaI himself, ifwe may judF by his prudCDt rcadioD (.reponed by JImt, D. ) J above) to tbe disciple bitten by thepoiIO-. make be u.s taken for --(joel."

sions of any theoretical schema in tbis domain, apoint wbose decisive practical importance wu DOt

always openly KtnowledFd by Ibn cArabi's latercommentaton.11

The translator's discussion of Ibn TaymIya9s famousattacks on (amona other thinp) the more systematicmetaphysical pretensions of later Sufism also serves tobrin, out those distinctive features of Ibn cArabY'swritiol which no doubt 10 far in explaininl tbeovcrwbelminlsuccea of his "systematization" of Sufidoctrine in the later Islamic world wben comparedwith the comparable dorts of sucb fiJUres .. BalyIDt,Ibn Sabcyn. or Suhra atdl Thole characteristics, illus­trated in detail in Mr. Cbodkiewicz9s invaluable notes9

are essentially (a) his extraordinarily careful attention,in unfoldinl the inner meaning of scripture, to thesipificance of the "Jetterft aDd sma1Iat details ofexpression of the ~oran.1)odith,aDd Islamic law (the6IuIrJCa); (b) his relative concentration on expreainlhis metapbysical inliabts in the vocabulary of kaJamtheolOl)', rather than the uspect terminology of thephilosophen; (c) his insistence on the central role ofthe Prophet, at every level of bein& and of the superiorefficacy (compared to other valid methods and paths)of the practical implementation of all of his teachinp;and (d) his systematically balanced consideration ofthe needs and Iimitatioas of the full rmae of humantypes. capacities and social situations (not merely thespiritual elite) in his expression of his teachings.I' Yet,however importal'lt tbae features may hPe been,historicaDy speatin& for the acceptance and wide­ranJina inftuence of Ibn cArabrs teachina throupout

17 Although it it certaiDly -.mcd by the much wider Jl'oupof Sufis-illustrated by die worb of NaaafJ ad the laterQldid shaykh discuucd in the followin. two leCtiona-whoteftded to usimiJate individual -pieces" of Ibn CArabI'l tenDi­DOIoaY or te8C1Unp (e.... CODCerIIiD& the "Perfect Man,"~ tIl-wujiid, or~ aDd prophecy) without the same

COJK:Cl'll for the syIICDUIaic cobcrcDce aDd inteDedual UDder­ItaDcIiDc of his thouaht that is 10 cvidc:Ilt ill QGu and .1U«eII01"I. (ID this repnI. M. Choclkiewicz DOteS [po 36] theintcrelliDl story of a mcetiDa in EuPt between Ibn SabCJnand Ibn cArabt·. two ctiIcipIcI QODawl aDd TilimIIDI, briDainaout the latter'. relatiw aIinitia with Ibn SabcIn-which arcconfirmed by their aaociaboD • tar... for later critiques ofthe "'monist" Wll/fMlrytl.)

II MOlt of these cllanclerilticl arc ClleDtialJy .hared,altbouah ill varyiD. dcarea. by aJ-GbazIIt (i.e., AbO J:l1mid)ill his Sufi writinp, aod DO doubt also IIdp account for hissimilarly widespread veneratiOD (a -Imam,'" etc.) amoD,Sufis and noo-Stafil alike.

MoaalS: Ibn CArtlbi II1Id Hu lnurpntnl 741

the Islamic world, it must also be admitted that they donot always facilitate its acceaibility to a non-Muslimaudience.

In this lipt, the widespread interest in BalylDt'swork in the West-despite its ironic misattn"bution toIbn cArabJ-is not really 10 surprisinl. In many ways,its distinctive featura are almott the oppolite of thoseoutlined above: there is <a) DO explicit reference (exceptfor a few hints at the very end) to the indispensable roleof spiritual practice and experience, and to the decisivedifferences of human capacity in that reprd; (b) nostrea (to put it mildly) OIl the practical or metaphysicalimportance of the Prophet and the Law, or indeed ofany form of human responsibility, and (c) a cone­spondinl emphasis (whose quietistic or antinomianimplications are unavoidable) on the "illusory" natureof the world and the self; and (d) not only no appeal tothe inte1lect and the intd1isible order of the wodd at alllevels of manifestation, but in fact a sort of "anti­intellectual" depreciation ofMy effort ofeither IICtivityor undentandinl.19 Moreover, the superficial resem­blaJx:es of Balylm-s formulations to certain popularconceptions of Hindu thoupt (especially the role of"Maya] are especially Itriking.1ft Althoup Mr.Chodkiewicz does not say 10 explicitly,~ can be

19 It is important, both biltorica1ly and pbikMopbically, to

note that altbouah 1bcIc poiDts certainly do 1101 apply to IbncArabt or to many other Sufi writerl and teadIen aDd their

foDowas-aad lddolD 01" Dntr Jed to the 4raIDatic aati­DOmiaD CXc:aICI (IbM.-) aDd bcraia cited by the polemicistsin nery ..-they do point to real aDd socially importantpr.aieal tl'Cllds in later Sufism, especially in ita IIIOrc~u­

lar" and vulprizcd fOJDII, that were an evident tar8et both ofearlier critics IUdl • Ibn TaymJya aDd Ibn CWdan aDd ofmodern "reformen" mainly ccmcerned with the this-worldlyeffects of such ideal and conapoDdinl popular CUIloms. OneiDUitration of these tendenc:ia is the filet that the peater partof the dozens of apocrypbal treatiles attributed to Ibo cArabi,

• listed by Osman Yahia. cooc:em mqical and oc:cuIt pt'1IC­

tic:a (astrology, ete.}-precile1y tbe tort ofaupcrstilion that IiODe of the prime tarptJ of Ibn KhaldOD', Jenathy auaeb and"debunkinl" of such practices in the MuqtIIIdimtI.a This should DOt at all be taken to deny that ODe can

ultimately find wry similar conc:eptioDi in Ibn cArabl" ownthouPt; but lite mOlt &Iamic aoteric wrikrs (iDdudiDaShiite thinkers aDd philolophen, as well .. Sufis), he isusually reluctant to refer too directly to realities and plio­noJDeU which-if they were misundentoocl-could ad toJqliaence of one', ctbic:aI and social rapoDlibility (11lk1ff).This reticence is DOt always 10 evident in tile ICtUal oralteachina and methods of spiritual masten, and the relatWe

little doubt that the emphuis on the "universality" ofthe Shayth's thouaht aDd teachiq which h.. been •keynote of modern Western diJcuss.ioDl owes a areatdeal to the facility (in both senses of the term) ofBalylni's little treatise. What he does demonstrate,conviDcinJly and in detail, is that readers who takeBaJylDJ to be Ibn cArabJ will find it very difficult indeedto enter into the far more complex and cha1leoaiDI-ifno less "universal"-world of the Shaykh's ownwritinp and teaehinp.

D. If we were to foDow a Itric:tly chronoJoaical order,Roger Delad~re's trauslation of the TlldhJcirat Ill­1cJuIwIlR WG caqTI:/Qt ahl fli·ilclttillll [1.4 P,o/~uion tk/oi. pp. 317. Paris: SINDBADIEDmoNs OaIENTALES.1978.]-. bizarre mixture of Hanbalite caqrdtl (a doc­trinal statement followiDa a standard kalam-Iike frame­wort) and turgid "Sufiltic" sermonWnl in the ftoridrhetoric ofa 10th or II th century (AR) Q..irIautho~l­would come near the end of this article, illustratina thewide range of Ibn CArabrs formal or literary ~inftu­

ences" in later Sufism 8Dd the important fact that that

MfrankDell" of Nasafrs writinp (ICe below) may partlyconapcmd to a more ralIJiaed oriliDal audicDce.

21 Note the followin& iBUItratins both the author's prolixstyle and his QIdUf aJIiliatiOD: "••. incomparable maten ofthe esoteric Truth. iDUItriouIlinb in a chain extcDdiDa frommy lord, muter of the masters of knowiq, the quinteuenceof the Saints in God', proximity ("".",.IIbIin) and ol1holewho mow with certainty (miiqiniill), the master of the WayaDd the source of the aoteric Truth (",.cdin III-II.,.), themaster CAW al-Qldir al-.ntI-may God IaDCtify his sublimelOul and iUumiute his tomb"(Pp. 103-4);"... our Jord, ourpide and our model ill the path to God, the Shayth MU\lyial-om CAW~ aJ..ntI ..." (p. 142); aDd •..• *XOrdiDgto our lord the Shayth CAW al-Qldir ..•" (p. 16S)--eKh ofthae precedin, loft' citalio.. from his X. III-GJrunytlli-1JlihrTIITfq IIl-lJtJqq•

The author of this work is evidently one "cAbel al-$amadal-Qldiri," cited as IUdl in two of the oldest of dahtmanuscripts-the earlieIt of them daama ollly from the11th! 17th centwy-used ill the critical edition that formedpart of the traDllator"s dillertation (1974). (Information takenfrom the review by Prof. D. Grit ill AIJIIIIln lWm%8iqws,XX (1984), pp. 337-39, since theIe biahlY relevant facti arcnot mentioned ill the brief notice coDCCllliq the edition liwnIII the beaillDinl of this volume.) The wort is DOt lilted ineither of Ibn cArabr. 10l1lliltl of hiI own writinp" and it iscspcciaIJy JipificaDt that the book itJdf coDtainJ DO indi­e:atiOft that the origiDalllUtbor (as oppOeed to the moderntraDllator!) had the ,liJbtat pretcnle of auributina it to Ibn

742 10runoJ of 1M Anwrlca 0rlmt1l1 SodIly 106.4 (1986)

sort of influence wu often relatively superficial, reflcet­ina in many cues no serious undentandina or study ofhis works.22 However, we shaD mention it here because,like BalylnJ's work (only perhaps more so), it otren anideal opportunity to briol out further characteristicand fUDdamentai features of Ibn 'Arabr. spiritualteacbiOI and method-precisely because itlltyle, con­tent, and intentioDl (aide from the few pusapsborrowed literally from his writinp) are so totallyditrereot from thOle of the Shaykh al-Akbar.

Unfortunately, rather than using this work (which isotherwise of only limited historical interest) for thatpurpose, Profcssor DeladriUe hu utonishiDJly chosento KCept-or more honestly, to promote2

) -its attri­bution to Ibn 'Arabt His motives for this pious deed

CArabt, cspeciaDy IiDce both the style ad coDteJds (apartfrom the borrcnrinp mentioaed below) are 10 totally incom­patible with any mtbe Shaykh'l kDown worb.

Ibn cArabl (u noted by D. Gril in the abovc-mentioaedreview) OCQIionaDy does JDeIltion cAbd al-QIdir, iDdudina aspiritual eDCOWIter with him in the 1Huukh, but not wilh theIOrt of wonbipful quotation of Jenathy pasuaa (and thealmost idolatrOUI eacomiu..) foUDd in the ICClioDi cited&bow. utew_, the dole 8IIOCiation of Hanbalilm andQIdirf Salim here is DOt lurpriliDa (aJthoaah it is by DOmeanl the rule amon.later Qldirts either), Jiven that cAbd

»-QIdir himself•• a ferveat Haabalite preacher (ICC articleM<Abd aJ-~ldir aJ-DJDlnl" in EI2, I, pp. 68-70), and manyother Hanba1itcs, perhaps ~n more than with lOme of theother IepI ",tIdJrJrtIb$, were also promioent Sufis, iDcludinamOlt notably cAbduDlb ADfId of Hent. (The DOCOriouIcritiques of Sufism by Ibn TaymTya and other Haabalite/uqIIIt4:>, IOIIIdiJDa themIcha UIOCiatcd with more -mod­erate" orden, were commooly directed at what they COD­

sidered tleKie8Cl" or -umovatiODLiU And sometimes, u in this cue (see below), lletUally

tumina up in contexts almost diametrically oPlN*d to thespirit and intentiool of his taebina. (See abo the eeaeraJobtervations or Professor Schimmel witb reprd to the wide­spread later poetic .... of Ibn cArabt's teebDial termi­

DOJoay, cited in n. 2 abow.)n Giwn the obvious Hanb8litelQidiJf alIqiaDce aDd much

later Arabic style of this wort (ae n. 21 aboyc), which couldK&n:ely escape even a bqinniDl student, one must choosebetweea two bypothela coocernin, the truIIator: eitherutter incompetence-which is extremely difticult to imaaine,ciwn his able I'CIIderiDa of the Arabic: ad evideat learaioa(includinl eonaiderable study of Ibn cArabt'. own worb) thatare maaifested both here aDd milia earlier artideI and ...excellent translatioDl of teveraI Sufi -clallics" (iDdudiDl

GhadIT'. MbhUt al-AnMfr[rd. at n. 13 UoYC1 Kalabldbt'.

are clearly stated at the end of his Introduction (p. 78):-rhus it seemed to UI that the beat means of unquo­tionably refutiq every accusation 8pinst Mul;tyt aJ-DIn(by "Ibn TaymIya _ representative of the ShmfCajwas to publish hiI Profession of Faith, which is inperfect apeement with the doctrioe of the AlII 111­SUIIIUI Wtl_l_jtmIaca."ZA Unfortunately, while there isindeed no doubt about the -pure doctrinal orthodoxy"(p. 76) of thil particular book from that particularpoint of view-since ita author'. stated purpGle, fromfint to last, is to outline the simple creed of the AIUal-SUIUIIl wtI aJ-lamac• (the epithet the Hanbalitaapplied to themselves and those Muslims they apprcm:dof) and to .how how the other 72 troublemakina"scctI" of Islam (not to mention the rest of humanity!)are III eternally d'mned to Hellfire-ODe woDden

K. td- Til >4UTI4f[Trtlill iMlOU.f'imw: fa Mtlltrn ~, In tttIpU,Paris, SindNd, 1981.1 and the coJlected fraplCDtl and

sayinp of Junayd (JUIIqd: ~mmt $pIrlIwl, Paris,Sindbad, 1983.}-or alOrt ofwdl-intcationed "pious fraud,"

reminilcem of FlrlbT'I similar DIe 01 PIotiDUi (of tbe 'J'¥.0/00) u "Aristotle.. for the purposes of bit famous exotericMHarmonization" of Plato aad Aristotle.

Not only does the traDlJator careruny refrain from men­tiomn, all the mOlt obvious lips of the true ntbonbip justmentioned (n. 21), which could scarcely fail to Itrite~ themOlt aaive racier of the Freocll venion (amcb 1ca theArabic), but in discuaiDa (pp. 32-39) the clIq1dJI borrowdfrom the bqinoina of the FUlW)lI, lie forthriahtlY aDd totallymisrepresems it • the Shayth'. "major" profcssioo of faith

(the followilll .......11I dilmilled • '"two other minorprofessionl of faitbi in • way that is more or lea the exactcotllrlUY of wbat ODe bds lUted repeMedJy aad explicitly inpJeCisely those I&DIC ...... of the FutiJJ}at. (See below.DO. 21, 29-31.)

24 Despite the tende1Itious natUR of the l8tter part of theInlrodUdioa (pp. 321'.), the two opcniDa tee:tioM (pp. 11-31)do contain some valuable biosraphical information, and abrief diKuuioa of hilluPJM*d +IIW'f" tendencies in jlqh.However, while we haYe already ttreucd the relatiw neaIi­aeoce of tbae elemeatl of the Sbaykhtl tho... and beck­

around in Western literature until n:cently (a teadmcy itselfrdectina later IlIamjc treatmelltl 01 JbD cAtabri -Iystem- iDrelative separation from its pr8dical, operative dimenaioDl),readen .ould cert.mJy be better IIdviled to c:oasult IbnCArabt'. own, quite radically difl"emat treatment of tholetrllditiooal materiaJI-. iIIustnIIed in IeYCraI 01 the n:c:eattranslation. mentioned in Pan I-rather thaD this Hanbalitedocument, wllich is. far removed from Ibn cArabrt uader­ltaDdina aad spiritual depth of treatment of thOle ID8terials •could pouibly be ilNlaincd.

MoaalS: Ibn CATtJbi tmd Hu Intnpnterl 743

whether even the most obtuse of those "IItuluzwfyQ"would ever have Jiven credeace to its attn"bution to IbncArabl

The framework of the book u a ~hole (sections1-13 and IS9-6S, in the translator's division), u wehave just indicated, is the famous l}adrth of the "73sects," interpreted here-in the polemic (in fact oftenfanatic) heresiolDPhicaI JanauaIe UICd throughout thework-to exclude from the sinJIe "saved sect" allMuslims but the author's own handpicked group, whoare defined by the Hanbalite ctujfdII outlined in theintervening sections: chapten on TtIW/ftd, the "Realityof the Prophet," Faith, and the fint four Sunni ImamJand their rank (sections 88-1S8, the main body of thework). In all but the first two chapters, there is nothingremotely resembling the treatment of those subjects inany of the known works of Ibn cArabI, and indeed theirHanbalite dOJlDatism and polemic intention leave littleroom for more than brief allusions to the author'sQldirJ Sufism. The visible "inftuences" of Ibn cArabI,apart from one or two verses,IS an lOme very briefquotations in the section on the "Reality of theProphet,"" plus the openins clU/fdtl (sections 14-27),which is quoted in part-with some brief but sipifi­cant additions atld exclusions-from Ibn cArabI'sMuqlUldinul to the FutU/:Uit. What is significant abouttheae two brief"borrowings,tIn though-and represen­tative of much later use of Ibn cArabI's work-is that

15 In addition to those identmed by the traDslator, D. Grit

(in the review cited in n. 21) mentioDi the poem borrowed atthe end and in seelion 26. TIle fact that nODe of theseborrowiDp are explicitly rderrcd to Ibn cArabT is certainlyundentaDdable in the author's Hanbalite lettina. where the

Sbaykh's name wu by no means uDiverully revered, to saythe least.

26 Apin, most of tbese passaaes, as the traus1ator indicates,seem to be paraphrased from the SIuIjtITllt Ill-KiJwn or otherworb concerniq die "MuhamlJUldan Reality"; Prof. GriJ basI"CICOplizcd section 51. e.J.. as a quotation from Iba cArabt'aIt 1l1-lttiJ)JJd tll-KJJwnr, the text be edited and traDIIated (see

our review in Part I). It is typical, however, that they are usedhere in an apologetic, defensive, and historicist seme which

refteds a complete misUDdentandinJ (or misrqJraentation)of Ibn cArabt's own distiDctively ontoloP:al (and therd'0I'enec:caariJy universal) ute of these concepts. (See also DB. 21­28 below.)

77 This cllqrdlz correspoDds very rouPIy to die FM, I,pp. 36.6-38.3. but with lOme very sipificant internal chan&esand onaiaions-not to mention tile suppression of IbncArabt'. eueatial qualifications of this paIIaF (see DB. 29­31)-whicb are cspccially revea1in1 of the Hanbalite author's

they are ultimately literary or stylistic, phrases andterminol0IY borrowed without any (implicit or explicit)reference to or deeper uDdentandinl of their oriJinalsystematic context and implications.

This point is especially clearly-and ironically­illustrated in the cue of the OpeniDl caqrdil borrolftdfrom the FUIUJ;Iat. For Ibn cArabJ, far from beina the

Yet')' different undentandiD& aDd inteatiODI. ODe especiallystritinl example is the passage On the divine '"Speech"(ktl14m), which in this venion (seetioD 24, p. 98 of thetranslation) becomes a series of separate historical acts:..... By it He spoke to MOICI and He c:a11cd illbora; by it Hespoke to David and calIrd it Psalms, to Jeaus and called itGospel. ..." (indudina lines completely abient from theFtitOlJat here in any form!).

In the COrrespondilll paIAF in the Flltiil)8t (I, p. 38, lines210-21) one fiDds aometbiq as difl'ernt from thillitcraliI~

historicist Hanhalite perspective as day from ni&bt: ..... with

this (Speech] He spoke to Moses, and He cal1ed it Revelation(t4nZf/), Psalms, Torah, lad Gospels, without letters orsounds or voice or Ian What Ibn CArabl is refer-

rinJ to here is a1re8dy quite de8rly-althoup his meaninJ itamplified in hundmls oflatcrpqa of the FutQ.-prccilelythe eternal spirituallleUty which is at once the Source of allhistorical "revelations" and the common object of the pathand teachinp of the tlWllya;) (in 11111 historical or reIiaioUlsettina). As always in Ibn cArabI-and that is pn:cilely the

point of his credo of the c-wmm-this formulation encom­puses and illuminates the popular comprdleDaiOD of the

Hubalitea (and indeed of virtually all the other "'schools," in

this aDd other reliaioftS!), but it is in no way reducible to thatlimited vision, and in fact directs the readcr' precisely beyondwhatever mental i.mqeI and conceptions be may happen tohave of that Reality.a This is especially obvioas in this author'. references to the

"Muhammadan Reality,"wbicb here is little more than empty

bautilll Oft a sectarian historical level, without the slilbtestinkling of the meaning and impJicatioDi of that term in IbnCArabT' OWll writina. (As such, it is a typical illustration ofthe IOrt of literary ooinftuence" of Ibn cArabr. tcrmiDololYand concepts without any serious undentanding ofwhat theyrepreseBt, and indeed often in ways quite contrary to his

intentions; see already DB. 2, 26, and the IeCtion on Nuafrbelow.) In In cAnbY, for example, tbis Reality (with its many

equivalent names: see S. a1-~akim. III-JlIl7-n 1II-$iJfT(dis­cussed in Part I, n. I], pp. :W7-S2 and 151-68, plus the 10111list ofcross-references in each case) is consiltcntly treated in away that briap out its univenaI. oqoiDl manifestations,both in Islam and other re1ipons (and prophets) and at all therelevant !eve of the "Complete M.... (iIulIIr /c6mil). It isperh... worth addinl t1Iat in Ibn cArabt tbeIe implicatioDl

744 JOfInfJIl O/IM Amnkllll 0rimt4l SocIety 106.4 (1986)

-credo of the elite" in the title of this work (ctlqrdmtlhJ lI1-iklt~)t it is deteribed as the "credo of thecommonen •.. amona the peoples of taqlrd,w1f and isimmediately followed by two JoIJI, extremely complexsymbolic aud mystical discuaioDl which tOJdbcr makeup what Ibn ~abt explicitly calls his own-howradically and irreducibly difrerentr-CaqrdGt ahl aJ.IkJuIl6l min IIh1 Allah.· But that second ItaF is only

aDd lIWIifelUtio.~ by DO meaDS a matter of IOIIIC abItracttheof'CtiQl -system,. but of coacrete aDd particular reaIita­bO.. in the life of each iDdiYidual. (The bat avai1abIeiJluIIraIion is in the traDIlaaiODl aDd comJDeDtaria on the

FUlDllIl-{liIcturt diIcuaed in Part I.)It The pRCiIe terJDa of Ibn cArabrs dacriptioDl of this

clIII'Idt4 both precedina aDd immediately followiDa .it, areextremely impotWlt aDd daene to be cited in full, althouJb

~ cannot commeJlt on the meanina of ada of tile tenDs heUICS. FlltUJ.tat 1, p. 37.5: -AppeDdix, contaiDiDa what IhouIdbe believed (lctItfiItI) 8IDODI the common pubtic (III-CWniim,hoi polloi); it is the credo of the people ofoutwarcIlUbmiaion

(uJam). xcepted (",.,.,.".) without any mquity (,..,.,)into (ratioDai or ICriptural) iDdieatioDi (dII1rl) or (spiritualaad experiential) proof (burhlll). FutiiI.tM I. p. 38: "'So this[Precedina 1tatemeDI, iDdudin. a Ion, coadudina leCtion notused by the Babalite author] is the credo of the mallei

(c4rWl1mlft) aJDema tJae people of IUbmiuioD (IIIIm), the

people of lilqlrd, aDd the people of IfIIIIlT [i Tho cArabf".... priDwiJy the m&IIiIktIJlimii, but also __ types of

pbiJoIopbcnJ, IUIIIJIIU'ized aDd ....,ed... The Ii mcaniDaof tJaae terms will be recopized by thOle who have~queDIccIlbn cArabi's worb. In any ncnt, tba'e caa be littJedoUbt tbM such tetmI • c4lWlmm aad Ulqlrd refer here (astikewme in many other tnditio. of IaJamic tIIOupt) to

prcciIdy the IOrt of Jiaoroua nOD-tbinkin, (by DO meam

aduiwIy Banbalite!) 10 perfectly iIluatrated, if not iDdccdclcfeDded, by this particular book.

JO F~t I, p. 41, lines 1-8. Tbii dettription of tbeintencnin& aedioos (pp. 41-47) IUIIlJDaI'izina "the belief ofthe people of the tJile amGllI the people of God [ODe of IbncArabf's favorite CXpralioDi for the true SuD] who arebetween intellectual inquiry (1IGJ4U) aDd expcrienu.l unveil­iDa" (p. 41.3) bas been quoted because it islUdl an ironicCOIIUIIeIHarY on the prcccDIio. oftbis later Banbaliae text. InIbn CArabra IonF dacriptioll (po 31, tina 22-21) of tlaetwo~._abady morecliltiDctiwly Sufi -crcaIa"-

eatirely dift'erent, iDcideDlaUY. iD their subjects and (0l11li ofexpraaion-be describes tJae true "lIhllll-ikhl~"• ~dite of tbe people of God aIDOq tbe people or the Path ofGod, thole who truly realize the divine Truth(tll-~in its Sufi usqe), tJae people of direct unveiliDa (bDItf) aDdtrue Beina (or -eataly," wujlid)." To daaibe this staae as-minor" (u the tnDIIator doa). in relation to the pncecliDa

the beJinnina:~ow u for the cfIqfdtl concerain& Godof the quinteaenee of the elite (kJrMllqtJt tII-IcMHtJ),that is a matter even above this one, wllkh we IuIw6pr«ld thr0U6ltout tJrJs book. •..91SI In other .0Rb,the around and true meaninl of Ibn cArabJ'1 openinJc4UJfda-aad the immeaaurable diataDce teparatina itfrom the perspective of this one~imenlionalHanbalite~ofeaioD of faitb9l

-QJl only be fuUy appreciated byone who baa aaimilated all the tenin,1 and inaiptsof tlae FutfJl)al and (most impottaJltly) the profoundspiritual realization UDderlyi.ns them.

No doubt the tranalator of this ork is quite jUltifiedin insistinl throughout biI Introduction that Ibn CArabJ\Va iDdeed "mUl~ 91161UD1li," "orthodox" (and manyother thin besidea),J2 but readen of this wort rillearn Dotbina-aDd indeed are likely to be .moUllymW&:d-about the deeper, perennial dimensio ofsuch terms in the life and teachina of the Shaykh andthe ways be IUgatl they can be realized (the dimen­sion of tah.qlq).....A.hJ IIl-mtrIUI," like "catholic," huseveral levels of meanh,. AI we have indie-ted inPart I of this article, both bam and fUlh are extremelyimportant-and still ....1y unstudied-aspects of IbncArabl's thouJht, especially in the FutiiJ}at. But hisdistinctive personal treatment aud multidimensionalundentaDdinl of both lubjects, consistently trlDlCelld­in. the sectarian and dopIatic approach of the tradi­tional rruMIJJahib, is a IOrt of polar opposite to thefanatic doam,rillD of this later Hanbalite tract.

credo (n. 29), repraeatl a penpeam wbidl-aJtboalb DO

doubt faithfully BubaIitc-ia c:ertaiDIy quite clitl'aent fromIbn cArabJ·..

)1 FIlIiiJ,4I 1, p. 47, JiDa 71f.; the ..... coatiDua - ..•

beca IDOIt mteJlectl, bd1w wiW by IMir tlaotclw. arehie to perc:eM this bccauae of their 1Kt of (spiritual)

purification (ttljrfd)" (tIllplwil outS, ill both cases). TIle factthat tbe FutDI}at in ill entirety conWDs dear but -dilpened".nUliODS to the bipest spiritual truth, which each rader must-Put tOld-" accordina to the ..... of . inIiabt· IWedeven more clearly at p. 38, lines 2S-28: WfhOlC (cleaterltatementl of the Truth] are aepankd mid scattered•• wellaw IIICntioDed. So may he on whom God .... batowed theirUDdentaDdiq rec:opize (the truth 00 their matter anddiItiDpisb them from the other thiDp. For that is the TrueKno Wac (tll-cllm aHwulq) aad the AutbeDtic SayiDJ (til­

qtlWllll-pilq). Tbere is DO JOAI beyo II, aad "the blind and

the truly IeCina are not alike· [el. ~oraa 6:SO, etc.] in IIIrqard...."

)1 See II. 2A and the clilaasiODI of traDl1aaed acaWDe worbof Ibn cArabt partly iIIU1tntiD1 these points, • be UDdcrstoodthem. in Put I.

Mo au: Ibn CArobi tmd Hu Intnpreters 745

m. The widely read Fenian works of the Kubriwthaykh cAzrz aI-Nuafl (d. late 7th/13th century) i1lus­

trate some important pectJ of the initial reception ofIbn cArabl's work (on a more practical and lea purelytheoretical level) among Persian and Central AsianSufia, a movement that is already evident in therelations of Nasan's own master Sacd aI-Oln aI­J::IamtPT (d. 6SO/I2S3) with both Ibn CArabI aDd $adral-DIn aI-Qilnawi.JJ Not only does NasafI's wort (like

J) For lJamil~'1conta:ts with QGnawr aDd a cIeKription ofthe contents of his IettcI' to Ibn cArabI, ICe M. Mol~"

IntrOduction to his edition of the Ki,.b tIl-buIIn td-Dmil(and several other collec:tio.. of short treatises) of N...n,Tehran/Paril, 1962, pp. 7-8. (Since lJama~ knew QOnawlillDamascus before Ibn cArabI'1 death, it ICeIDI hi""y litelythat he did have some personal contact with the Shaykh.)

l:IamO~" iDftueoc:e is visible throuabout Nuafrl worb,where he is coastantly cited as -our mutet," etC.; see thefurther dilcuaion of their rdatioDi ill MO~'1 bttroduction.

ope cit., pp. 7-21.A number of early Ihaykhl of the Kubrlwrya order have

been closely studied in worb by teYera1 ICbolan whichtotetber &iYe UI probably tbe most detailed picture, both inquantity ad quality of dilcuuion. of ay c:ompanble periodaDd rqion of Sui KtiYity. (TbeIe studies also mate it dearthat l;Iamii1's aDd Nuaff', rdativc inlerat in the ODtoloPcaland theoretical upeets of IbD cArabI', work w. DOt sharedby other important CODtcmporaria in that laDle -onter"; see,e.I-, the references to SimDInI belo .)

For Nasafr himself, see also two Itudia by F. Meier, -OuProblem der Natur im esoteriac:ben MonismUl del bIama,"UtlllM-Jtlhrbudt 14 (1946), pp. 149-227, and"Die Sc:briftellcia cAm aI-NuafT," pp. 125-82 in tbe W".mu ZIludtri/t/fJTt&lCuItM .$M~ S2 (l9S3), • welIu M. Mo~',article on -La Kubrawiyya entre IWlIIisme etI~.. Rnw.$ltuM$ i&ltmtiqw$, 1961. The clauic study ofNajm al-DInKubrI himlelf is F. Meier's German mUOdue:tion to his

edition, Die "llIWa".J~ al-ttunal IN IlIWilil) tIl-IlIlal" tinNtJImuddrn al-Kub,i, WicsbMen, 19S7. For Ntlr al-DrnlsfarIyiDJ (aDd his dilCiple SimDlnt, disc:uued further. D. 80below), see espec:ially tbe JoDI Introduction to H. LaDdolt'.edition of his COI7UpOItI1Im« $pIriIwlJe (with SimnlDl),(TehranI Paris, 1972), aDd his IntroductioD. truslation ofIsfarlyinl's Kamif Gl-ARl" aDd. edition of that wort adrelated Persian letten of spiritual JUidance in Dmiftll-hTilT(Tehran, USBf 1980). This latter WOTk, bich in fa coDlti­tutes a history of many apcct. or the early KubrlwtJa ordermore~y, ... now beeu republiabcd, in a RYiIed admore acceaible version. • u JUW1IJteur tID Mptbu: "Ifill• $tJII/imw (Pari&. Verdier, 1986). For more detailed biblioa­rapby (iDdudina many other studies by Meier aDd Molt), lee

both LaDdolt, Ope cit., aDd R. GramJich, DW $dtilIueltm

that of BalylnJ above) represent a vital, long-atab­liabed current ofSufi tboupt aDd expreaioD in its ownri&bt (in which, foUowina Tumidht, the more theo­retical writinp-often in Penian-of A\UDad GIwIIJand CAyn aI-Qu41t Hamadini bad played a formativerole), but at the same time it briop out quite sharply,even more than Baly~ the vast ranF of problemsand complex issues (both practical aDd theoretical)that had already come to the forefront in the develop­ment of Sufism prior to Ibn cArabI, aDd which in largepart helped structure both his own creative responseaDd the lublequcnt UICI and transformatio of hiswritinp in the euterD IJlamic orld. Moreover thecomparison of Ibn CAnbY and NasafI (and the ten­dencies their difJerilll formulations represent)· notonly historically illuminatin~ It is also a salutaryphilosophic remiDcler of the full rUF of ethical,political, theoloaical. and practical problems that oneioevitably eacounten (in tilly cultural context) inattempting to reaJizc the deeper spiritual intentions ofthose writers (or the prophets who are their own guidesand inspiration).J4

The wide diffusion and popular inftuence ofHasan'swritiD&S-a~ which may be explainable, at leastin part, precisely by their characteristic directDCa aDdrelative lack of subtlety aDd overt systematic CODCCI'DI

(whether' theoretical or practical)-c:an be judged bythe profusion of IIWIUlCripts aad early translations(especiaUy Turkish) ofbia worb. Their relative acca­sibility is no doubt alto reftected in tbe teDW'kableseries of Western vemODl of his brief MtU/,.J-i Aq,awhich for several centuries constituted one of the fewtranslated sources on Sufism in Europe, beginning withA. Mueller's Turkish edition and Latin traDIlation

DnwUdtOTdm hniDu, W'1CIbaden. I96S (Part I) ad 1967(Part II), wbic:b aIao offen a broader perspective 011 thismovement. For Najm a1-Drn RizI, ICC n. 62 below.

U Seen iD t • lipt. detailed historical raeardl (whetherlOCio-c:u1t1n'al or-doctriJlal.. aDd philolop:aI mfoc:ua) caD be

of considerable philosophic value, even when the raearcbenthemIdves are rdalively UDCODCerDcd with the apiritual dimea­siona of their abject. One of the IimitatioDl of translatio ofSufi tem aimed mainly at ""'introducin." -Sufism,W which stilliDdudes molt of the boob readily available to Itudentl, isth. they teDd to present an idealized, abItnld ima&e Ieaviqout the fwI ranae of problema aDd iJIua (with their historicalparticularities) with which iDdividual Suit have DeCCIUrilyaI ays been invohed. The Itudics j maatioDcd (n. 33) areespec:iaIly helpful in th. reprd. m briDaiDI out Mpecta ofSui practice (aDd life in a partic:ut.r~ aoc:iety) wbidlwere ofteD lakea for panted in mysticallil6",un-aDd forthat reaoD are often -mviliblew to modem readen.

746 Joumal of tM Amerialn Orienllll Sockty 106.4 (1986)

(Brandenbura, 1665), then F. Tholuct's influentialhandbook on "the pantheistic: theosophy of the Per·siaDa" (Be~ 1821), aDd Eo H. Palmer', Eq1ishMparaphrase" [Oriental Mystlcum: a Treatise onSlIjiutic ad UnittITum Tlteosophy of tM Pe"liDu.Pp. xiv + 84. LoDdon: FaANIC CASS. 1969. (Reprint of1867 edition.»)." Yet while it is not difficult to leCOI"nize, with considerable regret, the wider intellectua1CODICQUCDCel of takin.a work like the Maql/ld..j Aq,a(and moreover, in a tnmeated, groaIy iudcquatesummary) as somehow intellectually or spiritually rep-­reseotative of~ufismIt in pnerai, Palmer'. paraphrasedoes retain a certain usefu1nea for specialiatl who canapproach it with an awareness of the underlyina textand its biuorital background, since NaaafT sometimesstates his own opinioDi more explicitly there thanelsewhere.)6

Fortunately, thoup; babelte de Gutincs' recenttranIlation of two of Nasafl's loqer writinp, the

U For cIetailI 08 the manUitripti and traDIIatiou, lee

Mo~'s editioB of 1l1-1tuiIn lII-K4miJ (n. 33 aboft), pp. I and28-S6, • well. F. Meier's article on Naafl's writiDp (ref. atB.33).

Palmer's opeaioa ..mion (p. ix) that ""'this work was

0ri&inaUY written iD Turkish aDd translated iDlo PeniaD by

~h hazim Shah" Jives lOme idea of its quality. The eucti·lude and method of his "paraphnst"-which completelyallen Hasan's chapter divisioDl, and iD which it is oflCDimpossible to decide where Palmer is inteJjectiaa his ownextraneous remarks-can be judaed by comparilll his·Part III" (pp. 43~, OB WfIlayIl and llllbuwwll), with Mole'scomplete translation (rouPJy twice • 100&) of the COfTCI.

POncliD& chapter 5 of Nasafrs work (at pp. 1'-18 of hisI~uetion to the above-mentioDed edilion). The reprintpublisher's assertion (on the jacket) that USome works stand

the telt of time better than othen" and that this ODe -is still aniDdispeDJable 100J for Islamic tcboJan" is an ironic iDUlt~lion (amon, the multitude lhat could be cited by uy teacherin this 01' other area of IsJamic thoqht) of the 1astiD, cIamapthat can be done by inadequately prepared aDd UlDOtatcdtranslations of important worb, not leat by discouraainlany subsequcut attempt at a more adequate treatment.

J6 MOlt notably on the question of wdI,. and nubuwwa

(= Palmer, pp. 43-44), KCOrdina to discuuio by M. Mo~and F. Meier, rcferrinl to the reIatioaa between the MIIqIMl

and Naafl'llonaer KJuhFtJl-lJlfII/ll% ICC. e..., Molt, pp. IS­27 of tbe Introduction to IIl-hu4It III-bmil. Another .van­..of the MIlt/II'd. nCD compared, for eumple, to the textsiDcluded in 16 llvn ,. /'No"",., P"r/llil, is its relativeconcision aDd systematic fOnD; hich brinp out more clearlythe overall structure of Naaafr's coDCCrDI-althouah one

ould hesitate to call this a "system." if compared to tbe

Mtm4zil-i sa'i,,.,. and /ndn-i K4miJ [I.e Livre de['Homme Parfait. pp. 381. Paris: FAYAaD. 1984.], givaa far more comprebauive and rcveaIinI view of thisfucinatinl fipre. Both Mbooks" included in this trans­lation are actually collections of Naufl'. letters inresponse to questions from his dilciplea or other Sufis;these particular titJa, the overall oRier and Dumber oftreatises, and even the prefaca purportina to explainthat order all .em to ha'YC been added (or at leastrevised) after their oriIinaI composition, either byNasafl or by later Meditors."37 While raisinl • Dumber

intdJectual coherence evident iD Ibn CArabi aDd his commen­laton cIUcuued below. UDfortu.nately, even with some aware­DCII of the likely PeniaD lad Arabic equivalents, ODe canneftr be very .ure how dOle Palmer's~hrue"is to theoriginal lerDII. (For the full measure of the euctitude andcomplexity of that oripw 1enniDoIoaY, whether iD Peniuor Arabic. see tbe many illustrations in the notes toH. Landolt's translatioa of IsfariyinI's nmi/III·AsTiJT [n. 33above) aDd tbe detailed AeDcb and Persian indexes to thatltUdy. Many of tbote -nota"-reminisceDt of KrauI's Jab"ilHr Qllyy6t-are actually lCparate IDOnopaphs on the devd­oplDCDt of these conc:epll aDd techBa terms.)

J7 See Mo~'1 iDlroductioa 10 his edition for an explanationof the complex and problematic manUlCript history of theseworks, all of which later circulated UDder many nama, withthe same treati8e OftCD appear101 in rouply tbe same form iDIC\Ieral different col1edioa. In addition to a vat nllDlber ofordinary variant readinp (pp. 488-551), Mole also includes

(pp. 444-82) 1001 a1temate sections (often equivalent toseveral paaa iD truslaboo) found iD certain manuscripts ofthese treatises. The Freach translation contains DO referenceto these serio problems which have a potelltially importantbearin, on how one iDterpretl the work ...whole-e.I-, bowmucb is NuafJ~s OWD writin& what may have beeD cban&edor interpolated by later compilen, etc. The title adopted here,a Mole notes (intro., p. 38), is almost certainly due to • latercompiler. aDd quite possibly to a confi ioa with mY's muchmore systematic work (ICC below) of the same name.

In pneral, readen should be cautioned that the translatorhere-a iD her Preccdinl venion of cAttJr's MrqrlNn"."",[u liv,~ ,. l'ip,ftIW, Paris, Fayard, 1981, with preface byA. SCbiJnmel)-lw .opted • reIaantdy popular or freemethod of translation (ofteD parapbruiD& or droppin, severallines, and with essentially no explanatory iDtroeIuetion,detailed notes, or index) directed toward the "aenenl public"iD the broadest ICDIC. The rault is often Iesa repetitive andmore immediately "'readable" &Del~ Pleasinl (toour modCl1l taIte), but at the same time tends to obJCure thosemeaninp aDd • that would require a more extCDlivellCquaintaDce with t author and his historical conteXL(Those interested iD Nasafl himself or the ~ubriwtya, for

MORRIS: Ibn 'Artlbi IIIId His Interpreter. 747

ofserious interpretive problema, the particular arcum­ItaDc:a of their composition do 10 a lonl way towardexplaining some of the most strikinl characteristics ofboth of tbae worD, features which make this trans­lation especia1ly fuciDatinl, if also sometimes frus­tratina, readilJl.

Those unusual characteristics, which in manyrespects are certainly typical of the behavior of a livin,•hayth with his disciples (but not 10 commonly of Sufiprose worD destiDed for an indeterminate public),include; (a) Nasafi's relative disorder aDd lack ofconcern for formal systematic coherence, whether inhis practical advice or in his treatment of theologicalaDd metaphysical issucs, an impreuicm that may bepartly explicable by the different inner aptitudes andconditions of his particular correspondents; (b) hisopen, informal style, showing DO fear of (apparently)contradietin. himselfor admittiJll his own uncertaintyand hesitation on crucial iuuea, sometimes vergiq ona systematic skepticism-features which are remark­ably revealin, (for medieval Islamic literature) ofNuafl's own cbarllCler and personality; and (c) hisapparent (but as we shall ICC, quite problematic)"openness" and expticitDell in diacuuina the mostcontroversial esoteric questions. All these distinctivefeatures-which are sometimes so Itrikinl here, whencompared with mOlt classical Sufi prOle, that onecould almost imaaine oneself in CaJilornia"-mayalso reflect the widespread socia-political disorder andconsequent greater freedom of ekpreuion in IlkhanidIran and Central Asia after the MODgol invasion.)9 But

example, will therefore still have to refer diredIy to thePenian texts.)

). By this we are referriJJ& to Nasali's remarkably open.

relatively non-dogmatic, aDd frequently prqmatic or even"experimental" attitude-as in his I'q)eatcd indications ofuncertainty as to whether withdrawal from the world or(ascetic) participation in it is a better spiritual JDethoct-andhis continued actnowlcdJllle1lt of the spiritual ..d...."focuain.OIl wbat actually works in a &i~ case. As just noted, thesecbataeteristics may actually be typical ofsome Sui ....ten intheir real life, but they are rather strikiD. wbell compared tomost of the UlnwlUn of Islamic mysticism. in which (a with

the Haabali/ Qldirf text ctiIcuIIcd above) tbcoloP:al COD­

siderations of ODe IOIt or another are usuaJ)y much morevisible. (ThiS impRllioa may also have to do with the free anduncommented nature of the translation, as indiallcd in thePrececlin& note.)

» This extremely unusual set of politiall cin:u.mataces-iawbich Islam (and Sunnism in particular) actually cused to betbe state reliIiOD Del (to IOIDe extent, at least) the state­enfon:ed Law for dOle to. century-i. cited in. variety of

more important, they are also indicatil'e of certainbroader (both earlier aDd onl0iJaa) Sufi traditiODI aDdtendencies in that region (already visible, for example.in BalylDI" work, but dramatically illuatrated in manyPersian Sufi poets) that helped determine the partial­tar forma of "reception" of Ibn cArabI'. writiDp (jUitu earlier, in the case of al-TirmidbI or certain Shiite1OW'Ca, they bad helped shape the problems that IbncArabT wa intent on raolvina).

TIle lipificant coatrutI between NuafJ ad IbncArabT are equally appaRnt wbetber we consider theirtrutment of the practical questions of spiritual disci­pline and method or more .....coretical" and doctrinalillues. Here we shall coDCCDtrate on a few typicaltheologicall philosophical quations. since they 10

clearly illustrate the types of widespread, potentiallycontroversial problems for which Ibn CArabY's works,

connections in the studies by Ludolt, Mo~ and Meiermentioned above (n. 33); the political role of Sufis likeIsfariyini, in particular, is diJcuaed in detail in H. Landolt'.introductiOD to hiJ Kashif IIl-hrar, pp. JS-19 and relatednotes. The brolMler importance of tbete socio-politica1 con­ditioDl-includina the control of wtlllf endowments by theShiite philosopher and scientist N... aI-Di'n AI-TiiSi, asMooaol w.mr-in encouraaina the spread of Avicennanphilosophy _d "speculative mysticiJm" (amoul other ..het­

erodox" IDOvemenu) in the eastern Islamic world, is evokedby W. MadelUDI in bis "Ibn Abi Gumhar al-A~~'s Syn­thesis of 1uIlam, Philosophy and Sufism." now readily avail­able in his Re/i6Ious SclrbtJu tmd &eu In MedkWlI/$Itun,Loncloll, 1985, selection XIII (pp. 147-56). (See also the

illustratiw cue of Ibn AbI JumbOc'1 open reference totransftliaration of souls, n. 46 below.)

It should be stressed that the consequences of this tem..rary period of relatiw ""intellectual freedom" were quitecliJf'erent from (if not indeed the exact opposite of) thosefoUowin. the later Safavid imposition of clerical TwelverSbiism several centuria later. The widespread veueratiOD ofCAlI and coucerD with wtlMytI that is 10 evident with Naafiand other Sufis of the time-and which is more closelyanalyzed in an extensiw literature wbicb can be found in theworts cited at n. 33-1CC1D to have had little or nothiDl to dowith the quite distinct Twelver Shiite lepl and J,tJdrlh scboolldunDl . period. (The cue of the llmailim~t afterthe MOD.ol inVasiODSICCIDI to have been quite clil'erent; theinterpenetrations with lra.iu Sufism were so profound thatSufis like Nuafl (see Mo~'s introduction. pp. 20-27) andSbabiltarf (see H. Corbin's edition and trallllation of anIsmaili commentary on his GubNm-i Nz (Trno,N ismMl­WIIM, Paris/Tehran, 1961, pp. 1-17. of the French traDI­

II.tioD. sectiOllIII]) were apparently -adopted" by later PmianIsmailis.

748 JoUl7llll 01 the Americllll OrienltlJ Sockty 106.4 (1986)

through their adaptation by QnnawI and later inter­preters (diacuaed below), were IUbiequently to pro­vide more adequate and widely accepted solutions.These closely interrelated problems-since all of themare only facets of what Nasafi (following many otherSufil and Shiite thinkers) undentandl by the differentdimensions of man's 66Resurrection" (qiytima)-are(I) the relation of nubuwwa (or risGlo, i.e., legiJlativeprophecy) and waliiya, as bound up with (2) the theoryof cosmic and historical cycles; (3) the succeuive livesand forma of existence involved in the gradual per­fection of tbe soul; aDd (4) his understanding of theposition of the "people of Unity" (tzhl-i val}dol), inrelation to the rat of mankind. If Nuafl (like hismaster l:IamO>J) was already aware of some of IbncArabI's theories in these and related areas, his verylimited adaptation of them only serves to underline themore fundamental distance seParating the two per­spectives.40 In each of tbetc cues (and in manyothcn),Nasaf'j's underlying approach is basica1ly the same,characterized by <a> an ostensible "openness" (which,

40 In the MflqlMl-i Ap (Palmer's paraphrase), note thedilCUSlion of tbe Frqiq fll-J)iIuIm (p. SS) and of a disputebetween QOnawi and l;IamQ?J concerning tbe divino Namesand Attributes (pp. 27-28). More perally, u in parts offll-lruTIn tll-Kiimil, one can see Ibn cArabi'1 poaitiona bem,taken into account in reJ8ld to luch questions U IIIWI}Id orthe -unity of HeiDI." wtlIDYlI, tile flCya tltabhtl (where IbncAnbI i cited by name, p. 296), or the "Perfect Man" (a farlesl important topic in this coDec:tion than the subsequent titlemight sugest). While tbe~ interest in tbae metaphysical

aDd cosmolO&icaJ topics does distinguish Nasafl and lJamO>rfrom a far more practice-orientcd K.ubdwI shaykh likeIsfarayinI (see references in D. 33 above), for example, it isalso clear that Nuafl is dealing with Ibn cArabi'1 contribu­tions (which here, • 10 often, seem to be essentially limited tothe FU#II) on somethinslike a case-by-ease basis-as thoughin convenarlon with another respected sbayth about mattenwith which each is familiar-with little ICDIC of either hisoverall Iystematic coberencc or the lupreme I"Clpect for his

teachings that certainly characterizes all the fipres in the-school" of QlDawt discussed below. (A particularly obviousexample of this relative "1Ddepenclence"-aJtbough it wouldprobably be more URful to take Nasafl as often repraentingprecisely the sort of typical, relatively disorganiml cliscuuionof these questions prior to their transformation by IbncArabl-is his discussion of the -Perfect Man," pp. 16-22 intranslation, where the "Perfect Man"· dealt with primarily asa panicular human individual, an ideal human type, with littleemphasis on the transcendent, cosmic dimensions that are soprominent in Ibn ~Arabt.)

from Ibn cArabi's standpoint, would instead probablybe characterized as an illusory Iiteraliam and RduetiwVUlgarization) concerning the 66esoteriC" (balin) dimen­sion of the spiritual path; aDd (b) a concomitant elitistdisregard-indeed sometimes an almost dualistic orgnostic disdain-for every aspect of "his world"(iucluding the pjhir of religion and prophecy) and themass of men who are deluded into takin& it as their solereality.

That these characteristics are not limply a matter ofrhetorical empbuis aDd partial expression (as theymay well be in certain poets) can be seen most clearlyhere in Nuafl's undentanding of the wali (or vali, inPersian), who for him-in a conception totally differ­ent from wbat one finds in Ibn cArabi-is the ..$QI:Ubai-am"'," a messianic fipre whom NuafI (like histeacher l:IamlPT) apparently took to be a particularhistorical individual bo as shortly coming, in hisown lifetime, to transform totally the human condition10 that the "MflcQ (and ..~,. in general) would nolonger be necessary aud only the esoteric Truth (thebalin) would rule."· His own historicist, DOn-symbolic

.1 For the historicity of Nuafrs conceprion (following

l:IamO"'I), see his dream of the Prophet in n. 42 below.Nasafr'1 views on this question must be carefully distin­pished from (I) Ibn cArabrI views collCCl'lling the relationsof wtll4ytl, nubuWWfl, met rislllI, which have little to do withthe particular point Nuafl is discu ins in terms of the"waiT" [See now the compI'Cbensive study of tbeIe subjecu inMichel Cboclkiewicz, I.e S«tIu tin Minll: f"opIthie ~t Mlinlet~

dtDu III doctriM d'lbn CAr.; (Paris,~ 1986)}; (2) Ibn

cAram'1 conception of the nuUull, which is more closelyrelated to this point; aDd (3) Twelver Shiite aDd Ismaili Shiiteconceptions oftbe MabdI. WaII, and~b al-ZamIn, whichare apin c10scst to Nuafr'l terminolOlY, although thatsimilarity is unlikely to rdect any dogmatic theolo&ical"allegiance" on either his or lJam1i>r'1 part (see Mole'd.iscussion in his introduction to the edition of this text,pp. 20-27). What sets Nuafl apart from all of the above-orat least from their more spiritual conceptions, if not thepopular messianic misUDdentandinp-is preciJely his histor­ical "literaIism" and appamd belief that the MabeU ·11totally trusform the human condition by doiIW tlWfly withthe 8ht1"ctI aDdllhir, rather than (. in many ""elIth cited byIbn cArabI) coming to hold men to the sluufciI-« moreprecisely, rutins acxordins to the blIIln of the (true, eternal)

sMrfcfl. While Dot denying the validity of the many tradition.concerning tbe transformations to take place at the"cud oftime.. (about which, moreover. they diJl'er in other importantrespects), both Ibn cArabr and most Shiite thinkers aliketended instead to ItrCIS the prumJ meaniDS or potential of

MoUlS: Ibn 'ArtJbi and Hi8 Interpnlen 749

conception of that fUDCtion (or rather, of that indi­vidual)-aDd the wider antiDominan danaen of suchpopular mcuianic belief-aK aptly illustrated in hisobservations about the many pretenden to this rolewho were springing up throughout Iran in his time;their failures did not teem to shake his own profoundusurance that .uch an individual was about to come(aDd would even approve the teaching and promul­gation of Nasafrs own book.!)."z His expectation ofthis forthcomiDa transformation of the humaD condi­tion wa apparently bound up with his beliefs con­cemina a.mea oC cosmic eyeJea-of 1000, 7000, and49,000 years-that make up, at least on one plane ofinterpretation, what NuaflundentaDdl bythe~,"Mgreat," and Mgreatest" ResurrectioDl.") While one canfind superficially similar notions of COIoric cycles inboth Ibn CArabi and many straDda of Shiite thoUBbt(and indeed in many other reJi,iODl as well), whoseoutward aspect is apparently bucd on the implicationsoC a common astronomicai/utroloJicai system, what

tbole traDlformatiODl as an inner apirituaI reality-but not.somehow oodoina away with" tbe 14/JiT of this world and its-relative reality." The iDseparability of the two _pccts baobvious pr8Ctica1 implicatioDl for their attitude toward man'sexternal reliJioUl (and legal aDd socio-political) duties • well.

U See the traDlJatiOD of N-...fr. dram of his eDCOUDter

with the Prophet aDd his muter "amtl>y, taken from tbepref-=e to his KaJiftIl-fltlql'iq (Molt, intro. to Ill-Ins'" ... ,pp. 8-9). in which tbe Prophet alSib'tS him tbat after tbe year700, most of the students in the ",..."". will be llUdyina hiswritinp. Perhaps even more sipi6caat, in lipt of what wehave already noted about the SlnUnIMopenneu" of NuafI'sstatements, is l:Iamii>'i's remark. in the same dream. that Mbe(i.e., Nuafl) striws to proclaim opaaIy and unveil everythinlwhich I bad tried to hide aDd conce." (p. 9).

43 In this view (pp. 334-36 of the translation), tbe lesser,10000year Mresurrection" iDvolva the establishmcot of a1llW_nell throupout the earth (the concordance of this mille~

oilllD with his immediate expectation of the villiafter only 700yean is not explaiDed; perhaps be would rule until the comingof a DCW Jaw-Jiviq prophet). while the two pater cyclesinvoM partial and total oosmic cataclysms, each wipinl outall animal and veJelable life, which then bqiDI oYer in a new

cyde. This chapter of the Mtut4zil tI1-Si~iTin (pp. 329-40 oftbe traDJlatiOD) implies views of transmiaratiODS of(tbe?) lOulwhich are apparently presented here .. Nasafl's Owll. (The

Persian text is actuaDy more clear than tbe French in implying­although not with absolute certainty-that Nasafl is talkingabout conditions he really believes to be the case. These viewsare certaioly coincident with tbe escbatoloJica1 opinions heCXpl'CSlel in other chapterS of these two collections.)

is &Jain most strikin. with Nasafr-apecialJ:y com­paRd with Ibn cArabIor the Shiite writen expoUDdiqsuch theories, for whom they can (and perhaps mUlt)be understood first of aD on a purely IJIDbolic, iute­riorized level-is the literalism and historicity oCNuafT'sllCCOWlt, with its apparent UDderlyiJII.-ump­tion that the spiritual Truth (the ba,ln) could somehowbe ~auaht," if it were not for the obstacles pOled byman's current condition and the (apparently Mgntnle")teaebinp of the tbeolO!iaDI, philosophers, etc.

The same assumption oC "literal eaotericiIm,,. withsimilarly problematic etbicaJ and RJiaioUi implica­tions, is apparent in NasafI's account (tr., pp. 329-40)of the development of the (MiDdividual"1) IOU1 •involvillJ a p-adual purgation aDd perfection, o~thousands of years, through conditions as mineral,plant, anima'" and human-animal (with its manifoldpoaibilitic:l) until finally rachin. the truly bUlDallstate, where man'slpiritual development, more strictlyspeakin~can actually beJin..... From this penpcctive­which seems to convey at least the mOlt explicit andtangible aspect of Nuafl's own escbatoloP:a1 belief­Paradise and Hell (*Dd mOre especially, for mOlt ofmankind. the latter; ICe p. 239) are quite immediatelywith us here and now, and it is only throop DWlylifetimes of long and painful experience (the purptivetorments brought on by our p ionate psychic attach­ments to one or another dimension oC~ worldjthat some individuals can move on to the hiaher,paradisial stages of .piritual awareness and the true

44 Here one mipt expect Nasafi to oontmue by speaking ofthe lOul's further puri6c:alion uad advaJICeIIlent, at leut insymbolic terms, OOUlrouP" the heavenly spheres or the IJi&berspiritual states they repraeot, as in SO many other fo ofIJlamic tboupt. But another rather oriainal apeel of N...rrswork is his treatment of the spheres and the plandl (in hisdiscusaion of the "cosmic tree" as Jeen from the biIhat slalCof the tIh1-i vtllulilt, pp. 345-4) u the Mlower world."IDltcad,be quite vigorously insists (in the same chapter, at leut) thatthe hipest state of perfect vision is that attaiDed in the hereand DOW. (Denial of the spiritual, supernal state of thebeaYCDIy Iphera and their 1DtcUecu, as implied in the acceptedPtolemaic cosmololY of that time, is usually to be found onlyamona more literal-minded theologians.) This attitude mayalso flow frol'Q a very literal conception of Mtelncarnation" Oft

NuafI's part; one woDden, in the same connection, whetherhis words about the pouible Mre-descent" of sinncn intoanimal bodies are to be taken literaDy or-u for 10 manyother Penian Sufis-as rd'erence to the v t majority ofMhuman animals" (btuhtu, not iIu4n) exhibiting a corr~

spondinl variety ofManimal" natures.

750 JOUI7UI1 01 the Ammcan Orientlll Society 106.4 (1986)

"end" of their "cycle" of perfection.·'~ while onewould not want to deny that, with appropriate qualifi­eatiODl, this is at least one possible aspect of IbncArabt·. (and maDy other IaJamic thinken') under­standing of the eschatological language of the Koran,what is extraordiaary here (for an Islamic mystic. atleast) is Nasafi's unqualified and quite open statementof this point of view-opening the way to all thosepotential ethical perversions of this vat transmigra­tionilt penpective (in terms of either quietism orantinomianism, ibiil)ll) which. in the Islamic world,seem to have restrained its non-symbolic formulationby any but certain "extraDe" (and in their own wayequally literalist!) Shiite ghul4t groups.... Moreover,quite apart from these potentially dangerous popularmisunderstandings, even the Sufi reader could easilyreduce the bcarin& of NasafI's formulations-whichgive only minimal reference to the complex eschato­logical symbolism of the Koran and I}tuIrth, portrayedin such detail in Ibn cArabI's own writinp-to thesingle plane of his own limited immediate experience,with the obvious danaen either of a short-circuiting ofhis spiritual tealiution or of a sort of vain ·spiritual

45 The final chapter of Q/·huilJQ/·K4mi/(pp. 231-51 of thistranslation), devoted to the exposition of ~he Paradise and

Gebenna that are in us" fits integrally with the aa:ount ofIllUkh and mtulch (loosely translatable as -transmiaratiOD,"thoup whether of -mdividual" souls Ot ODe cosmic soul isalso unclear from this description) in the description of thefifth stalc of the soul's d~lopment in the Man4ziI1I1-S4:Jirfn(the chapter disallsed at n. 43 above). Nasafi acids that the"story" of ...be paradise and bell that will be- is "alreadyknown" and tbat he will speak: in another treatise of the one'"that is outlide us"-not necessarily the same as the story thatis -already knowo"?-but he does DOt do th}s here or in theother work we have seen, 10 far as we can tell.

46 It is essential here-as indeed in most traditions of Islamicthou&b~ whether mystical. philosophic, or Shiite-to distin­guish ~fully between what is ~xp'~$Md and hat may wellbe believed or known; it is the expression, and DOt the belief,that caused cenain JfOUPS to be c1aued u -extremist... (SeeIbn 'ArabI's own indications in tbil regard, nn. 29-31.) IbnAbi Jumhiir's open statemen~ at a slightly later period, th-most of the philosophen and the Illuminationists" believedin the transmilration ofsouls (cited by W. Madelung, op. cit.in n. 39 above; Madeluns does not live the Arabic term oradd what additional explanations may have been provided inthe orisinal text), is a revealina indication of whal can begathered from the symbols and allusions of sue figures asSuhrawanlI., the Riu4;)iI of the Ikbwln a1-~'. aod manyother Sufis and philosophen before and after that time.

elitism" (familiar danaen Nasafr himxlf denOUDCCl inother contexta).

We have already dealt with the way Ibn cArabT (andhis (ollowers), throqh their emphasis on the keynotion of tajalliY4t, carefully avoided the confusionsand practical danaen Bowing from the simplified con­ceptions of "Unity" (w~) exemplified in the worksof Balyinl or Ibn SabCJn, and OWly of the wneremarks would be applicable to NasafT'. own discus­sions of the "people of Unity" (ahl-I vDJ)d4t, perhapsequivalent to the muwo1}/}idfin, in tbe usual Sufi usageof that term), whom he uaually considers the JUabest,most realized group'" (He also speaks of their unitiveinsight as though it were 1M "resurrection" and Para­dise, whereas that realization is always quite explicitlyonly one dimension of thOle symbols in Ibn cArabL)An interestinl practical corollary of this metaphysiealconception throughout both works translated here isNasafI's comparison of the Dhl-i vaJ:ulat with the (forhim) clearly inferior conceptions of the mutllkallimfinand the philosophers (~mi;:'). For him (see p. 26S)these are the tint two stages o( man's truly responsiblespiritual advancement-the vast mass of mankind, asalready indicated, being still animals in human form­and once their illusions and limitations are desaibed.they merit no further mention. With Ibn cArabI, andeven more 10 in his later interpreters discussed in thefollowing sections,'" the focus is always on the formu­lations ofeach group of the "theoreticians" (as with theeven more fundamental role of the "lord9t praent ineach man's faith), as in themselves a prefiguration ofthe Truth, a valid and indispensable mirroring, in thatpenon's experience, of the absolute Reality (lJaqq)-a

47 Naaa1l's temunology or categorization seems to vary inthis regard (this being one of the points where reference to biother worb and other KubriwI writinp miaht have beenespecially bdpful): at the end of the Mtmdzil fIl-SQ'irln(pp. 349-S2), be calls the "postics" (ciri/in) an even hipergroup within the tlhl-i vtIhdtz,. In any case, it is interatina thathere (e.I., p.~) the term -SufiM already refen to a relativelylower, more popular category or staF. remindinS us of thesimilar relative denipation of 'ibid and zahid (commonterms applied to the earlier Sufis), in favor of the term 'ilrif(-postic" or '"true knowcrj already in the works of Ibn Sini,GhazIlT, etc... See the similar comparisons of the Sufi, klllllm, and

flllstlfll positions on basic theoloaical questions, itb the samesystematic approach (but quite ditrerent from Nasafl·s) insuch figures as IJ. Amun, Ibn Turb IsfahlnI. Ibn AbiJumhQr, Jimi, and MuIIl ~adrl discussed in the text and

note below.

MoulS: Ibn CArob; IIIId His Interpreters 7S1

truly univenal penpective which emphasizes thebrotherhood ftowm, from each individual'. intrinsic (ifrarely fully realized) relatioDlhip with God (rather thanthe exclusiveness of • ".Dostic" elite), and whichsugests a far more comprehensive awa.reoess of themanifold functions of the prophets (and their t6heinj,in this world as ~n u the hereafter.

IV. cAbcI aI-Razzlq aI-KllhInI(d. ca. 1~5/13~S) wuone of the foremost and certainly one of the mostinfluential repraentati~ of what may Dlore riptfullybe called a "school" of Ibn cArabi, a line of inter­pretation and further development of the Shaykb'sthought whose essential features are already dearlyevident in its founder, Ibn cArabY's stepson and closedisciple~r aI-Din aI-QOnawr(or "al-QunyaWi,tt afterthe city of Konia where be died in 673/1274). Given thedecisive and still laraely unrecopized importance ofthis school for the later development of Islamic thoughtin aeneral, aloOl with the remarkable Iact of trans­lations and aeueral studies of its key figures,'" the fewrecent French publications on KlihlnI will be supple­mented in this section by brief references to works inseveral lauguases on or by other major fipres in thismovement (QOnawI, JIlT, AmulT, and JImi) and by anintroduction to a few of its distinctive characteristicsshared by all these anthon. To beain with, this tradi­tion of biablY sophisticated philosophic and theologi-

.. The mOlt substantial studies OD the early, formativefigures in tbis school are tbOie cited in the rest of tbis sectionbelow, which can be supplemented by the general historicaloutlines in the two surveys by H. Corbin mentioned in n. 3above. In addition to the writinp discussed in thole studies,see the much lonaer list of sources aDd authors (especially thedozens of commentators of the Frqiq al-J:lilumt and IbncArabl's brief summary, Natph al-FIIIfiI) given by OsmanYahia in his Hutoir~n cltusif~lIlion ...(~Gen&-a!,items ISO and 528) aDd in tbe Arabit introduction to hisedition (with H. Corbin) of l:Iayclar Amun's NtlR IIl-Nrq;q(full references at n. S above). Also extremely important inthis rcpnI, bceausc Jiving UI SOIDC insight into the manypossible "non-literary" chains of transmission, are the longlists of diRd auditors (from the early IIlaDUICripts) given inDr. Yahia's new, 0Dlomg critical edition of tbe F~', aswell as bis summaries of sneral sibiltls of direct trausmittersoflbn CArabI'. works (HUlo;" .•• , Addenda At II, pp. S39­

SI) and the transmiuion of Ibn 'ArabI's IcJIiTqtI IIkIHurYtl(A4deDda. B, II, p. 543). (For further refereDCCS to this lastsiJsilll, which wa transmitted within several of the weU­known Sui orden, see the discus1ions by Michel Cbodkiewicz,ref. at n. 113 below.)

cal speculation must be distinpishcd from severalother important but more dift'ulC lines of influence ofIbn cArabI's work in the later Islamic world which are,if anytbina, even lea studied: (a) the influence of theShaykb and his Arab Sufi disciples (e..., Ibn SawdakTn,cAflf ai-DIn al-TilimsIDT, etc.) in the Maghreb aDdother Arabic-speatin, regions;jC) (b) the multipledimensions of Ibn cArabT's inftueace on ""ractising"Sufis within many difl'erent orden, as illustrated in partby the work of NuafI and the later Qldirf textdiscussed above; and (c) the even more complex ques­tion of Mborrowinptt of vocabulary and concepts(especially connected with the notion of W~I al­wujiid) by later poets, theoloaians, etc., exbibitin.varyina degrees of acquaintance with Ibn cArabi's ownworks or even with the tommentators on the Fu/ilI.'.

With reprd to its formal and historical character­istics, the school of Islamic thougbtS2 that developed

50 For a few _peets of this subject, see the diKuuion of(Abel al-Qldir al-Jazl'iJf at the end of this article and therefereDCCS to the 18th-eentury Moroccata Sufi Ibn cAjIba(works by Jean-Louis Michon at n. 4 above), as well as theimponant treatise by Ibn cArabi's close disciple Badr al­I;lab bI, also mentioned in n. 4. It is e:atainly tbe c:asc tbatthe "Ibn cAlabrocriticized by Ibn Khaldiin in the Muqtli/Jimtl,

where the focus is entirely on the occult, magic, aDd tbesupemananl (*bleb may have played a much IJUler role insome kinds of Mpopular" Sufism; see the kinds of apocryphalworb commonly attributed to Ibn cArabI, n. 19 above), isunbelievably distaDt from die fiaure presented in the traditionof Qiinawi aDd his succason discussed bere.

SI This relatively superficial approach is certainly c:harac:ter­istic of much of tbe polemical literature, whether pro or COD,

revolving around the Frqiqll"I;IikJIm (references above, n. S),as well as with mucb of tile poetic and literary use of IbncArabI's technical terminology (n. 2 above). ~ with the uses

of Platonic (or Neo-Platonic) themes in Western literature, itis probably fairly rare for poets and men of Jetten to bawestudied the works of Ibn cArabr and his inta'pmcn in great

detail; yet the ability to perceive and convey his centralinsights (_ with Plato) is not dependent on (nor even alwayscombined with) a more Mscbolastic," systematic study of thoseworks thcmIelves.n The term Mscbool- here must be used cautiously and

subject to two extremely imponant qualificalions. Fant, thereal philosophic and theoIoJic:aI unity and diversity of thetcwriters have not begun to be explored in modem researeh; thesame is true, incidentally, for the later schools of Islamicphilosophy a weU. (MOlt Western authors, U can be seenfrom many of the translatiODI available in this fidel, havesoupt instead to briog out the peral M 1slamic"or M Akbarl"

7S2 JoUl7lll1 o/IM Amnialn 0rlmuJI Sot*ty 106.4 (1986)

out of QOnawi's interpretation of Ibn cArabT .aamarked by at least four diItincti~ features. F1I'Ity itafocus on the actual writinp of Ibn cArabI, insofar •they were studied at all,S) wu primarily on the Frqtqal-IJiktml, and even there wu mainly dedicated tobringina out the metaphysical and theoloaica1 aspectsof that work (the ·Unity of Beine." the ontololY of thedivine MPresences,,. aDd their rdlection in the -PerfectManj. Secondly, the popularity and tremendousinfluence of this more strie:tly conceptual, metaphysicalapproach seem to have been patelt 00 the easternIslamic world (includilll the Ottoman realma, CentralAsia, Muslim India, and other lands where Persian wfor many centuries the /inpIIfrMal of higher culture),where Arabic was for the mOlt part the lana... onlyof a learned scholarly elite; hence its leading figures,belinaina with QonawI, ~re often CWam4' u well uSufis, and were UICd to writina in both Arabic andPeniaD (and IOmetitnet Tutkidl), depeDdin8 on theirintended audience." Thirdly, this school developed,

aspect of these worb-which is uDdentandably more impor­tant to a Fneral auclieDce-rather than to focus on thosequestioDl that pcraacd the bUDdrcda (if not tho....) ofboob produced in tbiI school) Secondly, noac of tllelewriten are mere "colllJDella.1on" of Ibn cAnbY, .. c:an readilybe Ken even in tbe worts (KllbInl, JIlt, AmuIr, JImJ, etc.)

dilcuacd below. M with -AriItotclianiIm" or -Plaonism" inWesternth~ lbo cArabT's writinp were only tile startiDapoint for the molt dil'CrIC developments, in wbicJa rdermce toIUbiequeftt interpretm quietly became at least .. impolUnt.. the study of the Sbaykh himself.

n Sec more JmeOIIy nn. SI-S2 above. In particular, thespecial role of the FfII/iI til-QikimI as the primary III1CN1w

tool (altho'" the muten themlelva no doubt read morewidely) in the eaateI1l Islamic rid is amply i.UuItraacd by thevast number of commentariea produced down to the 19thcentury (n. 49).

The fate of Ibn cArabI in this leIard, at 1eMt within thiImore 1CIa01u1y tndition, is doIdy anaIoaOUI to that of IbnSIni in later lJIamic pbilolophy aDd 1uJIam: alrady by thetime ofGbazIII(aDd indeed of Aviceftaa.. immediatediscip1elluch _ Dahmany"', whole K. tll-TIIIRJ/(cd. M. Mu~,Tehran, 1349] quietly became a favorite teachin.text), IbnSId'l ideu-ofteD in IIIJI'tJCOIDiza aocI DO Jon.,- philo­sophic form-were IaIJdy beina traJwnitted tbroup IUb­

leql1ent manuals and sum..nes, wbether in Josie ormetaphysics, often reducina his thouabt to rote -/ud4m- (inboth IeIIICI of that term).~ For the importaDce 01Persian poetry, in particular, in the

further spre8d of Ibo cArabrI ~--with the tranlmuta-

from the very beJinnio& in extremely clote interactionwith the separate intellectual traditiOdJ of Avieaun

fllbilfll (especiaUy aa transmitted by N. TIIII) and oflater kalam (Fubr aJ.DIn aI-RIzI, al-IjJ, etc.) whichwere both already deeply Cltablished in those reaioDl;"this intellcc:tual context in particular involved a seriouslimitation-or at least a sipificant transformation-ofits audience, intentions, and choice of lubjcdl whencompared with the actual writinp of Ibn cArabr.Finally, while all three of these traditions of Islamicthought maintained their separate identities-and espe­cially their fundamentally different conceptions ofspir­itual or philosophic: lWIhod, which often were at leastU sipificant u their nominal "conclusions"-theyshared a formally similar taIam IaD&uaF aDd prob­Iematic,1O that lCpresentatives of each Mschool" wereusually at least superficially acquainted with the liter­ature and terminolOJY or the opposina IfOUps.56

tion that neccaariIy invol¥cd-see the discuaioo ofJImJ andclrIqI later in this article.~, See especially the~n of QOnawrl correspoDdence

with the AvK:ennan philolopher (and Shiite tbeoJoaian) NIIflral-DIn __rosrdiIcuIlCd • n. 65 below (article by W. Chittick).An espec:idy uaefuI indicMion of the . orical Iit1Iation ofthae inte1Jcetual tnMlitioal in AnatoJia immediately prior tothe spmMI of Ibn cArabra tboupt by Qanawt and hisfoUowers (ifwe can trust the date 629/1231 in the colophon) isthe text Gl-Bul611t1ft tll-1JihruJ published in (.-simile by theTurkish sc:ho'. (ud author of an important work onQOna.r), Dr. Nibat K-etJik (Istanbul. '969). While the ortis mOlt certainly not by Ibn cAnlbt. .. the editor then

nWntaiDcd-a point worth ItJaIina, Jiven the ay luchattributio tend to spread if not noccd by boobdlen aDdlibraries-it is a remarkable indication of the situation of-Speculative mysticism- in ita more intellectual, metaphysicalform at this period; it tbaeforc rc1lecb many of Ibn c-ArabJ".(aDd QOnawr. or Ibn SabcTn 'a) immediate precunon in thisarea of Islamic tbouaJd. The unbown author draWl a~cia1lyon the works of SuhrawardI........" (0. 14 above) aDdGbazIIT (n. 13), within. broader metaphysical frameworktaken (_ with both Subrawardt aDd GbazIIt) from a certainAvicennan tradition. His poIitive aDd enah • . \lie ofSumwanll is especiaDy iDteratin& since mOlt of Suhra­wantI'slater commcntalOn (ICC n. .4) mown to us-up untilMuIIl $adrt-tendcd to be lairly Ilon-myltical Avicennanthinters ueatiDa Subrawardl not .. a Sufi writer, but _another1Cb~collUDeDtator of Ibn sma.

56 This cootinuin. teparatioIl of tbae distiDct intd1ectualtraditio becomes quite qparmt, after QGnawt (d. n. 6S). inthe many orb by later wriacrI in the IDOI'C mysbcallChool of

753

What resulted from tbete developments. already inthe writinp of QOnawt. wu a body of complextheoretical literature focusing on the intellectualundentaDdiD. and elaboration of certain perennialphilosophic and theolosical problems within its ownindependent conceptual framework aDd teclmicalterminolOJY, drawn 1aqely from the writiDp of IbncArabL)1 Whatever one7s opinion of this tranaforma­tion-and, among the many motivations for QUnawl'scfl'ortJ, there is little doubt that it helped to mate IbnCArabT more interestinlaDd acceptable to the educatedelite of the time, from both talam aad philosophicbacqroUDdJ-tbc outcome was clearly something verydifferent from Ibn cArabr. own writinp (aDd espe­cially the FutUI}at), as one can readily verify even in

Ibn 'ArabI comparina Ilia po.itioftt .-itb t'ott of theAYicennan pbilosopben aud nrutlllulOimlilr: see tile works by1:1. Am~ Ibn Turo bfahlnI, Ibn AbT JUJIIhOr. JImt, andMuIJi Sadri di8cuacd below.

Apart from Itudies of thosewri~we still have almost noliteratUR brinpna out the vitality, iDdependeDCC, aDd oriai­nality of tIleR otber later traliitioDi of Islamic thoup~

usually because outlicle IChoIan have been unaware of theMc:ocIe-worda" aud distinctive commitmentsllDcl MlUmptioas

UDderlyilll tile colDIDon-_ ofteD biIbIy milleadin.-blamframework. (ODe would have much the same impreuion inapproadlina the dassicl of medieval Latin pbilo&opby withno prior backlfOuDd.) Some idea of thole features-within aquite limited time aDd aeoanpbica1 area-can be ptheRdfrom the texts iDcluded in Corbin aDd Ashtiyani'l MlhologWdnphilMophn ITtmieIu .•. (d. .. 3 above ucl our review inSophiII hrmnu In. no. I [Tehran, 1977]. pp. 128ft'.).

51 This delcription is already true even of the earliestMcommentaries" on tbe FIIIfiI (d. n. S2 for tbe pouiblymiI1cadinl nature of this term) by Qinawr, where indepen­dent theoretical developments already often take precedenceOla the illumination of Ibn cArabr. aetuaI .nama. (Seeillustrative tl'8Dl1abODI by W. Cliittict mentioud below.)

While the COlDlllCDtary of OawOd al-Qanan is probably themo8t helpful in actually UDdentaDdina tile FfIIiiI itlelf. hisMlntroduction" (muqaddinuJ) is virtually an iDdcpeDdentphilosophic study. 8Dd W8I itself the object of doUDS ofsubsequent commentaries. The latest of tbeIe supcn:ommen­taricI (iUdf a rneaJina iUultratioa of this pare, wbida aIm_0~1msQaypd91 relatively brief Introductioa) is S. JaWai-DIn AsbtiyanI'l SNub-; MlU/tlddinul-Jl; {ltIJI,.ri •• .•Muhbad. 13M! 1966 (6S1 pp. with Freacb aDd EnalilhintroduetioDi by H. Corbin aad S. B. Nasr). (Sipificanllyenoup. in view of the coDtinuina clerical mspicio.. of IbncArabt [see n. S above), AshtiylBI'I own exteDdcd Persian

translation." Within this new intellectual pellpective,ODe may aIIo note the relative DeJieet (at least in theliterature itle1f) of two key features of mOlt of IbncArabI'. own writinp: his detailed c:oDCeI'D with methodand practice, the "phenomenololY" of the spiritualPath (a dimenaion be shared with other Sufi mutenand mOlt early Sufi authon); and his attempts tocommunicate his spiritual realizatioDl and iDliptidirectly to his readen, throuab a wide variety ofrhetorical devices (often cloeely tied to the ArabicIanP.> which arc neYer entirely separate from-norreducible to-thcir implicit intellectual and metaphys­ical framework." The relative suppreaion of thesefeatures. wbile aIIowinl peater conceptual clarity aDdsystematic coherence, did have its costI. For both ofthese reuona. Don-apecia1iatI will almost inevitablyfind Ibn cArabr. own writinJl both more powerful andmore directly aanaiblc than those of his interpretersin this "school," since the worb of QUnawr and hisIUCCCIIOn are often virtually inoomprebenaible with­out a 1enIthY preliminay explanation of their ownintellectual framework and tenninoJoay, as well as therelated kalam and IIlbqfIl If temI frequently involvedin the diJcuaions.6O

COllllDeDtary on the FUIiiI, promised in this volume, bas Dotyet been publiahed.),. A handy illustration of this poia~ while awaitiDa tbe

10nJCr tranllations promised by William Chittick andS. Ruspoli (nD. 61-68), is the translatiOD of Qllnawr. briefMIT~" tJI-'Ari./rn dilcuued below, at n. 69.5' This Dot at all to imply that the foremost representatives

of thilscbool were not theauelvel Sufis, nor that they did notalso, in lOme cues (d. JDI beloW) write OlMr worb illus­tratina either of these poilU. In faa, most of them were oftendeeply involved in various IlIIriqa-this concern with theMpractice" of Sufism beiIIa of course the element that espe­cially cIiItiquished tbeaI, for example. from the AviceDnanpbilOIOpben whom they were clebatina- But it is nonethelcutrue that these two upectI of theory aDd .piritual realizationare not nearly 10 intimMely aDd explicitly (indeed ofteniucparably) linked • they are in the Sbaytb'l OWII writinp.(See our remarks on the importaDce of the Mrhetorical"dimension of Ibn cArabr'1 writina. in tile broadest ICDIC ofthat term, in Pan I of this artide, at .. S.).. For these reasons (lee D. S6 above). the relative of'i&inality

and creativity of Wamic thouabt in tbU period-wbicb areUDCleniable. e.... in a writer lite JUt (see below)-are IliIllarae)Y UDexplorcd, aDd must remain relatively "invisible"until their termiDolOU and eateaol'iel are more adequatelyexplored. (The impr'ClliODI of Mstapation," McteeacIence,"

754 JOIII'NI1 of1M Ammcll1l 0rlmIId Sockty 106.4 (1986)

QUnawi's more I' tematic and theoretical writinp,however, reftcd only ODe dimension of his role in thetransmission and systematization of Ibn cArahr. ideasand teadlinp. EquaJly important was the extraordi­nary range of his personal relationships hich­whether as DWter, disciple, or colleape-spannedalmost every Islamic intellectual tendency and school,both Sufi and non-Sufi, of his age. (That phenomenonis no doubt partly explicable by Konia' unusualsituation at that time as a sanctuary for refuFCS fleeinlthe Mongol invasions of Central Asia and Iran.)Among his wide-ranging contacts were the renownedPersian mystical poets RnmI (d. 672/1273), Aw\ladaI-DIn KirmAnI (d. 635/1238; a shaykh of theSuhrawardlya order and, alonl with Ibn cArabl,QOnawI's own master), and-most directly inftuencedby Qiinawrs teacbins-Fakhr ai-Din Clraqi (d. 688/1289);'1 the J(ubrlwIya sbaykbs Sacd ai-Din }jamiPi(d. 650/1252-53; the master ofNasafl discussed above)and Najm ai-Din RIzT (d. 654/1256),'2 author of sOmeof the most widely read Persian prose manuals of Sufiteachinp; Sacid aI-Drn FarghinI (d. ca. 700/1300), theinfluential commentator (in both Persian and Arabic)

"fossilization," and the like that one often WI in secondary1M:lC000U aR seldom based on serious, Icqthy study of the

tnlditiODl in question-beiDa rouPJy equiv" to the likelyrcaetion if ODe were to baDd worb of Kaat am aCFl. in theoriIinal aDd with 80 COllllDeDtary or explaaatioa, to IOmeoDe

from an entirely diftCrcat civilization. At the very~ thatperson ouId tillCl it very difliwlt to sort out bat is oJiaiDalaDd importallt from bat is not, without IIIIda deeperKqlIaintuce with the tradition iD quation.)

" For a vivid and detailed description of cIriqrl relations

with QGnawi-and of QQ_wt'l Jaraer cin:le, iIIcIudinI hisown relationship u a disciple or KirmiDJ--see the bio­araplaical section. pp. 33-66. in the translation aDd study of<;lrIqT'1 lAmDclJt by William Cbitt~k aDd Peter L. Wilsoa,

Divilw FltuMs (New Yort. Pauli.. Press, 1982); tbiI wort isdiscuuecl further in the sectiOD on the poet Jlmibclow. Thesebiopapbical passaaes, iJacludm, a Jetter of C)rlqI to QOoawt,aR iDvaluable simply for their portrayal of an -.pea of

QOuWt that coulc1 otberwile ICan:ely be ilft.lliocd simply onthe bail of his more theoretical writiDp.

62 For Najm aI-DiD Kubri, J;lamu>J, aDd otJ.er major fipresiD the early Kubrlwtya, sec the ref'~ at Do 33 aDdthrouabout the section on NuaCI above. Prof. H. Ludolt basdetected some inftueDce of Ibn cAtabl9s thou,bt (as witJl

Nasafl, on a particular subject, not as a total system) iD theMir,u1Il-'Ibid, a wielely read Pcniaa prose orlt oa Sufismby Najm ai-DID RIzI: see the article on SimDlDI and Klsblnt

of Ibn al-Flricrl celebrated Arabic Sufi poem, theT,>rytl;63 and finally the lcadm, Aviamnan philOIOpher<and Shiite theologian) of that time, NqTr aI-Drn TOSI,and his disciple Qufb al-Drn ShIrlzi (d. 710/1311),who also spent several years studyina with Qnnawl.64

The record ofQDnawI's extended correspondence withTOsi, carefully summarized in an important article by

in Dn hllmr (fun ~femlCelat n. 10 in the coadudi part of

this article). p. 30, ft. 4. 1lUI'. ort hal recently becomeavailable in a complete Eaalish tt latioD (with limitedIntroduction aDd annotatioD) by H. AIpr', 1M Path ofGod'sIIonds1MIr (New Yort. Caravan Press. 1980).

6] His commentary bas also beea edited: MtUMrlq tIl­DtriIf: Slttul}-I Tl~ytI-/Jbn.i F6I#. ed. JaW al-Dfa AsbtiyIDJ(M8Ibhad.I979),183 pp.; CAbd al-1lazzIq al-KllbIDI(whoIeKoranic commentary is discuued later in this section) bas abobeen attributed a famous COlDlDe1ltary on thisN~ tIl-SrJiiJc(but see n. 73 belo ). See also the En..... trmslatioo audrunniq collUDelltary of the same work by A. J. Arberry, TMPMm of lire WtIY (London. 1952; Chester Beatty MOD~

araphs No. 5)... The worb of both mea have been studied (in the West)

most receatly in terms of their utroDomica1 activity at thefamous observatory TDsJ established at Mar.peh; see the

utides on this aspect ia the Dictio".", of Sdmtiflc Bio­

PtIPhy. Unfortuutely, "fIII·s decisive and muJti-facded m­fhIeDcc OD subsequent Islamic thouPt-where be .. of theutmost importance in rcviviDa the tndy philosophic study ofIbn SId (tbroqb his ~tary 011 the Im4ril aDd .

several worb severely -taekina the in ueatial "".,tI1c.u;mFakhr al-DIn RIzI) aDd iDaapratiDa an important liDe ofTwelvcr Shiite theolOl1 (tJaroup his TIIjr'Id tll-cA~>Id, the

objcd ofdOUDS of later COIIUDCIItaries)-bas Dot yet attractedstudy in proportion to its UaportaDce. (See also D. 39 above,for W. MadeIUD,'1 article llreuiDaT 1'1 major political roleas well.) W. Strothmaan's monop-aph IN ZwiJl/n Schi,,:Z~i r~ligiollSg~sch;clulidte CluutIC~rb;1der tIllS Mr MOil­go/mzeit, recently repriatal (Hildcsbcimj New York, 197~), isa helpful biolUPbical outlinc-briaaiDI out the (apia stillJarFIy udied) importuce ofT '1 maay yean ofactivity

an lamaili theoloaian-but does ot really 10 into a deeperstudy of his role iD Islamic inlel1«1IItIl . ory, and especiallythe way his Aviceanan pbiJoIOpbic commitment expressed

i. his tbeoloaical and political activities.The appareat lack of..y .moIlS ""Sufi" OrieDtatiOll in Qutb

al-Din' commentary on Sum arefT (lee Do 14 for its forth­comiDa pubJicatiOll in Freucb tranIlatioa) bas oDeD beencommented on, but apin there is not yet any comprebeDsiveItudy of his maDy activities (closely paralleliDa thole of T •except for the Shiite theolosical side).

MoltaIS: Ibn Ckabi tmd His Interpreterl 7SS

William Chittick." is a remarkably revealing illustra­tion of the way this systematic ·school" of Ibn cArabideveloped in many respects out of the attempt torephrase the Sbaykh·s insights and conclusions-takento be representative of the methods and principles ofSufism more FDeraUy-in terms CODVincin& and intel­ligible to the prevaiJiDg philosophic and theologicalschools of the time."

Our knowledge and understanding ofQOnawrs workand his creative historical role in the transmission ofIbn cArabl should be greatly increased by two major

6S "Mysticism Venus Philosophy in Earlier Illamic History:the at-T81i, aJ-QDDawI ConespoDdtnc:e," Religiolu Studies 17(1981), pp. 87-104, where the author also mentioas (p. 98,n. I) that he ha prepared a critical edition of this text. Thoseacquainted with tbe dilliculty of the ofiaioal Arabic~n­sistilll of a letter from QOnawr attemptina to phrase keyinsiJhts aDd assumptioas of Ibn CArabI in terms comprc­beDsible to -Pa1pateric" tbouJht; 'fOIT's rather coadesceDcIin.rcspoue, ecboiDI Ibn STd'l attitude toward Sufism in theIslWll; and QilDa1YT's reply aDd answers to 'fOsT'1 objectiODS­

will appreciate the mastery of Prof. Chittick's IUIIUIW'Y of theuDderlyina issues.

In panicular, this correspondence and the Avicennan intel­lectual context it assumes (see also n. SS abo~) sugests someof the reasons for the subsequcnt centrality of problems ofwal}dtlt Il1-WIIjQd (aDd the correspoocliaa formulation of IbncArabi's thoupt in primarily ontolo&ical, rather than thea­

1000ca1, tell'Dl, draYrioa 1aJ1dy 00 Ibn Sld'i voc:alMalary) inthe writinp of this school, sinee that conceatration is by DOmeaDS reflective of the importance of this problem or thisvocabulary in Ibn 'Arabi's own writinp. (Typically-andfollowing other Sufi writen of his time in peral-be makesmore frequent use of the talaml Koranic lanpaae of thediviDe Attributes aDd Names, with tbe distinctively Sufi focuson their existential correlates.) This coDtrut can readily beseen in compariDa the FIqiq itaelf with tbose colDIDCDtaries.(See further remarks on DshIni's vocabulary below.).. This should not be taken to imply that the form of this

tradition can imply be understoOd as a SOrt of apol0aetic (or

polemic) reaction to competilll intellectual traditions of thetime; but it does mean that eYeD -mtanal" developments aDdexplication of problems already posed within Ibn cArabr,writinp tended to be formulated in tile ......aDd conc:eptstakeD over fro~ eldstioaf4llM/4I and 1uJI4m traditioDS. ThisprOCCSl is especially evident with commentatOR lite KasbInJwho came to Ibn cArabI not from a purely Sufi bacqround,but with extensive trami. in the philosophy (or tbeoiOlY) ofIbn SId aDd his fonowers. (The same path, of course, walso followed by SuhrawardI [nD. 14 and SS above}. whose

works whose publication has been promised by Dr.S. Ruspoli (a French translation and commentary ofthe MIft4J) G1uJyb ai-Jam C wtl-I- WujQd)'l and Pro­fessor William Chittick (a comprehensive study indud­ing a number of translations)." While awaiting thoselonaer studies, one can pin a first imprasioD of tbemajor themes and distinctive style of QOnaWi and hisschool-and of the original developments separatinahis approach from Ibn cArabrs-from an EnaJishversion of his short treatiJc (only 14 pqes in transla­tion), Mir~at aJ-cArifln [Reflection of the Awaluned.-Attributed to al-QiinaWl'."Tr. SAYYJD HASAN AsxAtl.pp. S9 + 48 pp. of Arabic: text. London: ZAHRA TRUST.

1981.]." The central themes alluded to here (so con­cisely as to be incomprehensible without lengthy com­mentary)-such problems as Koranic cosmology and

distinctively mystical thouJht and iasipts were likewiseexpressed in terms still so heavily AvicennaD that subsequentcommentators often took little DOte of the truly decisivediJrerences between the two perspectives.)

It is also importaDt to recopize that withiJlthis intellectualand historical context "IbD cArabi" (i.e.• the writi.. of thistradition of QGnawf aod his foDowen) ofteD came to be seenas a son of normative tbeoloJicaI ""representative"-as in themany controvenies discusled in n. S above-for a multitudeof enstilll Sufi orden and practices. inc:ludiDI many beliefsaDd tendencies that could scarcely be jUltiied or defCDdcd onthe basis of his own Sufi writinp. (Sec also references toattaeb by Ibn TaymIya aJMl IbD KhaJdiln throuahout the~ sections.)

61 This is a revised aDd abridp version of his doctoralthesis (Univ. de Paris IV, 1978), which also included a criticaleditioD of this major wort ot QUnawi.6. This work, ""teDtativdy titled~ Stars ofFailh,"is

mentioned in several of Prof. Chittick's recent studies ofaspects of QUnawi's thouaht, and will apparently includetraDIlatioDS of several important treatisa. In the meanwhile,

in addition to his articles cited above (n. 6S) and below (n. 71)•sec also ~r ai-DIn QlDawt on the Ooeness ot Beina...l1UtnuJIIOIIIII Philosophial/ Qututerly XXI (1981), pp. 171­84, and "1be Last Will aDd Testament of IbD cArabi'sForemost Disciple and Some Notes OD its Author," SopIritl

hrmnis 4 (1978), pp. 43-58.., The phrase ..attributed to al-QilDawI" men to tbe iDter­

estin. and historically sipificant f~ diJcuacd at IeD&th iDProf. Askari'. introduction, "... that from tbe twelfth cen­tury onwards both in Persian and Urdu (Twelver Shiite]circles, Miral ,-Arifin [ ic] seriously considered a workof Imam Husayn"(p. 3). While the book itself is undoubtedlyeither by Qiinawl or some later fipre in his school, this

756 JoumtII 01 1M Americtm 0rimIIlJ Sockly 106.4 (1916)

the degrees of existence, their reinteJl'ation in therealization of the ·Perfect Man" (al...i1uan aI-Until),and the ontological correspondences and distinctionsat each level of that Mcircle of being"-a~ all iDus­trated and analyzed in profuse detail in the longerworks of QOnawt and his followen, especiaJJy theinfluential line ofcommentatoR of the FUlfil al-1J1IuImthat continued throup Mu'ayyid al-Din JandT (d. ca.700/1300), cAbd al-RazzIq KlshinI(d. 736/1335), andOawtid Qaytarl (d. 751/1351).70 TOFther, these (our

attribution is itJelf a fascinatin. pbenomeDOn OR at least twocounts: (I) a it illustrates the remarkable pcnetratiOD of IbncArabi'. idea and vocabulary in all area of the eutem

Is1amic world (see n. 2 above); and (2) u it raises Itill virtuallyunexplored questions of the bKqround-or at least theuDdcaiabJe paraUdism-betwccn many of IbD cArabi's tllemes

aDd methods aDd those of earlier Shiite works, questioDlwhich are often applicable to the intellectual and philosophic

exprasions of Sufism more pnerally (see n. 13 above).The translator's DOtes and explaDatioDS of this text are also

a salutary illustratioD of the difliculties facina anycme whowisla to explaill the tethaical pbi!OIophie ....... aDdproblematic of Qilnawr and his sua::ason to contemporuyreaders (see nB. S6 and 60 above)-a prob1elD which in itselfpoints to the SVMtaDtial cliJl'ereaca between their writiDpand those of the Shaykh bimsell.

70 See B. 57 above for the most recent c:ontiDuation of thistraditioD (based on Qanarrs ·collllDelllUy") by a modemIranian student of these authors, and see n...9 for themultitude of intermediate links in this chain of writers on tbeFIqiq. Also worth ootin. is the fact that each of these four

figures-whose works demonstrate an originality andindepeudenc:e that mates them considerablymo~ thanme~ tAcommentators" in any limited sense-seem tohave determined the major themes aDd conceptionsthat pided the more theoretical teaching and under­studio, of Ibn cArabI (and, at Ie.t in much o( theEastern Islamic wo~ of Sufism m~ generally),through dozens ofsubsequent commentaries and moreindependent works, down to the present day. Anexcellent introduction to some o( their central commonthemes, and at the same time to their individualparticularities, is now available in two pioneeringcomparative studies by Professor Chittick, incorpora­tin, extensive translations from each of these authon:MThe Five Divine Presences: From al-Qiinawf to al­Qa~"and MThe Chapter Headinp of tile F~u.."71

&pres personally studied the text with his predecessor,bqinnina with Ibn cAnbI; referaaa:s in O. y~ His­loir~ • .. , Addenda A (I~ pp. 539-"'1).

11 The first of these~ which, • the author notes. islikewise about one esseatial aspect of Ibn cArabt'. BOliOD ofthe /1UM KDmiI. appeam1 ill 1'Ite MII$/Jm World LXXII(1982). pp. 107-28. ThiJ study is baled on the worb ofQDnawf and his students men Fnerally, aad thus brinp outthe importaDCC of the tbouabt ofhis other disciple al-FarabInJ,whose commentary on the NllpPf td-SuIUk • already a.c.tioDCCl (n. 63 above).

The second study, iJa the JOIImIII of 1M MuJ,yUJdin IbncArabt ~Iy II (19M), pp. "I-M. which includes remarksfrom each of these thiaken. is especially useful in suuestinatheir historical relations ofdcpendeDcy aDd oJiaiDality.

IBN cARABI AND HIS INTERPRETERSPART II (CONCLUSION): INFLUENCES AND INTERPRETATIONS

JAMES WINSTON MORRIS

INmTUTE OF IsMAIU STUDII!Sy PAaD

CoDCIudiDa our .urvey of major historical teDdeDcic:I in tbc interpretation aDd receptio of IbnCArtbi's writinp in various traditions of later Islamic tbouabt, as illustrated by recent traDllatiODIaDd related studies, this fiJIaJ leCtion deals with repraentati~ fiawa in the DlOI'e pbiIotopbie"school" founded by QOnawT (KIIbIDI, 1;1. AmulI, aDd mT); in mystical poeuy (JImI, clrlql, aDdothen) aDd philosophy (Mulli Slldrl aad his IUCCCIIOn); aad witb the more receot Sufi writiap ofcAbd aJ-QIdir aJ-Jazl>id, who recapitulates and intcpates many of tbclc traditiODl while retUl'llinsto the spiritual.ourca and inteDtiODI uderlyina Ibn cArabI's own wort and tew:bin.

IV [Coat.] CAB» AL-RAZZAQ AL-KlsHlNI (d. ca.736/(335) has almost certainly been the most widelyread (and cited) of these early interpreten of IbncArabI, to such an extent that much of the subseqUCDtdiscussion of Mlbn cArabrs· thought and doctrine"whether in the Eastern Islamic world or in the modemWest" can best be undentood as in fact a reference toKisbini's writinas cospcria11y where writas~ expound­ina what they take to be Ibn cArabi"s ·system" orphilosophic Mdoctrine" (e.... of wlll;ultlllll-wujiid).72 Inthis regard, the modem attribution to Ibn CArabT ofKishlni's TII:>wiliil III-Qur:Jiin is unfortunately usymptomatic as it is historically unfounded.7J Profes-

12 This is even true to a certain extent of T. lzuuu'sfundamental study of Ibn CArabI's tboupt, Sl{"um tmdTlIOism . .. (see Part I, D. 6 aboft), which, as tbc authorhimself streaes in the 1Dtrocluetion, is heavily Jdiant onKII~I'I commentary, usually citinl it at the same time asthe text of tbe Frqi4 tI1-J:likimr. (This is another illustration ofthe chanlcteriltic pedaaoP:aJ usefulocl. and iDtelltion ofKlIbInI's works, diJtulsed bdo. ill telatiOIl to his KoraniccoJDJDeDtaries.)

1) Altboup Prof. Lory, followinl Brockelmaan, remarbthat all the manuscripts of this work are attributed to KIIbInt(or ODe of the other variant fo.... of his name, such .."al-K.IshJ," etc.), Osman Yabia (Bistain ... , DO. 732 aDd724) does mentioD a few later manuscripts of this workattributed to Ibn cArabT (aloOl witb KllblDJ'. treatiK OD~> and~, OY DO. 723). However, it is ccnaiDJy true,.. P. Lory iDdicate:s, that the most recent modem publishenof tbis wort (in India, cairo, and Beirut) IIlUIt bPe beenprimariJy motivated by commercial coDlicleraliom in conlinu-

101

sor Pierre Lory's recent study of that frequcntlyreprinted work [UI ColfllnOllllirn elotlrique8 duCortm d'apre$ cAbd ar-RDzzaq aJ-Q4Ihibrr. pp. 111.

ins to affix "lbD CArabi's"name to the text. Some of tile moreimponant distiDctiODl between ~1IhIar. and Ibn cArabI'.respectiw approaches to the Koran are diKaac:d belo in thissection or. for Ibn cArabi, in IeVeI'81 earlier JNUU of this article• well.

Both Prof. Lory (p. 23) and O. Yabia (II, p. '"3, baed onKlsblnt's own autoaraph \el'lion of his work, attributed bylater librariaDI to Ibil cArabf) ftOle that cttWn IIWlUlCripu ofKlsbiDr. COlDIDeDtary go only • far .. Sura 32; tbc same faais DOled in H. Landoh's importaDt study of KIIhIDr. corre­.pondence with CAli.> aJ-Dawla aJ-Simnlni (discuaed at D. 80below), without any bypothesis .. to who miabt haw com­pleted it-possibly an immediate disciple, since readers do notseem to ha~ noticed any peat differeaca between the earlierand later sectioDi. ProfeAOr Landolt also points out (p. 36)

that the commentary on ItJIl aJ-F'lricrl NtlP'f tI1-SuliiIc usually

attributed to our author (in several printed editio. and inArberry'l traDllatioD of Ibn al-FIri4, see D. 63 &bow) is

actUally by clzz aJ-DIn M~Od aJ-UshInJ (d. 73S/1334­3S), best known for his widely read Pa'sian traDIlatiOD ofCUmar SuhrawardY'. famous Sufi manual cAwllrl/tU-MtlclIrif,

theM~ III-HiMyG. (The Mt,biIh, ndhcrthan Suhraw.-clr.ori&inal Arabic, was the bMis for Wdberforce Clarke'. stillfrequently rq»rinted partial EnaIish paraphrue ..TIte cAwlrlf­

u;)/-Mtl c4TIf," CaJcutta. 1891.) In the comext of this artide,the fld that this COllUDClltary OD Ibn aJ-F1ri4 hal for so Ion,paacd • the wort of CAW aJ-Razziq KiIJWlI is still anotherint.erestina sip of the remarkable peoetration of subsequentIranian Sufi thouabl by the conceptions aDd t.erminolOlY ofthis "school" of Ibn CArabL

102 JoUl7Ull of tM Anvrialn OrimltJI SociDy 107.1 (1987)

Paris: La DEUX <>dANS. 1981.] is not only an exceDentintroduction to the main outlines of KlshlDT'1metaphysics or "spiritual cosmology," but also a usefulillustration of those characteristic feamres of hiswritings and interpretations that help explain theirgreat influence OD later Muslim thinken, especiallyphilosophcn and theologians. (Ruden without accessto the Arabic can supplement Professor Lory's analysisof this commentary by referring to the carefully anno­tated partial tranalatioDl of M. VIIsan, or the summa­ries of certain sections in M. Ayoub's The Qur'jjn andIts Interpreters.)'·

Kllhtnrs work is in fact Dot so much a "ta'>w,f" inthe more specifically Sufi usqe of a profound andinevitably quite personal awareness of the immediate

14 Prof. Lory liva a briefrdereoc:e to M. Vilsan'. tramla­tioas, whicb are apin of coDlisteally biP quality and withextremely useful notes aDd explanations, in the Bibliogrwphy

(p. (67) at the end of his book; for fuU biosraPhical detailsand a CODlplete liItiq of the pauqa traDS1atccl, ICC thebiblioJrapby of all of Mr. VIIsaD'I writinp.. iDductiDI many

traDllatio.. from tbe:F~', discuaed in Pmt I, n. 27 &bene(the collected articles entitled L7Mi1m ~, ,. Fonclio" • RmIGuhum, ed. C. Gayat).

Prof. Mahmoud Ayoub'. work-VoL I (Albany, NY. SUNYPress, (984) coven sUral 1Il-1JGqtJr1l aad the~ but theItudy is to be exteDded to theen~Koran-c:u be used onlyfor a Focral notion of KilblDt'I interpretations, since it livesonly a paraphnuc or summary of certain aectio... AltboupProf. Ayoub briely mentions that Mit is more commonlybelieved" that tbis work is "by ODe of Ibn C Arabi's disciples•••C Abel aI-Razzaq aI-Qubani" (p. 6), be coadudes that-Wboever tbe author may be, the work clearly repraentl thetbou&bt aDd style of Ibn CArabi.to aDd then procaldI to cite "IbncArabi"-with DO further mention of Kisbini-throuaboutthe I'CIt of his study, indudina the index, bibliopapby, andkey to the sources. This practice-which bopefWl.y will becorrected in the second aDd subsequent volumes-is especiallyunfortunate not only because KisbinT is nol at aU representa­tive of Ibn cArabT'I"style" or ..method" of exqesis, and onlyto a very limited extent (for reaIOns outlined below in thisseelioD) of Ibn cArabrs ""tboujbt." More importam, far ftom~presentinl Sufi tbought at its biabeIt level of esotericexeaais" (p. 6), it is-a bshlnI bimlelf explicitly briop outin his Introduction (a. 75 beJow)-aa elementary wor~ forbqinners on the spiritual Path, with very limited pedaaoaicalaims, aDd tbcrefore is completely different in style aDd contefttfrom wbat one usually fiDel. (to take only examples in theframework of this article) in either tbe worb of IbD CARbY orthe more iDtiIIlate paIIIICI in cAbd al-Qldir's JltIWiqif(traaslatiODl d.iscuaed below).

spiritual implications ofparticular Koranic verses," ..it is the application to the Koran of • coherent

l' P. Lory pva a remarkably coadeDleclsummary of thesetypic:al featurea of Sufi "1Iermeneutics"at the bepnnilll of thisstudy (pp. 9-18), with appropriate emphasis on the funda­mental role of individul .piritual realizatiOD (p. 15) in aU theforma ofSufi exqeais-a dimension which makes it extremelydiffialJt to "1UJIlID&rizc"or systematize, even within tbe worksof a sinale autbor. However, be: does nOl draw the reader"sattention to the peat dearee to which ptecilely KllbIDJ'Icommentary tends to depart from tllia norm. (For a relativelyaccasible sampliDi ofsome more typic:aJ CaICI of Sufi ,.""r/­precilely in their radieaJ diwnity ofoutlook aod illlCrpmation-see tbe discussions of Rtlzbebln Baqn, NajmuddJD Kubri,SimnInr(n. 80 below], aDd others in H. Corbin'. TM Man ofU,h' in Irll1rllUJ Sufism, tT. N. Peanoa, Boulder a LoDdoa,1978.)

It is perhaps also indicative that Ibn cArabI himself rarelyuses the term III>wJI (which in his work can have a pejora­ti~ ICDIC of an "CIOleric" iJlterpretahon arbitrarily auaehedto a Koranic expression, with DO eaential iDDCf coDDCCtion tothe actual meanin, of the text), and that be: commonly UICI

the word 'II/.rrr-which, a P. Lory nota, wa ordinarily usedfor -exoteric," historical aDd pmm,'icaI commentaries­precisely for his owa spiritual undentandinl- This is only ODe

sip of Ibn cAnbY's broader metapbysical outlook. For him, inJCneraI, what we would ordinarily call the "spiritual" meanin,u precilCly the "literal" meanin. (u typitied in his character­istic Jinluistic, "etymotop:al"approKb to key Koranic terma~indeed" the -Reality" of the ~oran itJdf-in a sease whichinclude$, but is in no way reducible to, the sort of biatoricistand lepIistic·viewpoiDb (themleha "interpretationsj that

are unthinkingly accepted • the "obvious" meaniaa of thetext mo t of the time. This "Platonic" UDdentandinI of theKoran (and of rneIation iD ament) is in DO way reducible tothe sort of 1Ihir/W,in or 11Ift"/,."., 1 sc:bema implicit inKllblnrs approacb (and in tbe philosophic, Sua, aDd Shiitepenpectives he ultimaJe1y draws on). and cannot really be"'-up."-preciJely because that would imply that tbe:"mean­ing" were somehow reducible to a system or let of CODCCptl

somehow separable from tbe triad Koran-reader-Realitywhich &lODe is the matrix within which, for Ibn cArabY, thatmeanin& is ncceaariIy both manifested aDd perceived.

It is certainly true that KlihInI'. orb in JlCaeral (cf. on.74, 76, 78) are extremdy helpfuJ pcdqoaica.l tools, for thOlepreviously unacquainted with Ibn cArabl's outlook and termi­no!o&Y, in briD&inI out tome ofhis key cooceptI aDd technicalvocabulary. But the relation of these demaatI to the Sbaykh'sown orb can probably best be expreac:d u t.bat of aIfaDUIW' in relation to aU tbe riclmess of a livilll1aqua&e,botb spoken ud written.

Moaals; Ibn cArtJbi tmd his Interpreters, Pm II 103

metaphysical system, elaborated in all of his works,76based on elements from both Ibn cArabl's writinas andthe prevalent Avicennan school ofphilosophy in whichX.lshlnI himself was originally trained. The fint half ofProfessor Lory's outline of Klshlnrs system (chapters4-7) is a remarkably clear and readable summary of itsmetaphysical structure (the divine "Presences" and theontological levels of the divine Essence, Attributes, andActs) and its manifestations or expressions in cosmol­ogy, theology, and spiritual psychology. The secondhalf of his account (chapters 8-11) deals with Kishinrsapplication of this conceptual schema to more practicaland experiential aspects of the spiritual life, withregard to a representative selection of Koranic versesand themes (eschatology, morality, the religious Lawand its application, prophecy and sainthood, etc.)traditionally taken to refer to these issues in Sufiwriting more generally. The author's exposition through­out is aimed primarily at readers without much previousbackground in Islamic spirituality, and thus may wellserve (for that group) as an extremely useful generalintroduction not only to KishiJirs metaphysics, butalso to certain essential features common to manyforms of Sufism and their spiritual approach to theKoran. For example, Professor Lory's explanation in anumber of later chapters of the fundamental shift inperspective from a "moralistic" and historicist frame­work (in which Koranic categories and judgments an:viewed as applying to specific external groups andindividuals) to a profoundly and rigorously internalizedspiritual (or "ontological") understanding of thosepassages, is especially helpful in that regard.17

76 For a further, more detailed introduction to this system,as it was developed in KIshinI's famous commentary on theFU#iI a/-lJiJcam, sec T. lzutsu·s Sufwn tlIfd TQosim . .. (cr.n. 72 and Part I. n. 6), as wen as substantial segmentstranslated or summarized in the two articlcs of WilliamChittick on the commentators of the FUID1 cited at n. 71 ofthis review article. (The same conceptual system is alsopresupposed in Kishlnrs untrans1ated, but widely read worksmentioned at n. 78 below.)

71 In this regard, it should be noted that Prof. Lory's book isevidently intended not only as an introduction to Klshlnrsown thought, but also as a general introduction to certaincommon features of Sufi exegesis, as well as their relation toother forms of Islamic Koran interpretation (e.&-. in theauthor·s Foreword and the opening and concluding chapters).There is certainly a great need for such an introduction forstudents unable to read exemplary texts in the original Arabicor Persian, since the most alIequate modem Western-languagestudies of this subject (e.g.. P. Nwyia's Exige~ Coranique et

However, the relative clarity and simplicity ofProfessor Lory's book also reflect similar features in allof KlshiJifs own works-features which have to dowith both the form and the substance of that work, aDdwhich in some key respects are radically different fromwhat one finds in Ibn cArabrs Writings (or in many ofhis more purely Sufi commentators). Kishinrs Koraniccommentaries, like his other boots, are all clearlydistinguished by a thoroughgoing pedagogical concernand didactic procedure71 that is manifested in suchinterrelated characteristics as their rigorous systematiza­tion, the clarification and simplification of vocabulary(especially if compared with Ibn cArabI), and theconceptualization (often in an openly reductionist man­ner) of what were originally multivalent symbols.These tendencies are not merely stylistic particularities;they also reflect a shift in the content and underlyingintentions of Kishinl's writing (when compared withIbn CArabi) that brought him very close to the prevail­ing systems of Avicennan philosophy (especially intheir interpretations of the phenomena and claims ofSufism) and related schools of kalam-to such a

Ltmgllge Mystique [Beirut, 1970J and G. ~wcring's 1'1u!Mystical Yi.sion ofExistence in Cl4uictU hlmn: The Qur:>anicHerme1lftllia of the Sufi SDhl 111-TustiiTT [BerlinINew York,1980D probably presuppose more backgrOUnd than can beexpected from most beginning students. while the still fre­quently cited works of Goldziher and Massigoon are bothoutdated and extremely misleading on fundamental points.However, one may question whether most readers of thiswork will be able to readily distinguish where (as in chapters4-7, on the underlying "spiritual cosmology") KlsblDI"s viewsare relatively unique or representative only of this particularschool. and where (as in most of the latter chapters) hisapproach and presuppositions are more broadly typical ofSufism in general.

71 This particular intention is brought out very clearly in theIntroduction to Kishaors TQ:>wflOt, which is translated in fullhere (pp. 149-S3), where be clearly explains that his intentionis only to open up the possibility of a spiritual understandingof the Koran for those beginning Sufis who may still find thatdifficult (as he himself once did), and where he states that hewill avoid his more pcnooal (and possibly controveni81)understandings of many points. However, the same pedagog­ical approach and broader audience likewise seem to beassumed in his other extant writings, including his commentaryon the FU#lI (d. n. 76), on AnprI's Manazil tIl-S4:>iTin. andhis frequently cited Sufi lexicon (l11i/QJ.r4t QI-$iijiya), whichwas explicitly intended as a learning aid for readcn of thethree above-mentioned commentaries.

104 JounttIl of1M Ammctm 0rlMttI1 ~ty 107.1 (1987)

depee that their verbal formuJatioDi are sometimesvirtually indistiDpisbable.'"

The background of that teDdeney is at least partlyexplained by some rare autobiOJl8PbicaI remarb inKlihInrs famous letter to cAlI' aI-Dawla a1-Simnlntdefeodina his coaception of wtJ1)dm Gl-wujQd-a ....sage translated in its entirety here (pp. JS4-M) fromJImi's Naf~t fI1.CJnI'O-in which he explains that.

79 The permeation of Dlhlarl thouabt by Avicaman con­cepts and prauppositioDs (larJdy explicable by the bio....,.icaI dements mentioDCd at n. 80 below) is espcciaDy mdent iDhis psychololY aDd theory of intellection (e•.., pp.~2 inP. Lory's book), where his remarb could DO doubt be read bythe Aviceoaan pbilosopben ofms day.. simply a restatemeatof their own vicws. (This WM especially litdy since post­Avicemwa philosophic thouaht bad d~loped an explanationofSui pncIice aDd experience, buiIdiaI on hints ia Ibn S-mi"sK. tlI-J~6t, which paatc:d them a ccrtaiD validity, albeit at alower, pre-pbi1osophic level.)

While KlahlDrs adaptatioas of AviceJman thouPt canprobably best be UDdentood, on their own termI (aadjudBiDIby his own autobioaraPbica1 explanations, n. 80 below), as anattempt to explain the iDliabts of Ibn cArabI to Itudems witha phiiOlOphic badtJl'Ound, with the aim ofdrawiDa them iDtothe practical dons aca:ssary to realize the IDOI'C profoundintentioas of Ibn CArabt (aod Sufism more acoenUY), theyalso made it easy for sublequeat students to trat the Shaykh'stboupt as a purely intdIcctual and, u it were, -.atcmalive"philosophical system, with little or DO refemac:e to its experien­tial aDd pnctical presuppositions and ultimate am.... Here readen are referred to H. Landoh's much more

detailed daaaic study of this conapondence (iDdudinsSimnlDrs reply to KllhIDJ): "Ocr Briefwccbael ZwischenKIIIDI und SiJDDIDI Ober WlIJ.u/dt Ill- WuIfld," Dn 1$1imt,Band 50, J (1973), pp. 29-81, which briop out the &fOundsfor SimnlnI'. attack-which was an important souroe forlater critiques oC Ibn cArabi, such M tbat by Atamad SirbindT

(n. S, Part II), even if it was not euetly typical of Sufiattitudes at the time (~1IbIftI ftOtes [po 163] the approval ofIbn cArabT's theais by SimnIDt's own master, IsfarlyinI)-iafean for blamic "orthodoxy" (especially in reprd to the

pnctice of and IIdhereace to the bJamic: Law) in a situation iDwhich SimnIDt's conception of blam appeared quile con­cretely threateDed by other reJiaioDS or sects under the relativetoleraoce enforced by the Mongol rulers of the time. ForSimninT's own dramatic life aod politico-refilious role, seethe bibliosrapbic references in the same uticle (p. 37, n. 36),Prof. Landolt's introduction (pp. S-S2) to his edition of theCOf'r~$plrltwlk ofSimaIDIand lsfarlyiJlI(fehralllParis, Bibliotheque iranienne no. 21, 1912), the article ",cAlI)

al-Oawla al-SimnlnJ'" (by F. Meier) in E/2 (I, pp. 346-47),

a yOUIII man be reached the hiJbest depee of attain­ment in the study ofloJic and (AviceDnan) philosophy,befon: continuiDllpirituai cliSlatisfaction drove him toseek the company and JUidance of Sufi masters. It isnot 10 surprisina. then, that Klsblnrl worb oftenappear, at the very least, • a biIb1Y theoretiallsort of~lo8Y"of SufiaJn directed-whether as apologeticor protreptic-more towards convincinB readers with asimilar fa1MJfa or kaIam training (rather than thespiritual direction of already practicing Sufis); or thatoften his writing turns toward a purely conceptual,"rational" philosophic exposition in which only thebroader problems and technical vocabulary recall theinftuence of Ibn CArabi or other Sufi authon. Thislatter development, throop which selected themes andapproaches from Ibn tArabi'. works gnldually becameintegrated into the intellectual discourse ofa variety oflater philosophic and theological schools, is especiallyweD illustrated in the rec:ent reprint of S. Guyard'stranslation (and Arabic edition) of K.llblnI's R. fitl1-QGf/;f> Wtl tJl-QadIu [Traite SlIT 111 PridutiNltion etIe libre arbitre, prkldJ • q&l/Utl1Ue htlditlu. Introduc­tion (and supplementary material) by G. 1...EcoNTE.pp. 114 + 25 pp. of Arabic text. Paris: SINDBAD/EDI­

TlONS OmENTALES. 1978.],11 which (despite the limited

and the additional aoun::a on the KubrlWlya order andhistorical context at this time in DD. 33 aod 39 of Put II.

Within the penpcctive of this article, Klahlnrs letter is

especially lipificaDt in explaiDina (a) the early reception ofIbn <ArabI's tboualat (once apia. in the fonn of the Frqiq) iDIranian Sufi cin:Ica primarily M a form of-mystical theology"­especially on the question of w~ 411-wujUd-6llinI awidely-felt Deed for a more adequate intellectual defeuse (ordescription) of the metaphysical claims of the exiJtiDI Sufiorden, aod (b) the pervasiveness of Avimman conceptions(whether understood as tbeo1o&Y or philosophy) in tbe intel­lectual trainina oftbe time (see nn. 79, SS-S6, and 64-66). Onthe last point, especially, I'rof. Landolt·s article (pp. 33-36)adds a Dumber of indispeDaable explanations (bioanPbica1details, etc.) to the list of names of masten supplied by

Kishlnt, iDc1udini the fact that the philosopber-scientistQu~b al-DJn al-8bJrlZI (d. DD. J4 and 64 above) JhJdied withKllhInI"l own Ipiritual master U a yOUDI man.I. The systematic scope of this treatise can be measured by

consultiDl o. B. MacDoaald's article "CAbeI aI-~aI-~iIbInt, .. reprinted in the E/2 (1, pp. 88-90>, which isJaraely an cxteDlive summary of iu CODteDts. baled on S.Guyard·1 translation and edition. The editor of this reprintededition bu added a helpful introduction placina ~lsbInrs

ideas iD the larger context of Iba cArabJ~ tboupt, with anumber of merences to the FutiiJ,il1 and the FflIIlI, M well

lOS

title) actually recapitulates the broad outlines of hisdiJtiDctive metaphysical system. In this respect, Kishi­nI is probably the best-known (ifby no means the mOltprofOUDd) .epreseDtatile of this major inteUectuaI ten­dency in the treatment of Ibn cArabt's heritage in laterIslamictbouah~~D8his philosophic aDd theologicaldefeoden and critics alike.a}

Whether one happens to view this transformationpositively or negatively, the distance separatiDa Kishi­Drs approach ftom that of Ibn I';Arabt-iJlltyle, COD­

tent, audience, aDd ultimate iDtentions-1taDds outdramaticaUy wbeD one compares their writinp OD

almost any issue. To tate one of the most strikingexamples, the related problems ofescbatoiOlY, resurrec­tion, and the afterlife, Profeaor Lory dearly pointsout (pp. 107-21) how for KlsbInT-who in his interpre­tation follows the understaDding both ofearlier philos­ophen and many Sufi writers (d. Nasafl above) aswell-k ••• the Resurrection is that "instaat' in whichthe encounter of the atemporal (of the metaphysically"timeless') and historical duration shatters the latterwhile revealing to it its own true nature" (p. J20). Butwhile that formula (and the insight and experience itconveys) surely corresponds to at leut one importantfacet of Ibn I';ArabT's eschatology, taken by itself itcould also lead, as frequently seems to be the cue withKlshlnt, to a son of allegorical m1uetiOD of thecomplex symbolism of the Koran and I}tulrth to asingle (or at most twofold) plane of refen:ace, and evenpotentially to an implicit denial of any meaningful"survival" of the individual soul, with its wide range of

a translation (apin by Mr. Leconte) of a c:oJJection of 4M)

/;IIId1th from the RW14I by the jurist al-QayrawinJ, uitended toshow the doJID&tic Nortbodoxy· of the Sufi position (here

identified with XlshlnJ). While these texts are fascin-tinS inthemselves and help to brina out the traditional IslamicbactsroUDd of Klshlnl's (and Ibn cArabI'S) positions Oil thisiuue, it is perhaps worth noline that the positions on tbisquestion-whether from the standpoint of~Ihaud Koran,fUlh, ulam, aDd Sufism, aJDODI others-are not quite •simple u the editor miPt imply, siDce this panicular problem

Utlbr and qiu/Qr) bas aenerated *monumental literature ineach of those domains, extenclins from the first Wamiccenturies down to our own day.

12 To take only his -defenders" or later interpmen in thescbool of Ibn cAnbI mentiooed below. he is frequeotly citedby ~aydaTAmun. JIJDI, Ibn Abl lumbar. Ibn Turb, MuIlI~rI (who. followina JImt, diJcusses the correspondencewith SimnInJ at Ieqth in hiI K. tJl-A$fIT __Arbee.), and a

Dumber of the IaIer Iranian thinken included in the Anllrol­ogw . .. ofS. J. Asbtiyint aDd H. Corbin (n. 3. Pan 11).

possibly serious practical consequences (both penon­ally and politically). By contnst. in Iba cArabt (e.&-,FutfJJ.r4t, c:bapters 60-64 aDd 371, for the most extendedKCOuots of acbatololY), what must strib aDy readeris the consistent and thorough ""literality"-an attitudeequally removed from Klsblnrs ""symbolic" approachand from what we ordinarily think of. -literalism"­with which the Shaykb treats the profuse descriptionsgiven by the :Koran and /;uu:lrIJa, his extraordinaryrespect for each concrete detail in the -..iminl" and""location"of the stagea ofman's poll-mortem existence(his ongoina development and spiritual experience inthe 1HIrziIklt or -Ieuer Resurrection," then the events ofthe Greater Resurrection, then the many facets ofGehenna, the Garden, aDd the beatific Vision).ll When

IJ (See a1rady the clileuuioft of Ibft cAtabT·. broader attitudetoward the ~oran and 1}tJd1llt in Part I aud at nota 10 aDd 7S,Pan II.)

In metaphysical terms, ODe could say that the difference

turns especially on their ditrerina conceptions of what IbnCAnbY calls 1chtqIl, in boda its cosmic dimension, on many

planes of beins (indudina the "material" world); and itsmacroc:osmic, human maDifatations (where ""im"linatioll" isboth a weak and mialeadinlequivalent, since it UDderIies mostof the phenomena-DOl merely the NrdiaiOUS" or imqinal

of experieace in JeIICIlI1). For a more CODCI'de example, onecan compare Ibn CArabrs tttatmeDt of the esdwoJoaicalmaterials of Islamic tndition with that of GbazIJI in hisDuntll tll-FIkltirtlfl KMJ; cUIilm tll-AkJrinl (1M Pr«iotaP«Ul: tI TrlllVllUkJftfrom 1M Anlbk. tr. Jane Smith, Missoula,MODt..I919[DOt to beconfaled withJIDiI+s DurTIlt aJ-Fakhir.

hose translation and edition are discuued belowD, whoserestricted rhetorical intenIions and UDderpinniDp-more orlas aimed at Nfn,btenina" the Ctlwimm into carryin, out

their reJilious duties-an clearfy outlined in Ghazllrs morephilosophic writinp (d. n. 13, Pan m. It is precildy therelative separation of-ethical.. and -intellectual" (or spiritual)

planes of meaDiq and inteftlion-and the c:onscquent division

of types of writiJlS and tadainS- hieh ObazIIJ took ovnfrom tile Avicennan philosophy of his day that is called intoquestion by Ibn cArabl's metaphysics aud his distinctive

understandiJII of propbeq and revelation in all their dimen­sions. (The same fundamental role of lMy4l for Ibn cArabi

likewise seems to underlie bis cryptic rapoDIC. in his famousfint encoWder with the noted philosopher Ibn RUlhd [Aver­roes). to . qUCltion wbethcr the wer-to a mysteriouslyIInnameet probJem!-achieYc:d by illumination and inspirationwu the same u that provided by rational inquiry: ·Yes 'andno. Between the yes and the no. spirits take their ftiabt fromtheir matter and heads are separated from their bocIieI." Seepp. 41-42 in the EqIisb tnmslation of H. Corbin's CrwIIM

106 JOUTIIIIl 01 1M Americlm OrimMl Soclet, 107.1 (1981)

this characteristic procedure is combined with IbncArabr, repeated vivid delcriptioDl of his own (or otherSufia') personal visionary experiences aDd encounterswith many dcceuecl individuals (cartier masten, pro­phets, etc.) in the other world (btuza/ch), it is relativelyeasy to lee that his own constant-and highly problem­atic, not to say diJconcertina-insistence on the pri­mary role ofk4.tJif(immcdiale experiential-UOvcilin.iand the concomitant limitations of abstract, formal~reasoning" (ctlql) have been substantially altered, ifnot indeed reversed, in Klshlnl's far more soberphilosophic perspective."

At the same time, it must be stressed that Klsblnr.relatively conceptual treatment of Ibn cArabI'sl)'mbols(or rather, ofbis pcnonal experience and re-expressionof the data of the Koran and J.uu/fth, in 10 manydomains) represents only one typical strand among IbncArabt', later interpreten. One cannot help but bereminded again of the similar diversity of approedles inWestern civilization to Plato's dialogues, according tosubeequent readers' cmplwea on his myths, psycbolOJ)',ontolOl)'; cosmology, logic, and 10 forth. The fecundityof Ibn cArabi's writing and his richness of expression(and possibilities of interpretation) are certainly com­parable, even if their later creative development is stillfar less known to us. Continuing beyond KlshInI,students can pin some notion of those alternative lines

l~ ill 1M $iifum of Ibn f;Artlbr, PriDcetoo, 1969; amore complete traaslatioo of the same paIU&Ie, from theFutilI}at. I, 1S3-SC, can be fouod in Asln PaJaciO$' L 'b1iJm~ [trauslabon dilcussc:d in Part I]. pp. 30-31.)

M Some of the gounds of the difl'erina outlooks of Ibnf;Arabt aod Kllblni have been disc:uacd in scaenJ termI innotes 1S and 83 aboft. Still another typiaaI example ofKIIhtnra auimilatioo of Ibn f;ArabI's ideas to Avicennannotions is in his treatment or COIJDOlol)' (= Prof. Lory'sstudy, pp. ~S9), where the various co-equal aDd concomitantdements of Ibn cArabT's CQlmoJoay-discusscd briely in PutI in tbe context of a translatioo of D. GriI-are transformedinto dqrces of ·proareuive particularization" (p. 54), with-Prime~. the lowest level

It should be added that Dlhlni"s approach was not

necauriIy typical of otla colDllleDtaton and interpreters oflbo cArabt Somethina of the clistinctiftDeu of his approach(in an tbe ways 01ltliDed above) coma out more clearly. forexample. wben it· contnlted with mrs much more faithfulcommentary on Ibn cArabt"s RUaItlt IIl-AnWiIT discuuecIbelow. mI'. relative faitbfuIneu to tbe Shaykh's JanauaaeaDd inteatioDl can be plainly seen, e.... in his dilcuslion (pp.121'.) of Ibn cArabt's aIhIsions to the stqes and realities of thenen world.

of interpretation by referring to relatively acceuiblcworb by Haydar AmuJT (d. 787/1385) and CAWa1-KarIm a1-mT (d. 8OS/14(3), both litewilc comlllen­tatOlS ofthe Fr.qlq, but also independent and importantthinken in their own riaht.as

The three works by }Jaydar AmulI edited byH. Corbin and O. Yahya (and at least partially acces­sible to non-Arabisa in Professor Corbin's Frenchintroduction and related stUdies) have a considerablehistorical aDd an intrinsic interest, even if AmulI'simmediate influence in Islamic thought seems to havebeen relatively limitc:cLN To begin with, they are anexcellent illustration of those general features which, aswe have already noted, characterize most of the later,more "scholastic" and theoretical treatments of IbncArabT's thought: the relative concentration (amonlthe Shaykh', own works) on the Frqfq aJ-IJiIuIm, thedeterminant role of the commentaries of Qayf&d andKishlni, and the centrality of the complex of problems-at once philosophic, theological, and mystical­summed up in the controvenial formula of the "Unityof Being" (wcrhda' tI1-wujQd).'''

More important, however, these books have certainqualities which might recommeocl them more partic­ularly to modem t'Cadcn, if only tbey were betterknown. To begin with, both the masaive K.. Jami C

al-ARM wa Manba::J aJ.Anwifr and the much shorterR. Ntlqd al-NuqUd fi MaCri/at al-WujQd printed

IS Their line is contiaued by audI fipra as 11m1 (d.898/1492), MuIIl SadrI. ad a number ofother leu renownedthinkers who are briefty mentioned below (e.I.• at n. 91)... The relative rarity of manuscripts of AmuJr'l works

(compared with authon lite K1sblnt, Qlnawi, or JilI) JCeIDS

tore~ not so much the intrinsic qualities of his thOU8hl u

the restricted nature of his oriPW audience-primarilyTwelYer Shiite tbeololians-and his pioncerin. status ind~endinl the writiDp of Ibn cArabr in that context. (He •

&monl the authOR cited by the later Shiite writer Ibn AMJumhOr [lee the article of W. MlMleJunl at n. 39. Put II). wholikewise attempted to assimilate Ibn cArabt·. penpectiva inthe Shiite theoloPca1 context.) For a tentative listina ofAmutt" worts and extant manUKripts, lee espc:cially theintroductions to his JilmiC IIl-Asr. (fuD refereDCa in textbelow).•, The indexes to the Jimic til-b. and NtIqd IIl-Nuqiid are

especially revealiDa of the Ieadina role of UIhInIand Qanadin detmnioin, Amun's conception of Ibn cArabl's -Philo­sophy." The same -school" seems to have been equally

inftuential in his later COllUlJeDtary 00 the Frqiq (NiIIItU-NIqUI . •. ). to juclae by the refereocea in his Introduction(the only pan so far edited; ICle n. 90 below).

107

with it ["fA phi/o$OP~ $hrc;u." Ed. H. CouINet O. YAHYA. pp. 832 (Arabic introcluctioD~ texts,and extensive indexes) + 76 pp. French introduction.Tehran IParis: BIBLIOTBEQUEWNIENNI!, n· 16. 1969.1'are mainly devoted to explaining lOme of Ibn C;ArabT~s

key cooc:epts (aDd their pncticaI, cxpericntial Piesupposi­tions) to readen who are not UIUlIled to be familiarwith his worb, an especially di1IicuJt daalIenae thatmust obviously be faced by any contemporary writeron these subjects. ~ a result, Amun's dilc:ussioDS~

while no doubt lacking the philosophic subtlety andcomplex technical vocabulary of the clauical wortsdirected toward "specialists" (QaytaJ'l, KIIhInT, Jr~etc.), are likely to be considerably clearer and more~ble to readers approaching these issues, at leastin their Islamic form, for the fint time. This pedagog­ical interest is amplified, at least in the Jllmic lll-A6rar­a work of Amuli's youth, written soon after his"convenion" to Sufism in the form of Ibn cArabI'steachinp-by a reveaIin& penonal openness and direct­ness, an unconcealed autobiographical dimensionwhich is relatiYeJy rare in Islamic literature in general,and certainly in most works of this school. Thispcnonal aspect is especially visible in AmulI's impas­sioned attempts-which provide the justification andframt\1Vork for the book-to coaYinoe bis mostly hostileand suspicious Twclver Shiite colleagues and friends(in the holy cities of Iraq where he was writing) of theultimate unity of Ibn 'ArabI's Sufi path and theinsipta and teaehinp traditionally attributed to theearly Shiite Imams."

II The importaDCe of Osman Yahia'llonl Arabic introduc­tion to this volume for the entire history of the commentariaaDd reception (critical. well u favorable) of the F"'IiItd-{liJulm bas almwIy been mcntiooed at n. S, Part II.

Relldcn unable to coDlU1t the Arabic texts in this volumewill fiDeI an exc:el1etlt brief introduction to Amulrs meta­phyUcal thouJbt, bued IarFly on both the worb edited

there, ill Toshihiko Izutlu'l article on Wfbe Baic StnlCtUre ofMetaphysical Thoqbt in Islam,,. DOW most readily accasiblc

in FreDCh translation ill the collection of his Clays entitledUrdll « 1"ExU1aI« ~t Crltuion hrpItwlk m Myst;qwI&ltmtiqw (paris, Lcs Deux 0c:Qm, (980), pp. 9-47 (lee alsoDo 14, Part 11).., Thil latter point daena IOIDC further amplification,

since Professor Corbin·. introduction fOCllla on the -meta·historical" or pbilosophic 1IDity (a perceived by Amun and afew otbeI' relatiftly rare Shiite scholan) between Sufism aDdShiiam, but does not stress the real Irbloriall difticultiaAmuII (and his lucc:euon; see Do 91 below) eDCOUIlten:d intryiua to conviDce their fellow Shiites of the valictity of this

The leCoDd volume edited by Corbin and Ymy&, theJODI introduction to Autun'. commentary on theFrq;q II1-Qilulm [NtIR IIl-Nrqiil/f SlwuI;IIu-FUIiiII "uT~xl~ .$ T~xt~$." Ed. H. eoaBIN et O. YABYA.

pp. 547 (text) + 77 pp. FreDCh introduction and 80 pp.Arabic introduction. Paris/Tehran: Bau01'llllOOl laAN­JENNE, n· 22-21. 1975.fO written in his old ap, is stillmarked by his Twelver Shiite convictions on the

conc:eption. In fact, AmuIr. UlUJDeIlt is a1moIt entirely

intended to explain Ibn cArabI'. outlook to Shiite reli&iOUI

scholars (whose trainiDa was traditionally in Shiite I)«/1Ih,fiqh, and 1uIJbJ tbeoIo&Y) and to convince them of the

superiority of Sufism and iu related lpiritual pnctices. in theform expressed by IbIl cArabt, u the proper aDd uniquely

effective way to .... p tile tnae intentions aDd meaninas of the

talChinp of the early Im8IDI-which AmuII uDdentands •another spiritual -Path,. {IdrJqllr), Iharin& many of the key

penonalitics (e.I., CAli and Jacfar~ also found in

many Sufi chai of initiation. The ork is ItOt devoted (aaclhere the FrmdI title may be lIIIiDteDboaally irODic) to defend­

ina ShiiJm to non-Shiite Sufis. for example; Amu1I comis­tendy writes from the penpectWe of the directly experiencedTruth (~.) uDdertyiaa thae IIDd many other reliaioustraditions. and does DOt attempt to circumlcribe the uniwnalimport of Ibn cArabt'1 mer. In that liaht, it is cuy to

uDdmtand the relative hOstility (or perhaps mon: oftensimple indifference) wbidI WM the usual derical reIpODSe tosimilar attempts by AmuJI and his IUCCeIIOn.

Historically spcakiJJ& the cfl'orts 01 AmuJJ mel RICh TwcMr

Shiite scholars u MuDa $adrl (or in our own clay, S. J.AshtiylDI: ICe n. S7, Put II) to brilll out this uniftJ'Ulspiritual dimension of Shiite tradition (almost always underthe direct or indirect inftueDc:e of Ibn cArabT) have usually­with the poaible exception of certain teacben ill QajarIran-remaiDcd at best somewhat maqiDal in theeycs ofthcvat JUjority of the Twdftr c:w.ma', and often IUbjec:t tobanasmeIlt Or even open persecution u a suspect heresy. (The

typical case of Mulli $adrl aDd his attempts to ~. the

profound inftueDce of Iba cArabI, in his more popular writinp,is detailed ill our traDllation ad introduction to his 17teWuJo", 01 1M Tlrrone •.. , Princeton, 1911.) Without anawarenas of this historical bIlctarouDd. more recent cIevdop­menta in Twclftf SlWsm milbt appear somewhat aaomaloUl,rather than .. heina the cootinuation of Ouaoinl aDd deepIy­rooted tendeocies.

,.. This edition docs not include Prof. Yabya'i cxtenIiwiDdeuI mentioocd ill the French introduction (_ the projectedpart 2 of this volume in the -Bibli~ue iranielmej;apparently they have not yet been publilbecl. An especiallyintereltiq feature of this text are Amun'. many circular

diapams UICd to illustrate upedI of tbc doctrine of~t

108 JoUTIIIII of tM Ammc4II 0rimt1l1 ~ty 101.1 (1987)

question of wa/8ytJ (which may have accounted for itsrelative aep:et by sublequent non-Shiite authon), butis instead an advanced, philosophically elaborate trea­tise, aimed at other hiahlY trained students of IbncArabr, discussing all the key themes of the FUIilI fromthe threefold standpoiat of IUlqI (1}tIdrth aad Wamictradition), clI'Il (the dialectic -reason" of later kaIamaDd Avicennan philosophy), aod kiuhf (the directexperiential realization of the Sufis). Amulrs explicitcomparatiw analysis of tbae three dimensions (atonce of intellectual fonn and spiritual method), whichare inextricably interwoven in Ibn cArabra own writ­ings, is a typical feature of virtually aD subsequentcommentaria and discussions or his taebinp-atleast when some attempt was made to explain ordefend them to pbilolopben and theol()JiaDs outsidestrictly Sufi circles.'1

cAbd al-Karim aI-.mt(d. 832/1428) was undoubtedlyboth the most original thinker and the mOlt remarkable

tIl-WIIjDdaod ttljMtiylt, wbicb are CODliderably more elaboratethan thole aiYCD by Iba CArabl iD the FUllll,lt.

A phyaicaJ indication of the extent (and relative pbilolophiciDdeJ'C!*oce) oftbis tnditioll ofI6C0111IDODtar,.' OIl the FIIIiIIby this time can be aIe&DCd from the editors' remark that anedition of the first half of AmulT'. 8CtUal commentary (theonly part now available in maaUlCript) would have takea fouror he volumes the tizc of this -IntroebIctioo- (547 pp. ofArabic text alone)." See tile very .imiIar aaalysil of tNJ"dIIt tIl-wujIMJ ad

related themea, in contrut with the Avicennan philosophicaacI bam .taaclpoiDta, by another, 'li&btly I.ter TwelverShiite writer, $a>jn al-Dfa Turb Isfahlnt (d. ca. 83~ A.B.) inbit T..mJd .,.g.w~[ed. S. J. AIhtiyIDt 274 pp. + 6 pp.EnaU.h iDarodudion by S. H. NMI'. Tehran, 1976.]. This wasaD important tuchiaa text in IaIeI" Iraoiu pbilolopbic cin:IeI,• iDcticated by the &Jolla by 19th and early 20th ceDtury

tneIitionailraniu philolopben iDCluclecl in this edition; theirrole is aplaiDed in the editor's JeDathy PeniaD iDtroduction(III pp.). T'bia IbD Tura...,pareatly the IOn orJfUdsonof $adr al-Drn Ibo Turta, another Twle¥er .cbo!ar "coo­verted- to the Sufism orI_ cArabT, no. RUAIfrill- WIIjfidtll-MU/1iIq is cited by AmulJ bimself in the J6mlc td-AsrIT,pp.496-97.

Another .ucceaor in this hierarchical resolutioa of the

penpectiva of taIam, plailolophy, and Ibe cArabI (repre­sentinl Sufism more acneraUY) is the Shiite thinker lbo AMJumbOr (d. &me 9th1 15th cmtUIY), whole views iD bit majotwork, the K. tIl-MujlIare outliDed in W. Madeluaa's "Ibn AbIGumbOr al-A~=n SyothaiI of~ PbiIoIopby aDdSufism-(ICe Do 39, Pan II), wbidl alto meatioDl • fonhcominaarticle OR IbD AbtJamb in the~ to the Btl. (This

article, tint praented in 1976, does DOt mention the poaible

aud independent mystical writer amona the figures wehave discuaed in the "school" of Ibn cArabl (or ofQOnaWl). lodeed the sort of derivative relationshipimplied by that expression is quite milleedilll unIeawe undentand their relation as comparable, (or exam­ple, to ProcJus' position vil-l-vis Plotinus.f1 For, haviDacompletely assimilated the teacbiap and writings ofthe Shayth (aDd his earlier collUDentaton), nil pro­ceeds to develop the same broad themes (metaphysica,cosmololY, spiritual psycboloJ)', etc.), but with anoriJinality aud independence which is consistendygrounded-like Ibn CArabrs-ia his own piritualinsight and experieacc. These distinctive qualities,which are especially strikina wben let apiDat therelatively geater theolOJica1 and philosophic emphasisof most earlier (aDd 1a1er) writen ill this school, nodoubt helped account for the wide diffusion and accep­tance of his writinp amon. Sufis from Muslim India(where .nJTtraveled) to the Ottoman lauds.') However,that same riclmea and depth of implicit references

lina of COnaec:bon with the eartier worb or ~. Amuh aDd11m Turk&.)

Comparative wor~ aIoq Iimilar IiDa by the poet­philosopher JImJ aod by MulJI Sadri are dilculled in the

IeCtion on JImI below.n The ana1o&Y in this CalC is particularly stroDl because one

of the importaDt features of mrs indc:pm:teat pbiJolopbiccontribution, • with Procl.. and suhlcquent Neoplatonilts,baa to do with his subtle anaJyIiI ud muJtiplicatioa ofdistiDctioDi conClCl'DiDa the -intermediate- coaditioaa aDdItatcI of beiDa; see, for example, E. Buaerth, -0. 8ucb der40 Stufen von CAbei a1-~adm a1-lmt,"~MAU­~ ., W"1UeIUdttIftm. phiJoio,um-hUtorUdw KJa.230, no. 3 (J 9S6). cAbei al-QIdir a1-JazI~iJf'.defeme of IbncArabI qaiDIt lOme of mrs "'iDDovatioDs- or clUpeementloa certain points is cliIcaIIed by M. Cbodkiewicz in theIDtrocluetion to his traDdatioDl from the M"""""(tbe tmuspiriluelr dilcuucd at the CIId of this article), pp. 31 and 189.t) For mr. trawll .. life. ICe the artide by HeJbDut

Ritter, MCAbd al-Kadm al-DjIIt'" iJa Ell, I, p. 11; the importaaceof tile Yemen in .nn'l life mniDds us of the IIiD virtuallyunkDown Itory or the IICCqUDCc &lid development of IbncAraIIJ'. inaueDce there (a subject evoked only bridy at theeDd of A. Atq'. article in the EJ2). Some idea of the spread ofhis ideas &lid writiDp, espccWly in sabtcqUCDt TurkishSufism, can be pthered from the locatioaa of manuscriptslisted in Brockelman. GALS II, pp. 283-84, peI-for.nn'scomlllClJtariel OR acvera.I ofIba cArabJ's worb-in O. Yabia'.HUtoir, ...•

The IDOIt accaIible popuJar iDtroduction to Jm is probably

ItiII that iDdIIded iD R. A. NicboltoD'. SIIMlIa ill IMtuIIkM,me;., (Cambrid~1921; repro 1967), cbapter II.

109

<aaain comparable to the later Neoplatonists), whichpose such a dilemma for students in most domains oflater Islamic cult~ are a formidable obstacle formodem students and traDllators-a fact which mayexplain the limited availability of his writinJS in anyWestern lanauaae.

TItus Burckhardt's partial translation of the opening,metaphysical chapters of mrs K. Gl-I1Ul1n al-Kbnil[De I"HomlM~l. pp. 101. Paris: DEavy-LlvRES.1975 (1st ed. 19S3)./ English tr. (from the French) byA. CUUIIE-SEYMOUR. UniwrMd Man. pp. 93. Sher­

borne, UK: BESHARA PuBLlcAnONS. 1983.], with itsextensive introduction and careful treatment of philo­sophic vocabulary (including an excellent glossary),has been a classic introduction to this dimension ofIbn cArabY's tboupt for many yean. However, thetranslator's intentionally limited selection of topicsand particular pedagogical intention-both carefullyacknowledged in the opening sections" necessarilylead the uninitiated reader in a direction almost theopposite (at least historically speaking) of that actuallyfollowed by the author; it ia very difficult, unless thereader is already quite familiar with Ibn CArabi and hisearlier commentators, to see how Jili is actually usingtheir concepts and terminology in an independent,creative fashion to develop and express new insights andoriainal ideas." A relatively complete and appropriately

,. This wrsion, a the translator strases, coven omy rouablyy. of the total wort, and is not entirely complete: even for tbechapters that arc included. The translator Jives a carefuloutline of tbe chapter beadinp of the rest of the book,but-as often with both Ibn cArabt and many of his laterinterpreters-an outline does not really sugest the likelihoodof such discussions .. those mentioned in n. 95 below.Readers of .mT's work, not to mention translators, arecertainly not aided by the state of the available printed texts,where it is clear that the editorIprinter hu himself often notbeen able to follow tbe diJcuaion.~ In Jill's case, the almost universal problem, for modern

students and translators of later Islamic thoupt, ofwidespreadiporancc of the distinct traditions of later killam and Aviccn­nan philosophy (already cited at nn. 55-56 aDd S9--a», Part II)is further compounded by his creative devdopmmt of IbncArabY's own tceImical terminolOl)', which also umes aconsiderable acquaintance with the Shaykh"s writinp in gen­era), especially in his more complex metaphysical cliIcussions.

This is not always the case with Jl'1l, a iDdica'cd by twofasclnatin, brief excerpts from the K. ai-I'" al-Dmil (fromlater chapters than those included in the Burckhardt transla­tion). which are readily accasible in the EnaJish tranIlation ofH. Corbin's SpiriIutIl Body tIIUl QkstitllFAr~ (tr. N. Pearson,PriDceton. 1977), pp. 148-63. (The fint selection concerns the

annotated translation of such a work, difficult thatmipt be, could help transform many widespreadmisconceptions concerning this whole current of laterIslamic tbouJbt.

In the meanwhile, readers can find an exceUent,eminently tadabIe illustration ofthese distinctive qual­ities of JitI'a work in the recent partial translation ofhis commentary on Ibn cArabT's R. al-Anwlr [JOUI7Je}'to the Lord ofPower. Tr. R. T. HAUlS. pp. 116. NewYork: INNEIl TaADmONS IN1'EaNAnONAL. 1981.]."What is remarkable about that commentary, in com­parison with the works by authon discussed earlier inthis section, is its consistent, unmistakable reference todirect experience of the realities in question, not just asa premise of the discussion, but as its very rai30n d'ltre..nu, like Ibn cArabI and unlike 10 many of his othercommentatoR, is careful here to raise questions of"theoryW or intellectual explanation as they naturallyarise within the context and ultimate aim of spiritualrealization-not as they are generated by extraneousapologetic concerns, or by an internal intellectualdialectic taken as an end in itself. The result, aided byhis frequent references from appropriate passages ofthe FutDJ,at aDd other orks of Ibn cArabi, is a trulySufi commentary (not 10 much a philosophic or theo­logical one), grounded in terms acc:essible to any reader

favorite Sufi theme of the -men of III-A c,rlcf. Koran 7:468'.),the second a mystical encounter with the initiatic figure ofKhip".) Without already knowing that Ji1I wa their author,it would be difficult to imaaine that these pusages are dra nfrom the same book as the earlier ~hapten traDllated byT. Burckhardt." The excerpts from JDi's commentary here coven 33

pages, venus only 24 Pa&a for the aaua1 translation of IbncArabr. text. (Aim Palacios' earlier tranIlation of the I8.IDC

text was diJcuased in Part I above.) This English vcrRon alsoincludes a helpfuill-p. Jloaary (includin, aplan tiODI ofbiographical references to cartier Sufi authors), bile theon 81 a whole-iftCludina the introductory material by two

contemporaryJe~Sufi lhaykbs-reftects the great esteemnn lonl enjoyed in Ottoman (by no means exclusively1"urkishj Sufi cirdes. a phenomenon also indicated by themany manuscripts of his oft. found in libraries in thatrqion (n. 93 above).

Althoup the tra.DIlatio in this wort are nOt by ascholarly specialist, any IhortcomiDp in that regard (e.z.,technical terms not always clearly explained ucb. mcreDCeSand allusions not always identified) are more than COUDter­

bal-need by the translator", obvio care for tbe ~larity andreadability of the fiDal vcnion-a fundamental co iderationthat is unfortunately not always so apparent in the availabletr latio in this area.

110 JOU17IIIl olllw Americtm Orinrtlll Society 101.1 (1987)

wiIlin, to foDow the spiritual proareuion underlyin,Ibn cArabY's exposition in this work. (The same distiDc­tive qualities arc likewise evident in the translationsfrom CAbd al-Qldir a1-JazI'itt discussed below.)

v. Althouah cAbd al-Rabmin al-JImI(d. 898/1492)could quite justifiably be considered a major fiaure inthe~bool" of Ibn cArabYand QOnawi discuued in theprea:din, section, simply on the basis of his Suficommentaries and more philosophical writinp, be iscertainly far better known today as one of the greatestclauical Persian poets. Professor Yann R.idaard'l trans­lation (aDd new edition, with facing Persian text) of hisfamous LIlwI'iJ} [UI JllillisfelM1lu '* Lum;e,~.

pp. 179. Paris: Lm DEUx OCEANS. 1982.1 whose 36-IUuminations" are a masterful combination of power­ful, immediately accessible Sufi poetry and complexmetaphysical analysis (almost entirely bued on IbncArabI and his earlier commentators), thus illustratesthe inner connection between these two equally euen­tial aspects of JImi's life and work. At the same time,amonl aU the translations disaaued here, this work(a1onl with cAbd al-QIdir's K. al-MilWiiqif, diseussedbelow) is especially suitable as an introduction to thiscurrent of later Islamic thoupt for students withoutany previous background, precisely beuuse JImJ­whose intentions are ably conveyed in ProfessorRichard's careful tl'BDJlation -has constructed thework as a sort ofdialogue in which the poelty (althoupGa*ionally didactic) most often directs the reader tothe immediate and indispensable experiential insilhts(the -illuminations" or I&ftashes" of the title) whosemetaphysical and theological implications are thenclarified and elaborated in the aceompanyina prOle,often by contrutin, the approach of the Sufi -knowen"(as exemplified here by Ibn cArabYand QtlnawT) withthe limited methods of the muIIJIcoUiman and/alMila. t7

In virtually every section he thereby brinp the reader

'7 This sort of "dialOCUC" of ecstatic poetry aDd philosophic

prose often strikinlly illustrates tbe IOrt of problems andpossible misconceptions (at once prKtical, theoJo&ica1, andspiritual) that frequently pve rise to the need for theoreticaljdoctrinal clarification in earlier Sufism., u explaiDcd in ourdiscuaion ofBaJyIDt(and his critics) above. A ic exampleis the poetic: refrain O(M".",. a.r,"(MaJl is He!") in IDumination22, immediaacly followed by the tbeolopcal and practicalexplanations ofwbM such an expression reaDy IIICaDI (sections23-24).

Sec note 100 for lOme of the relermces to Ibn CARbY andQOnawI. JImI"s~ comparison oCthe mdhod andconclusions of tbe SWl AvkeDl'lan philosophers, and talamtheoloJiaDI is expressed in its most systematic form in his K.

explicitly face-to-face t in extremely concise fashion,with the three essential elements of all the writiup ofthis school: the experiential around (and its broaderSufi presuppositions); its doctrinal or theoretical e1abo­ration; aDd its broader dialectical context (i.e., thecompetina or ostensibly opposed doctrines, methods,and interpretations, each usually expressed in theshared tecJmical vocabulary ofpost-Avicenaan kaIam).(The apparent difliculty or obscurity of most of themore abstract and purely 14theoretical" writinp of thisschool-including JlmI's own longer prose workswhose translations are diIaused below-is almostentirely due to the modem reader's undentandablelack of acquaintance with the fint aDd especially thethird of those elements, which were naturally presup­posed in the oriJinal audienc::e.)"

The same carefully conceived spiritual pedagOIYclearly underlies the structure of the work u a whole:JImT bepns with fundamental conditions of eachindividual's search (the state of -dispersion" aDd itscauses, 16illuminatioos" 1-4), points out the profoundinDer relation of the seeker aDd God (lilW~t 5-6)which is the ultimate context ofall that folio , alludesto ome of the key features of the spiritual method(7-10) leadinl to a growing awamJCII of this Reality,"and above all to ODe' awakenina to the true IWUR ofLove (11-12), the sip and companion of oue's subse­quent propess on this path. This fint third of the workhas a universality that seems to justify JImI's initialclaim (in his Introduction) to be nothing but a 14transJa­tor" (Itujumiin) of the Truly Real; and there areconstant aBusions to this incr pensabIe personal dimen­siOD throughout the subsequent metaphysical discus­sions, until he retums to that plane of immediate insighteven more forcefully in his conclusion: wr0 express theRealities in words is but a dream ... Silence is better

td-DumIt td-FilkJllril (translation aDd edition by N. ReerdiIcuucd below).

ta This problem stands out most clearly wben one com­pares the ~~iJ.t with the Enalish translation of the

Duntl' tll-FilJcJJiTtI (see below), hicb is often virtuallyincomprebensible-at least to nonspeciaIistJ-for lack oflIdequate explanation ofthole presuppositions. (lb.iI is not tominimize the diJIicuJty of the cbaDenp faced by traDllaton inthis domain., since there really. no simple way to condenseseveral yean of Itudy-w . b would litewiIe be required formost Western tbcoloPcal or pbilolopbic tnlditioDl-inlOlOme more easily KCCIIible form; d. our remarb on otherupects ohbis problem at Dn. 56,60 in Part II, and 9S above.)" The traIISIator'. brief outlillC (pp. 12-1S) of IOIDC of the

key features of Naqshbanclt spiritual method is especiallyilluminati. and helpful at . point.

MODIS: Ibn cArtlbi and Irb 1ntnprelerl, PllI't II III

than this convenation of oun!711 The intervening sec­tiODI (13-36), however, are mainly devoted to anelaborate metaphysical analysis, in terms at once onto­10aica1 and theolo~ of the inner structure anddynamics of absolute Bein! (wujQdl htutT) and thedivine Reality (IIl-JJllqq) in relation to the mani­fest, phenomenal world, a discussion almost entirelybased on the Frq;q al-Qilcllm and its subsequentcommentatoR.100

Rather than attempting a detailed commentary ofthese complex, still highly condensed discussioos (whichwould no doubt overwhelm this brief and intention­ally introductory wort), Professor Richard bas oftenreferred the reader to two of Jimrs own 10lller

100 In addition to the explicit references to the FUIiiItll-/JiJuJIrt (section 26 [from the FIIH of Shucayb], discuaiqthe bean of the true ~nowerand the stage of c.,.,. tll-Jam c isespecially importan~ along with other explicit citations in 30and 36) and to QOnawt (section 33, citin, his K. M-NU#lI),students of Ibn CAnbY will recognize that much of this part ofthe book is basically a Persian translation or paraphruc ofP..... from the Frqiq or from commentaries in the line ofQUnawi; the subject has been 10 deeply assimitated that it isdilicult to say whether limT was knowingly traDslatinccertain pauap or simply rephrasing their common insights.(Sec below for limi's own explicit studies of the Frq;q.)

Also DOICWonhy in this regard arc JImI'. quotations oflines from rUlmrs MIImtIVT (section 6) and froID MalpnadShabistiri's (d. 720/1320-21) GubJum-i Raz, indicatift of theextent to which Ibn cArabY's (or QUDaWl'S) idea had come tobe IICCePted • the standard Sufi interpmation for the mysticalvcncs of many carlier Sufi poets not directly inftuenced by theShaykh or his writiop. In fact, Shabisdri's Gubhtm-i JUz,composed in 1311, is-like the works of uatI discussedabove-an intertstin& example of the early, popular Sufiassimilation of many of Ibn CAnbY's ideas (e.g.., cobCefDingthe in.san lcilmil) in a form not yet heavily inftueaced by themore systematic philosophic and thcoloP:aJ lanauaF of theschool 01 QiinawI. Unfortunately, althoqb there are a numberof popular, frequently reprinted EnJlish versions ('The Ro~

GarMn of MYJlnWJ, tr. E. H. Wbinfield, London, 1880[reprinted); nw &enl Gtlrden, tf. J. Pasha, New York, 1974;1M &cnl GtUdln, tr. Juraj Puta, N.Y. and London, 1969),the lack of unotation makes it cliJIicuJt to grasp the moresystematic upcct of the work which made it such a commonteachinl text in Persian Sufi cirdcs for maay ceaturics. Themost widely read COlDIDCDtary, in this coDDCCtion, wu nodoubtM~UhIjI·s MqfJtrJ, tIl-ICj4zfl ShtJrlJ Gubhtmtll-Rb (ed. 'K. SamJ<t. Tebran, 1331 [h.s.]/19S8). writtensometime in the later 8th/14th century. (One may hope thatprojected translations of at least partS of that o~ in bothFrmcb and English, will soon be completed.)

commentaries on Ibn cArabI and his metaphysicalItheoloJical thoupt (tll-Durral tJl-FiJJcJlira and NtUldal-NIIIflI) which are fortunately readily available inrec:ent critical editions and (at least partial) EnJlishtranslations (sec discussion below); a detailed, compre­hensive understanding of the more philosophic parts ofthe text is probably impossible without extensive refer­euce to those sources. However, his translation (andedition) is especially marked by an awareness of andcareful attention to JImI's systematic thought andtechnical vocabulary (including a useful glossary of teyterms) that is one of its several distiDct improvementsover the outdated English venion by Whinfield andKazvini. 101 The translator's brief iDtroduetion (pp. 1­28)-again clearly designed for a paeral audience withlittle or DO specialized background-is a marvel ofconcision. since it covers not only Jlmlts life andeventful historical context (including his scientific train­ing, his extensive travels and contacts with the Ottomanand Aq Quyunlu sultans, his Naqshbandt Sufi afIilia­tions, and his equally famous contarlporaries in Herat's"Golden Age" under l:Iusayn Bayqara, Behzld andMir CAli Shir Navi~)and the manuscripts, edition andcommentaries of the UJwa~iJ), but also a fascinatingsummary of NaqshbandI principles ofspiritual methodand a long list of JimY's principal writings (withavailable traDSlatioDS and editions).101

101 This book, I..trH>U,: A Tr«ltworJ Sufu"., has JUeDtIybeen reprinted (London, 1918) with the very useful additionof an introduction by Prof. S. H. N... (pp. xix-xxvii)covering in a briefer form many of the same points as Y.Richard's French introduction. and corm:ting WhinficJd'sextremely misleading introductory COlDIDCDtI. (Whinfidd'.remarks-with their aIlusio to alIlOrti of"'causa1'"expo.lions of Sufism in terms of Indian, Buddbist, and Neoplatonicsources-Ire symptomatic of his iporauce of the IslamictraditiollJ themselves, but do indicate the ftry real progrcuthat has been made in these Itudia over the put tentury,when they are compared, for example, with the works of W.Chittick and N. Beer on JImY diJcUllCd below.) That theEnglish translation itself is still quite UlCful is no doubtexplicable by the fact (explaiDcd by Whinficld at the end of his

oriainal Preface) that virtually aD of ~ inducting the entirephilosophic later part, was tranJ1ated not from the Pcnian.but from a French traDllation by the renowned Pcnianscholar Mrrd Mlltuumud~.

101 For more ~mplete aDd detailed references. ICC thePcnian introduction by W. Chittick to his editon of JImT'.Ntlqd IIl-NIIfI1l. .. (discussed below). aDd the long bio­bibliographical study by A. A. Hetmat. JIIftl .• .• Tehran,1320 b.s., pp. 161-213. (The translator IICkno IccIFI thcIcsources for his .bOOpd liIt.)

112 JOIIm/II of 1M A.merielm 0rimttJJ Society 101.1 (1981)

Within tbe historical context of this article (andJiven JImI'. modem reputation primarily as • poetrather tban a mystical philosopher and theologian),that list is especially reveaIina in several respects. Notonly are 32 of the 44 titles cited as Sufi subjects(includina the renowned biosrapbica1 compilationNtl/al)41 al-Uns, a classic source for the most diverseaspects of Sufism), but the majority of those worbactually involve either commentaries on Ibn cArabl(includinB two on the FJqiq til-/JiJcam) or elaborations(mostly in Penian prose, but also in poetry andeven-notably with al-Dumzt aJ-Fakhira-in Arabicprose) of classical themes and problems within his"school"; often these analyses are applied, as in theLJlwa~iJ;J itself, to the interpretation of mystical poetry,including Sufi verses by Ibn al-Flri4 (both the MrmTyaaDd tbe Napn al-SulQJc), Rumi (the M1U1UIVl1, Jimihimself (his /luNcTy4/), and Fathr al-Drn clrIqI(AshiCCat Ill-LamaCit). 1be mention of the last ofthoseboob is especially sipifiamt, since clrlqrs /..amaCat,with its masterful mixture of ecstatic Persian lovepoetry and short prose interludes, not only provided theobvious formal model for the 1Awa~i/:I, but was actuallycomposed under tbe immediate inspiration of ~raI-Drn aI-QanawT's 1edures on Ibn CArabI's thought. Inthis reprd we can only briefly mentioD-so • not topreclude the full-length review it richly deserves-therecent study aDd English truslation of cIrlqi'. work byWilliam Chittick and Peter Lamborn Wilton [DivineFlashes. Pp. 178 + xvi (Preface by S. H. Nur). NewYork: PAULIST PREss. 1982.], and especially Prof.Chittick's analytic:al introduction ('"The Mystical Philo­sophy of the Divine Flashes j and extensive commen­tary (and index of technical terms) brinainl out thesystematic metaphysical underpinnings of C lrIqI'spoetry. Those sections, which often cite or paraphraseJlmi's commentary on the lmnoCat (AshiCCat al­LaI1Ul Ciit), in themselves constitute a substantial intro­duction to QanawTand his interpretation ofIbn cArabi'steaching, and clearly demonstrate its profound influenceon limi's own thinDill. 103

The juxtaposition of these two widely read aDdaenuinely popular worts of cIrlqi and lami is also a

MIl This wort is a model of the sort of backarouod that mustbe Jiven in order to enable nOD-specialist readers to under­stand the meaninl aod intentions 0( writers in IhcIe traditioDi.In addition to the pbiJ~biccommentaries, the boot aIIo

iDdudes a fuclnatiDa-aod less demandina-bioaraPbicaland historical introduc:tio~discussina c1rIqi'sl stay (aDd

subsequent influence) in Muslim Iodia .. weB u his role in the

l8IFr circle of ~r al-Drn QOnawT (see also DOteS 61-64,Pan U).

reminder of the much broader-if still little studied­problem of the Kjnftuences" of Ibn cArabT (and espe­cially the vocabulary and systematic interpretations ofthe Fup:q) in the later poetry and literature of tbeEastern Islamic world, in Turkish and Urdu (and evenMalay or Indonesian) as well 81 in Persian. Twooutward, easily discernable (and no doubt interrelated)sips of that inftuence are the almost univenal use ofthe systematic conceptions of this "school" (especiallysuch symbolically rich themes u wal}dln al-wujUd,tajalliyiit, the "presences" of divine Being, etc.) incom.mentaries on earlier, widdy read Sufi poets lICk asROmI and Ibn al_FIri4,IM and the pervasiveness of IbncArabT's technical vocabulary (again wac1y as trans­mitted by QOnawT and his JU«essors) throuJhout thepoetry compolCd in thOle lanauqes down throuah the19th century. Readen familiar with this school canreadily note the existence of its tenniDolOJY and prob­lems; but determining to what dearee those formalmetaphysical allusions (and Sufi lanpap in aeneral)&dually represent conscious acquaintance with andserious undentandinl of Ibn cArabI and his follower1,rather than merely traditional (or even ironic) use ofthose materials, requires close acquaintance with eachindividual writer and his personal background (SufiafIiliations, studies, etc.) aDd an informed sensitivity totheir role in his writing.I"

104 See 0 notes 2, 63, 73, and 104 (for Sbabistlrr aodLlbIjr). Amon. other, more iDlIuentiai poets whose wort wasmonety muted by the ideas of Ibn cArabt, one ould a1Johave to mention "Ibn cArabT's faithful interpreter (ShamsaJ-Drn M. al-Tab1fz11 al-MqluibT(d. ca. 1406)"(A. Schimmel,

op.cit., p. 167], whose mysticalJhazals haft yet to find theirtranslator, and the fouodcr of the Nic uIJIbt order, ShihNiC matuJ1lh WaIT KirmIDl. A po))llIar, readily acceasibleintroduction to his life aod subsequeat spiritual inJIuenc:e canbe fouod-aJOIII with translatio from his poecie orb aDdthose of his disciples aDd IUCCCIIOn (pp. 191-24S)-in Kingl

of Lo-w: T1u! History & PMtry 0/ 1M NiCmtltull4hI SufiOr., of I,,,,,, tf. P. L. Wilson and N. Pourjavacly, Tehran,1978; see Index under "Ibn cAnbY,""'QODJ wI," aod aJ)datal-wujOd... (This study also lives some iadicatiOD of the vastPersian biblioarapby on this subject, indudi. the extensiveeditions of Shih NiCmatulllb's poetry aad prose treatises bythe modem NiCmatulllbJ shaykh, Javld NOrbabh.) InFrench, see the brief introduction to J. Aubin's Jltltl,itIuxporn- 111 bqraplrk « Shah NicrruIlUlW Will; KnmDni(Tehran, 1956), and the relevant DOticcs in H. Corbin'sHistoire • 111 phiJOMJPhk islIImiqw, Part II (full rd'eRDCan. 3, Part II), pp. 1l~-26 aDd 1130-33.

105 TIle interpreti~ problem is essentially DO di1rereot thanwith, for example, the question of Platonic or Neoplatonic

MODIS: Ibn cArabi and his Interpretn'$, Part II 113

Fortunately, in the case of JImi at least, that neces­sary back&r0und is readily accessible, even in Englishtranslation, through two recent in-depth studies (includ­ing major critical editions) of some of his key meta­physical prose writings-works which are perfectlycomplementary, and which clearly represent the fruitsof years of research in this area.1O' William Chittick'scarefully annotated critical edition of llmi's earlycommentary on the FIJIilI al-Qikam (or rather, on IbncArabi's own condensed metaphysical summary of it,the Naqsh al-Fzqi4 [Naqd al-N~lfi SharI) Naqshal·FuPJI. Tehran, 1977.]-frequently cited in ProfessorRichard's own introduction-actually constitutes asort of broad historical introduction (but proceedingbackwards in time) to the whole school of QOnawI,since JImT often uses long excerpts from many of thecommentators discussed above (though not Amuli and.nIl). A partial English translation (some IS%, summa­rizing the main outlines, according to the author) isnow readily accessible in the first volume (1982) of theJOUI7UIl of,he Muhyiddin Ibn cArabi Society.l07

themes in Western vernacular literatures. One has a similarrange of possibilities, from conscious literary 14allusions"(which can often be purely fonnal in nature) to more mean­ingful and convincing poetic use by writen who may have hadlittle or no formal study of their "original" philosophicsources. The sensitivity needed to judge these questions isespecially great with these later Islamic literatures because the"'sobk-i Hindi" style (common to Persian, Turkish, Urdu, etc.in the centuries following Jmtf) assumed such a tremendousrange of cultural references (including extensive knowledge ofmetaphysics and theology) on the part of writers and readersalike. (See the related observations at notes 56, 60, and 98 ofPart 11.)

106 Our comments bere are intentionally limited to a briefdescription, given the framework of this article, so as not topreclude the fully detailed reviews each of these worksdeserves-especially sim:e both studies involve more extensiveand ambitious efforts than most of the translations whichhave been our primary focus here.

107 "Ibn cArabrs Own Summary of the FU$IiT. 'The Imprintofthe Bezels of Wisdom:" pp. 30-93; the article is reprintedhere from two earlier issues of the journal Sophia Perennis,vol. I (197S), pp. 88-128 and II (1976), pp. 67-106. This workincludes the complete translation of Ibn cArabi's work (Naqsha1-FuPil) itself. "Summary" is probably not the precise termto describe its relation to the FUIiJI IIl-lJikam. given theextreme concision of the Nllqsh (itself incomprehensiblewithout a commentary) and its greater focus on the ""meta­physical" side of the Fulfll. to a certain extent prefillJringQOnawi's own primary orientation.

Jiml's 01-Du"at a/.Fakhira-an Arabic prose trea­tise comparing the views of the Sufis (i.e., the school ofIbn CArabI), the mutaka/limiin, and the Avicennanphilosophen on the central metaphysical/ theologicalquestions of Islamic thought (as expressed in theircommon vocabuJary of the divine Essence and Auri­butes), and implicitly demonstrating the superiorityand comprehensiveness of the Sufi undentanding ofeach of those issues-is an even more fascinatinghistorical document, since it was apparently written atthe demand of the Ottoman sultan Muhammad II.That detail illustrates both Jimi's contemporaryrenown as a metaphysician (as well as poet), and thetruly "ecumenical" nature of Islamic higher cultureimmediately prior to the historic divisions introducedby the Safavid revolution. At the same time, this work(and the intellectual situation it exemplifies) clearlypointed the way toward the creative resolution of thosedifferent points of view by ~adr ai-Din al-SbIrnzi("Mulll ~adra,., d. 1050/1641), whose comprehensivesynthesis and readily accessible presentation of thefundamental insights of Ibn CArabi and his commen­tators (in language largely drawn from both Subrawardiand Avicennan philosophy) was to dominate subse­quent treatment of these problems in the Iranianworld, at least.101

101 See the introductory section of our study. The Wisdom

of the Throne: An Introduction to lhe Philosophy of MuUaStJdra (Princeton, 1981). For ~adra's own treatment of thesame questions summarized by JImI in the Durrm al.rakhira,Part I of the Sadri'S work translated above (pp. 94-129)should be supplemented by his more lengthy discussion ofthose issues in his Kitiih aJ-Mash4 cir, tr. H. Corbin: I.e Livredes Penetrllt;01l3 mililphysiqun (TehranI Paris 1964). (Prof.Corbin's work includes an edition not only of the Arabicoriginal, but also of a 19th-century Persian translation by thesame Qajar prince who translated Jlmrs aJ-Durrat aI-raJchirll",see n. 109 below.) For a more recent, increasingly scholasticstase of this philosophic development-in which the imme­diate inftuence of Ibn cArabi's thought is far less apparent-seethe translation by T. lzutsu and M. Mohagbegh of themetaphysical part of the Ghurar a1·Filri~id (or ~hartt-i

Man~ilma·yi l:Iikmatj by Muna HIdI Sabzavlrt (d. 128411878), The Metaphysics of Sllbzavarl (Delmar, N.Y.• 1977);the work also includes a translation (by P. Sprachman,pp. 11-24) ofSabzavln-ts autobiography. a historically revea1­ing document in its own right. The philosophic and tbeoloaicaldevelopments of the intervening period in the Iranian (andTwelver Shiite) milieu are partially covered in the works ofH. Corbin (with S. J. Ashtiyini) discussed in n. 3. Part II. Asalready noted, the fate of JImJ's more philosophic writings(and the broader intellectual tradition they represent) in most

114 JoumtIl olIM Amnicmt Orimllll SociII}' 101.1 (1981)

Professor Nicholas Heer's translation of the Durrllt111-Fllelrirll [1M Pncious PetIT!. pp. 237 + ix. Albany:SUNY Puss. 1979.], toaetJler with JlmI's own glossesand the subsequent commentary by his foremost disci­ple al-Lirr (d. 912/15(4), is (along with the Arabicedition itself) a monument of industry and erudition,whose careful philological attention to detail (illu­strated, among other tbiDp, by the massive index!glossary of Arabic technical terms, the identificationand discussion of JImI's sources for each of the three"schools" discussed, location of subsequent commen­taries, etc.) will make it especially useful to specialistsin this area. Ho~ver, little or DO attempt has beenmade in the translation volume to explain the actualphilosophic and spiritual meaning and more universalsipificauce of JImI's discussions, so that this text islikely to appear opaque and merely "scholastic"(in thepejorative sense) to l'CIden without extensive back­ground in tbe traditions in question. In fact, the deepersipific:aDce (and onaoinl historical inftuence) ofJlmi'swort is brought out far more clearly in the volumecontaiDina both the Arabic editions of these texts (alsoby Professor Heer) aDd an edition of its Peniantranslation-by the same Qajar prince who translatedMuI1I ~adrl's widely studied ~xtbook" on the sameontological/tbeoloJical issues, the K. II1_MtUMciT. 109

of tbe rest of tbe Islamic world ItilI remains to be explored;further developments were c:eruiDly not limited to SalavidIran.

For JlmY's predecaIon amona commentaton of Ibn <ArabicorrelatilJl the elements or contribuUoDi of 1IIIf/, ctll/1. aDdbsIif-wbicb could be very looeely conDeded with the meth­ods or prauppoaitiODI of blam, AvicenDaD pbilOIOphy, aDdSufism-see tbc discussions of Amun. Ibn Turta, Ibn AbJJumbOr al-Atad>J. aDd N..-fT above. JImI', work is diltiJ).guilbcd primarily by its more ')'Itematic and lebolasticpraentation of the "rational" (ctll/1I) formuJatiolll of each ofthese intdlqctual traditions.

lot See D. 108 for H. Corbin's edition aDd translation of theM4Ih4<ir. The volume ofeditions of tIl-DurrtU IIJ-Filkhiril aDdthe relaIed commentaries aDd Persian traDslatiOD (Wo. XIX inthe "Wisdom of Persia" Series, Tehran, J9S0) is also note­worthy for the 10lIl introduction by the Pasiaa editor,A. Musavi 8ebbehaDi; it is a philosophically ICrious aoclcreative attempt to rethink the issues which have traditionallybeen taken to clistiDpish the schools in qucstioa aDd therebyto ao beyond the standard repetition of stereotyped ICbolasticdeKriptions. That iodcpeodent viewpoint is relalively uniqueamon, the traditional (Le., non Wcstem-edueated) Iranianphilosophers clealin, with these schools of later Islamicthouabt.

-lbat 19th-centwy translation ofJImI'. work is onlyone sip of the viaorous, onaoin. ~lopJDCDt inSalavid and Qajar Iran (and the Shiite centers of cIraq)of this school whose Ianpaae and problematic is 10

deeply rooted in the study of Ibn cArabr-a historicaldevelopment we are fortunate enoqh to be able tofollow in some detail only through the coincidence ofthat ~'I relative insulation from direct colonization,plus the devoted eft'orts of a handful of more recentscholars. However, when one loots at the actuallocation ofmanuscripts of works by JImI or any of theother writers (iDcludina Ibn cArabJ himself) dilcuuedabove-or at the even greater multitude of poets andliterary figures who transmuted their contributionsinto many laJllWlFS-it is clear that their influence, atleast up to the 19th century, was probably at least asgreat and divene in the higher culture and among theSufi orders both of the Ottoman empire and theMuslim regions of India and Central Asia;l1O ourrelative iporanee of those later developments in thoserqions reftects factors other than any lack of sources.H the Sufi writinp of cAbd aI-QIdir al-Jazl'itI(d. 130(/1883) discussed in the following section appearto US today 81 a sudd~mysterious -renaiIAnce" orthecreative study ofIbn cArabY in the Arabic world, II t thatis simply a reminder of how much research remains tobe done in this <and other) areas of later Islamictbou8ht.

11. A case in point is Prof. RicbanI'1 mention of a com­mentary on the l..tnN>tI) by one of JImi'I penonal dilciplelwhich was nc:eotlydi~ in a library in Pekina (detailsonp.29).

Equally far a6eJd is the IDdoDeliaa Q..irf Sufi andMalay poet l;Iamza aI-FaDfiIrJ (late 10th/16th century), whoMbeIoJllcd to the school of mysticism chal'8derized by namalike Ibn al-cArabJ and c~- (article "l:Iamza FaDfOrr byP. Voorboeve in E/2_ III, p. ISS). (We baYC DOt been able toCOD ult the study by Syed Muhammad Naquib aI-AUas., TIleMy,tidmr of /JIImZIIIIl-FlI1IIf1rl, Kuala Lumpur, 1970, citedin A. Schimmel, op. cit., p. 354.)

Another, historically C\I'CIl more ioIIuential, example wouldbe the later Kubrlwt Sufi cAlI aI-HUDIldIDI (d. 786/I38S),author of stiJl another COllUlleDtary on the FUIiiI tIl-/jiJulm,who played an important role in the cstablisbmeot of Sufiam(and Islam more generally) in Kashmir; see H. Corbin,Histo;,~ ... , Part II (D. 3, Part II), pp. II J6-17, andadditional biblioJl'aphic references in the article "CAliHaDUldlDI'"by S. M. StaB, £/2,1, p. 392.

III Sec n. 4, Part )( fOl' recent studia of the 18th-«oturyMoroccan Sufi Ibn cAjIba, for whom Ibn cArahr seems tohave played a role that more fully reftccu the broad raDF of

liS

VI. cAbd al-QIdir al-JazI:>iJf(I222/1807-1300/1883)is today no doubt most widely knOWD, at least in thenations immediately concerned. as the leader of Alger­ian resistance to the p1Idual invasion and colonializa­tion of that country between 1832 and 1847. However,the two recent Frencb translations of parts ofhis KU4bIlI-MtlW4qtf, a vast work including his lectun:s. medita­tions. and a sort of "spiritual diary" from the decadesof his exile in DamMQIS (18S1-1883), present a VerJdifferent _pcct of his charader and historical penona:an extraordinary Sufi writer and teacher who-if theseselections can be taken u representative-was not onlyresponsible for reviving the teaebinp of the Shaykh,but was also himself in many ways a sort of Ibn cArabirebom. 112 Compared to the relatively "scholastic" tradi­tions disaJsscd above, cAbd al-Qidir's wort (like IbncArabrs) consistently conveys a stOkin., UDJDiitakablesense of true originality, of the fresh and compellingexpression of immediate spiritual experience, JrOundedin the most profound penonal reftection on the Koranand tuuJrth as ~ll as extensive study of the works ofIbn cArabi and their conunentators. That impressionof immediacy and authenticity is no doubt a reftectionboth of cAbd al-QIdir·s distinctive personal virtues andat the same time of his indebtedness to a broader (notmerely literary) tradition of study and applic:ation ofthe Shaykh'l writinp in a pradical, effective spiritualcontext.

All of tbcsc features are carefully explained inMichel Chodkiewia' remarkable introduction to hisscJcction of shorter chapters from the K. tIl-MilW4qif[Ecrit.r .rpmtwu. By OUR ABD EL-lC.ADD. pp. 226.Paris: EDITIONS DU SWJL. 1982.], a text bida is itselfa mine of valuable historical references. To beain with,in n:calling the successive external staFI of cAbcI

biJ writinp aDd aetivitiea-althoup it is diflicuJt to knowhow far one can geoeraIiz.e from tbis single case.m Amolll the sipificant biopaphiul flCtl DOted in the

translator's Introduction (teriu spiritue&, f\lll refereocabelow), proceediDl from the outward lips inward, are hishaving lived ICftrai decUs in the boule where Ibn cArabI

died.in Damascus, his beiDa buried DCXt to the Shaykh there(until the more recent removal of his remains to AIFria), his

n:ceptioo of the k/rIrqtl tIIcbtDfye (ICe also n. 113 below) fromlUI father, Stdt MMu\1yfaJ-~ .. aDd his repeated compdlinavisiOIlS and encoUDters with the Mspiritual reality"(~J)w)of the Sbaykh ai-Akbar; ICC the cIiKussioa of tbcse iDcidaatl,

with full referenc:a to the specific pusaaes in the MIIW4qtf, inM. Chodtiewicz's boot, pp. 28 IDd 187-88.

The resemblance of cAbd aJ-QIdir' writina to that of IbncArabY, both in style aDd content, is discussed in detail below.

al-Qldir' own lpiritual initiation-his youthful recep­tion of the lhirqtJ alcbilrrYIl from his own father,himself a Qidiri master;lU his encounter with theDOted Sbaykh ~hI1id al-Naqshbandi durins his firstpilgrimage and visit to Damascus (at aae 20); and hismatUre study with the ShldhiII sbaykh Mw,ammadal-Fisi at Mecca (in 1269/1863)-Mr. Cbodkiewiczclearly brinp out an indispensable dimension of IbnCArabI's influence and spiritual function wbidl is atonce more fundamental and yet inherently Jess visiblethan its occasional I&J1istorical" or literary manifesta­tions.1J4 However, in cAbd al-Qldir's own exceptionalcase-again not unlike Ibn CArabT's-tbe usual formsand methods of the Sufi path (the spiritual combat ofthe murTd. the "one who desires" union) appear to haveonly supplemented and confirmed a special vocation

113 It is important to Gte, as the traaslator streueI, that tbe/cJIirqtl lIklNriyrl (which CAbd aI-QIdir's gandfatber hadearlier received in £&ypt) did not distiDpil)a a separate Sufi·order," but was transmiutd by certain shayths of IC\'CI'aJ

'GTTq4Is, includiDa (at least mOlt n:cauly) the NaqsbbaDdlyaand SbldhilTya. Especially intcratinl in this reprd ii die

JODI historical note (pp. 183-84) on Ibn cArabJ'1 own sibilasor chains of spiritual initiation (of which the DOte lilts five,three ,oina bact to the Prophet aDd two to ~); it abomentions the initiatic sibIla (rom Ibn cArabJ do.. to cAbd

al-QIdir. all of them '""Iinnm, with QtinawI. (ApiB. ICC

QtlDawr', central role in the IiDes ofdirect ttaDlmission of the

FUlfil outJinc:d by O.Y., Hinoin . ..• n. Appendix S.)I U Especially valuable ia this reprd is die exteDlive informa­

tion (pp. 3S-38 aDd accDlllpUlyina DOtes), drawn larJdy fromstill unpublished sources Mel~ studies by £ayptian &DelSyrian scholars. on tbe inIutDcet of CAM al-QIdir's teaCbin,and personal example on contemporary Sufi Shaykhs (pri­marily of the ShldhilI aDd NacpbbaDdI orden) aDd theirSUCCCSIOn down to the praent. On &BOther left), but no Iaaimportant. the translator .. notes (p. 35) that it was 'Abelal-Qldir who financed the 1m publication (in Cairo) of thecomplete tIl-F~tIl-M~.

On tbe historicaI plane which is our main focus beret thisintroductiOD abo oft'en a valu ble lummary (with leDJthyrefereaca in tile notes) of three satient iJIucs in the lollicootroveny surrouDdm, Ibn cArabl &Del the FIqiq al-lJihm(see n. S. Part II, aDd a nwnber of otber puaaaes above). ThequestioDs dilcuued Ilere (pp. 32-3S) arc the "faith of Pha­raoh,.. the .eternity" of punishment in HeD. aDd the ·univer­sality· of the Sbaykh'l spiritual outlook; each or them istreated, with reference to both Ibn CAnbY and cAbd aJ-Qldir,with a clarity and coDCilioa that mates tbii teetion Ulduleven for t Ole who are not already acquainted with thaedisputed sections of the FUJi4.

116 JounttI1 01111I A1Mrlctm 0rimIIIl SocWty /01.1 (1981)

for the more direct and relatively effortless path of"ecstatic j))umination"(jGdhbcr) that typifies those rareindividuals "chosen" by God (the "muTldj.lIS Yet ..the translator indicates (pp. 25-26)t it is perhaps evenmore cbancteristic that having bad this transformingexperience of enlighteomeot (\1rith the CODC()mitantinsipt aDd passion that illuminates all tbac mIlWilqif),cAbd al-Qldir should subsequently return to follow theguiducc of a more traditional master (the SbldhiITsbaykb M. al-Flst, at Mecca) and carefully retrace allthe accustomed staaa and states of the more ....ormal"patht in order to t:dcct his own insight .. spiritualguide and teachert 16 the activity that largely occupiedthe final decades of his life.

I U cAbel aI-QIdir speaks of his own unuaual palh ud drawstbc 4istiaction bet1fteD these two way.-while uDdcrlinina

the daDFn aod actvaotaaa of each-in lOme quiIe revea1iDaautobiop'aphical remarks in MtIWtIlf 18, the ICCODd ldection(pp. 46-49) translated here. The distinction of muritJ aod

IIIIII'fd alluded to~ as M. Chodkiewicz points out (referriDato Ibn cArabI's briefLniw,4/), is taken over from the Shayth;there is a more adequate aDd extremely cleat discuIsioD of thissame distinction at the end of Ibn al-cArabrI MtlWilqlc

tIl-NIIjIim. summarized by AsinP~1'/"" CluUliIIIrUI(Frmch traDslation dilcuued in Pan I), p. 319. (Ibn cArabl'.

41/W:t11 tIl-$al"YCI-the CuD ranae of titles is aivca in O.Y.,DO. 31S-a shon work aIao inclUded, in inverse order, in tbeFUliiJJat (11,.128-34 =ch8pt. 73, question IS3), b. beentranslated by R. T. Harris in tbe JOumtll a/1M MullyitldinIbn cA,.; Soeilly, III (1984), pp. X1-S4, in a popular version

with a miJlimum of notes or explanations; it should be used

with ektreme caution in mldina other worb of the Shaykh,since the -definitions-Jiven here often touch OIl 0DIy a limited

upcct or a sinak meaniDI aDlODI the multitude ofICIIIa that

a Jiven term may haw in his own writinp.]Although cAbel aJ-Qldir's own reference to a spcc:iaI divine

"attraction" or jtldhiNI in the pauaJe just meationed wouklaIJow one, in purdy liquistic terms., to call him -1JIIljdJriIb,­

we must stress that there is nothing either in his writinp or inwhat is described here of his life that would sugcst the $On ofpatbolOlical chanIcIeristicI (IOJDdima rather cupbemiaticaUycalled "divine madaasj that are often UIOCiaIcd with theterm -rrt4}dIri1b to in many lslamic countries. Such a usqecould be hiPly misleading ICC, for example, cAbel al-Qldir's

typically ""sober"remarb coocerni1Ia al-lJaIJIj". reIatM "mad­ness- or intoxication" pp. 4S. 88" etc. (FortUDatdy-aod quiteexceptioaally &IDona the French traDllations dealt with in thisarticle-this book is provided with aD excellent lndexf)

..6 Apin (sec: n. 112) the year ad a half cAbel aI-QIdir spent

in Mec:c:a aDd Mecliu marked by 0 extnordiDary set ofsymbolic "coincidencea"meotioned by the trauslator (pp. 2S­26, aM, the biopaphy by the Emir'. son wbida is one of tile

Certainly it is this unifying practical aim of spiritualpedaaolY (rather than either Sufi "apoloaeUcs" ortheoretical elaboratio.. pursued for their own sate),an intention constaDtly illumined and guided by imme­diate personal experience and insight into the issues inquestion, that typifies cAbd al-Qldjr'. writinp (or atleast the texts transletM here) aDd distinguisbes them10 strikingly from many of the interpreters diJcussedabove.117 The central mctaphysical/thcologic:al prob­lems and intuitioDSt and even the technical vocabulary,are all essentially the same u in Ibn cArabT and suchcommentators as Qt1DdJand KlsbInI-and Mr. Cbod­kiewicz stresses and elaborately documents cAbdal-Qldir's profouDd debts to those authonll

' -butthey arc treated here in • practical spiritual perspective

main lOurces for the introduction). In Medina, be ti\'ed aDdkept hil spiritual retreat _ the site of the boule of AbO BUr,adjoinina the mosque of the Prophet; he IIChiewd his culmi­nating. -hisbcst depee of illumination" while medilatina inthe caw of Kin, site of the Prophet'. fint revelation.

For the sipificance of this careful ..retracina" of the

spiritual Path common to IDOIt individuals, in rdatioD to thelilk of this wo~ see n. 119 below.

J 11 It is important to recopize that cAbel aJ-Qldir'. MtIWiiqif

are for the IDOII part directed toward a very diJrerem audieacetbaD many of the worb in the IChool of Qlaawt, klsbIDI,etc.: they are not tryinc to convince, defend, or persuade a

1arJer "'ublic"; DOt tryiua to ~xpJain" a text in systematicaDd continuous famon; aod not direded toward other

cw.n..~in aeoeraI, but raaher toward sillCere ud ..,ractiJin.­seekers. The similar clarity aDd clirectnas one finds in certainof the worb of Jm (see above) may refted the same sort of

cooditioDS. In oy cue, the relatnely intimate spiritual nature

of these texU, more jmmediately JI'OUDded in experience,

means that there is rdatiwJy leu need for explanation aDdpreliminary backgroUDd f« modern readers.til For the more explicit rdereaca to Ibn CArabi aDd his

works, ICC the introduction, pp. 21-11 and index under the

appropriate beadinJl, pIuI tbe elaborate nota-b8Ied on theFUIfJI, FIItilI)4t, 41iJ1lbM, and otber worb-detailiD& hisdirect borrowinp aDd debts to the Shaykh. HoWCYCl', a the

translatorIU~ cAbel aJ..QIdir hu 10 perfectly recreated

the problematic and auidiDa insights of Ibn cArabI that the

mere enumeration of explicit quotations or allusions is inibelf quite milrepreKlltaane. An aoecdote be recounts (p. 31)sugests 1OmethiD& both of cAbel aI-Q..ir's cleYotiOD to tbeSbaykh and his deep conc:em for the exactitude of his

teacbiDa: he once sent two of his dose dilciples to x'onya toverify certain readinp in his own text of the Fudi/:tIIt bycomparina them willa Ibn cArabf's own autoaraPb maoUlCl'iptpreserwd in a library there (the IUDe manuscript which is thebasil for Osman Yahia's new ICieDtific edition).

MoUJS: Ibn cArtlbi lIIId hU lnlerpnl6l, PtlI'lll 117

whose immediacy and wriversality (and resultinl coher­ence) are far more directly accessible to non-specialistreaden. In sum, cAbd al-Qldir is not so much "com­mentinl on'" Ibn cArabY (or his IUCCCIIOn) as actuallyrecreatinl the Shaykb-S deepest intentions. The differ­ence of penpective' palpable, and makes this workitself an excellent introduction to the study of IbncArabrs own writinp, pven its relative simplicity aDdclarity of exposition.

The 39 borter Mhalts'" (often only two or three paaeslona) translated in this selection1I' usually beJin with ashort Koranic citation (or occasionaDy a sayinl of theProphet) illustratinl and illuminating a particuJar spiri­tual insiabt or problem and pidina a more extendedreflection-sometimes didactic, sometimes quite per­sonal and even ecstatic-on its metaphysical, moral, ortheolopcal implications. The result, at ita best, isneither a sermon nor formal (even mystical) exeaes' ,but sometbinl much more intimate and direct, namely,the communication of what Ibn cArabi often ca1II theMUhartl, '" the "allusion" or inocr mcaninl that appliespccificalJy to ooc's own immediate spiritual condition.

This aspect of the Mawlqifis especially apparent in themore intimate, autobiopaphical P..... (e..., sections] and 36-37 here)-a IOrt of writin. relatively rare inArabic mystical JJurtllUU, but revealing the very esscoc:eof the spiritual work and relation between master anddisciple-in which cAbd aI-Q1dir recOUD his ownrepeated experiences of what he calls (apin foOowinlIbn cArabY) "ilqi'," that is, the direct inner awarenessof the -projc:dion" into one's conscious ofa pof the Koran together with the pecific meaninluniquely appropriate to one's spritual state at that

119 CloseD from &IDODI almoR 400. mOlt of evidentlymuch Ion.... siDce the Arabic edition taka up three 1arFvoluma; there is a concordaDce (po 221) of tile FreDChtranslatioD aud DUlDberiD& of sectiolD here . the~IJ'ODCIiaI numberin. and ,..of the Arabic: text.

The lipific:aDcc of the title is carefully cKplaiued atpp. 27-28. More importaDt than any aUUIioa to the ortof the same name by the fam early Sufi itrId..M. Cbodtiewicz nota.' its by Ibil C for o.mIIWqif, in the context of the iritual path, is the .. orMatoppinl" place between t 0 spiritual ItatiOllS (mazil or"..,am) where tbe tra~ (dllk) rccciws the pidaoc:e orinstructiOID that eubIe him to realize funy and in deIail thepiritual UDdentaDclina appropriate to the Ii station.

There is a profound inner connection bctweeD the--Spiritual itinerary" tnIced out in detail in writiIl andCAW al-Qldir'l decision (see D. 116 above) to rctunI andretrace in full the ditl'ertIlt required of IDOIt spiritualpilarima.

moment. l20 The majority of these selections, ho ever,are comparatively more didactic and impenonal; oftenreftecting cAbd al-Qldir~1 own teaebin& activity (includ­illl daily lectures in his later yean at Daawau),they all revolve aroUDd the central trausfonnin. insiahtinto the transcendent Unity of Beine (MwtJl)dtJlaJ-wujildj and the apparent paradoxes and potentialmisuDdcntandinp that iDevitably result wbeo the aware­ness of that reality is approached as an external~heory'"rather than the expression of an inner realiza­tion. Ul Formally speaking. both the problems aDd thereapoDICS offered here had for the most part 10 beenclassic in the "school" of Ibn cArabL But what 10

po mully distinpisbes cAbd al-Qldir'l writina, evenon the most apparently abstract metaphysical to . ,from that of bInI, for example-and hat at thesame time 10 strikingly unites him .tb Ibn cAra -_.his constant contact with and reference to the imme­diate vision, the Source UDderlyina those formulations.and (scarcely distiDJUisbable from the precedina point)his fresh, authentic realization of the reality aDd inten­tions of the oran and the Propbet (via I,tMllth) asthey are lI'asped preciJely at that level of immediatepen:eption. IU

I. See apec:ially CAW aI-QIdir's RYa1iDa dacription of• pbenolDCDOll in the opeDiDa MtIWqIf(= ICCtion 36, p. IS7

in the traIIIIation). where be states that "everythinl in theseMtltNqifia of this nature." OtIIer explicitly autobioJrapbiC81all ions to this pbeno on QII be fo here in ICdio2~and9.

One is raDinded ofJ I Jdatcd the tqinainof tbe LtJwi~iJ.t (ace abcnte) be is oaly a r"(~ in the ICDIC of ODe who~ and conveys thetrue. intended me·ni.... Mlhout coJoriDa it 'th uythina of

• own adclitioll)-a t that evideady refen JDaiDly to. poetry in that wort. (See abo Ibn cArabItl 0 reference

to his fulldioft l4rj&lntan-in this ¥Cry speci6c ICDIC-in .introduction to the FUlDllII-ljiJulm; the FutiJJ)IIt containsmany more detailed eKplaDatioDl of the importance of thisawareneu and prOCCll of ......iation,.. in repnI to the 10both of the prophets ad the -.ainu" [4IWli".a;)].)

111 Althoop the r attempted t6 divide thaeselectio conc:crnin, IbD CArabl'1 teaebina topically­aa:ordina to luch themes - the ....nity of BeiDa... ""theo­phaDia," UOocI aDd ,ods," -intermediate C&UICa." and~Prophet..-the contro' focus of CAW al-Qldir's intcratand· .&ht' 10 sreat ODe scaredy notica iIlteDdedtraIIIi . from ODe bject to other.In In this volume, the "ecstatic.. dcmcDt is openly

aprcued in the d . poem (section aiO. p. In. the only.election taken from his - ) and in the openiq JltJWqif.

It' a1moIt thoup the traasIator inteacIed the rat of the

118 JOUI7IIII 01 lite AmnictJn 0rVn1lll~/y 107.1 (1987)

This ecstatic ground of cAbd al-Qldir's (and IbncArabrs) spiritual insight-reminiscent, in its mostdirect lyrical expressions, of a sort of s1ul1lh or of therhapsodic 6htw1b of ROml-is even more directlyapparent in some of the 19 poems from his introductionto the K. td-Milwlqi/. translated by Cbarles-AnddGills [Polmes MetllJ1hysiquu. By eMIR ABD AL-QADIa

L'ALGDIEN. pp. 80. Paris: l.Es EDmONS DE L-OEUVRE.1983.], which form an excellent complement to tbemore expository prose of the preceding work ( ithoutwhich, one should add, they would often be diflicult toUDdentand).lu A few of these poems are complex, butrelatively conceptual summaries of metaphysical issuesand paradoxes usinC a traditional Sufi imaaery(MajnOn-Layll, etc.); IS such, they are often remini­scent of the elaborate metaphysical venea that usuallyopen the chapten of the FUliiJJ4t and the Fr,qtq.'24But the best and most powerful of them, transceodinaand transforming those traditional materials, directlyexpress that decisive unitive (and truly univasal) insight

.which is at the core of all of CAbd al-Qidir's (and IbncArabI's) writingt through daring reference to thetheophany of the divine "I" or in an intimate dialogueof the soul with God that cannot but rec:all similarpoems of St. John of the Cross. In translation, at least,these verses are surely as fresh and evocative as themost celebrated poems from Ibn cArabr. lyrical TiII'-

ork, aeaaaDY more elaborately MdoctriJlaJ" aDd theoretical,to be taken _ a sort of COIIUDeDtary on thoK two framina

selectio -ad fOf.them to ItaDd for the ilwlispcnubleof what comes between. (AI DOted below, the poems from the

Introduction to the Mawaqif are often in this~ openlyecstatic key.)

IlJ The traDJl.ator's YCI'Y brief introduction, wbicb tells usvirtually nothin, about either the MIIWiIqif or their author,appears to Mlumc coDiiderabJe previous acquaia,ena: withbotb-a bac:taround wbich is fortulWely supplied by the

prec:c:cIiJII wort. Likewise the broader doctrinal or theoreticalcontext of the poems- bich may wd1 have beeD supplied inthe interveDinl pl'OlC ICICtioIII of cAbeI aI-QIdir'l 1DtrocIuctiOD,

about which we are told DOthiDJ!- apin apparemly tabafor panted, sioce the nota are limited mainly to identif"yinlthe molt evident Koranic quotations aDd aUUliODS.

114 It is iDtereItiDI to DOte dult the poems of tIUa 1011 aredistinpishcd by cAbeI al-Qidir91 adcln:asinI his reader in thesecond peno~ like a WIeber .nth' udentI (as in the moreprosaic parts of the MtIWlIqifmcntioaed above). But the moreintimate-aDd convincina-vena are thOle in tbe int penonor in immediate diaIope with God. often with complexallusio to the correspondina ~oranic: modes of addreuinlthe Prophet.

jum4n al-Asltwiiq. And if their underlying unity ofinsipt aDd perception is such that they could hardly bedistinguished, in that respect, from the works of theShaytb ai-Akbar, cAbd al-Qldir is clearly far frombeing a MdiJciple" in the sense of an epigon. One'simpression, here u throUJbout tbe M.w6qif, is n~ 10

much of dependency or derivation, but rather (toborrow his own Ianguqe) of t 0 equals drinkiDl froma common Source.

Finally, the recent translation of a letter of cAbdal-Qldir to the Socilti il.fiiltique (written in 1855 fromBuna in Turkey, where the Emir fint lived after beingreleased from imprisonmeDt in France) [Lellre iIIU

Fr~IIb:Notn btivn dutinks II MIX qui comprm­IImt, pOW' ilttiTer liJttentioll nil' tin problhnD euen­lieU. Tr. RENE R. KHAWAM. pp. 279. Paris: PHDus..19n.l,'l.' brings out a very different upect of his

m The oriaiul title of the letter is that traDS1atcd as thesubtitle of this traftS1&tioIl. We shoUld also note me recentrqHIblicatioD (EditioDi BouI1ama, Tunis, n.d.) of the on,uwFrench traaslatioD (in 18S8) by Gustave Du~ u livred' cAbMl Ktuln ... , wbicb is revealina of the prejudicca ofhis day (as Mr. Khawuo points out at areat Jenath), but whichis also provided with exteDsive nota aDd an iDdex (pp. 181­370) which lbow some Ierious effort (baed on the YCI'Ylimited kDowJcdae avWble at that time) to acquaiat tberuder with the traditio. of IIIamic pbilolophy UDCIerlyiDacAbd aI-Q"ir',leUer. R. I.ha am's traDIlatioa illOmewhatdoter to the Arabic, mel aiws a useful cbronoJoay (pp. 3S-S9.prinaarily political. some inttreltin& bioIraphicaldetails) and aleJection of8ClCOUDtI (pp. U 1-16: <IIAbel d-Kaderen Fraocej by French coatemporaria, which aptly co.~the perception of the dipity and ,piritual force of the Emir',personality even by overtly hOlliIe witneues.

However, neither translation Jiva much inklina of theactual content of tbe tnelibou of lJIamic thoupt (aDd

especially the IsJamic polibcal philosophy of AviceDna, TiIA,and Ibn KbaIcIOn) UDCIerlyiDa and informinl cAbeI aI-QIdir',

""brief ranarb."(One rcwaIinI aDd Jrimly hUlDOrOUl exampleis hen cAbd al-Qldirt

• •on to the MahdI's unifyina

mankind ~ the onl--a detail specified in numerousI:-/ftlt. frequently cOllllDCDted on (but ill a very difl'erentcliRclion!) by Ibn cArabt-is tRated • a pracieDt "'prophecy"(p. 164) of the liberation of AJacria.) The modem traDIIator'sfn:queat impassioned -ida, while Iymptomatic of the co ­quenca of the contemporary iporaoce (me.t Itritioa pre­cisely in the lslamic: world) of the complexity aDd univerulityof the divene intellectual traditions underlyina cAbd aI-QIdir'sletter, are in te'\UliD1 contrast with cAbeI aI-QIdir'l ownserene and (for those aware of the traditions in quation)doIeIy reasoaed diIcoune.

MoUJS: Ibn cArtlbi tDUl /aU 1nI6preters, PtlTI 11 119

thought-his acquaintance with the traditions ofIaIamic philosophy, and more particularly of politicalphilosophy, transmitted (in his case) through suchfipres u AviCCllJUl, TOIi, and Ibn Kha1dtin. Thiswork, in its more philosophical sections, is a brief (andrelatively unoricinal) paraphrase of the buic concep­tions of those authors concerning man'5 nature andperfection u I&knowcr,*26 aDd of the eaentia1SUidinl

J» cAbcI al-QIdir'l own Sufi collUllitmenll and UDdentaDd­illl aR mOlt evident here in his aUusiODS to the rdevaDt IOrts

or metaphysical IObowIecI&e- (CUm) coDSiderecl • maD'S

hipeIte~ and in his statement at the eDd of his cIiIcuaionof prophecy (p. 164): IOIf IOIDeODC came to IDe wisbiDa toknow the way of the truth, and provided that be knew mylaquqe perfectly well, I would lead him to the way or thetnlth without difliculty-DOt by prasurin. him to .ccept myideas, but limply by matiDa the truth appear before Jail eyes,

role of the prophets and the communities they establishin enablina man to realize that perfectioa. What .remarkable here is cAbd aJ-Qldir's matter-of-fact reli­ance on that (reputedly extinct) intellcctuU tradition,apparently in no way felt to be incompatible with hisSufism or -alien" to Islam, and the extraordinaryclarity and serenity with which it helped him to compre­hend and come to terms with the dramatic: historicalchanges that marked his own life and times. As such, itis an appropriate temibder of other, no Jess univenaland humanly significant dimensions of later Islamicthought which have~ become, if anythin& evenmore unknown (and misunderstood) than the manifoldcontributions of Ibn cArabI and his interpreten.

in such a way that he could not avoid acknowlcdaiDI it"(tranIlated here from the FreDCh). If otbiftI e , NCb ordJ

au..* spirit with wbidI be approaebed theM~