Sayyed Hossein Nasr - Theoretical Gnosis and Doctrinal-Sufism

8/8/2019 Sayyed Hossein Nasr - Theoretical Gnosis and Doctrinal-Sufism

1/35

Transcendent Philosophy 1, 1-36 London Academy of Iranian Studies

Theoretical Gnosis and Doctrinal Sufism and Their

Significance Today

Seyyed Hossein NasrGeorge Washington University

AbstractThis essay examines the meaning, role and structure of that supremescience of the Real which came to be known as al-tasawwuf al-'ilmi or'irfan-i nazari in Islamic civilization. It then turns to the history of this

science beginning with Ibn 'Arabi and his immediate circle and thenconsiders each region of the Islamic world separately from Morocco to theMalay world. Special attention is paid to the great masters of 'irfan-i nazariin Persia from the earliest teachers to those of the present day. The relationof this science to philosophy, kalam, and other intellectual disciplines isdiscussed and its spiritual significance is studied in itself and in its relationto the operative and practical aspects of Sufism. At the end of the essay asection is devoted to the significance of 'irfan today and its role in providing solutions for some of the most important intellectual andspiritual issues facing the contemporary Islam world.

Introduction

There is a body of knowledge in the Islamic tradition which,while highly intellectual in the original sense of this term, is neithertheology (kalm) nor philosophy (falsafah) while dealing with manysubjects of their concern although from another perspective. This

body of knowledge is called doctrinal Sufism, al-tas}awwuf al-ilm inArabic, to be contrasted to practical Sufism, al-tas}awwuf al-amal, ortheoretical (and sometimes speculative) gnosis (this term beingunderstood in its original and not sectarian sense), especially in the


2/35

2 Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Persian-speaking world, where it is referred to as irfn-i naz}ar. Theseekers and masters of this body of knowledge have alwaysconsidered it to be the Supreme Science, al-ilm al-al, and itcorresponds in the Islamic context to what we have called elsewhere

scientia sacra.1 This corpus of knowledge is implicit in the Quran,H{adth, and the writings of early Sufis. It becomes somewhat moreexplicit from the 4th/10th century onward in works of such masters asH{akm Tirmidh, AbH{mid Muh}ammad and Ah}mad Ghazzl, andAyn al-Qud}t Hamadn and receives its full elaboration in the7th/13th century in the hands of Ibn Arab, not all of whose writingsare, however, concerned with this Supreme Science. This corpus isdistinct from other genres of Sufi writing such as manuals for the

practice of Sufism, works on spiritual virtues, Sufi hagiographies,Sufi poetry, etc. but during the past seven centuries this body ofknowledge has exercised great influence on most other aspects of

Sufism and also on later Islamic philosophy and even kal

m.Despite its immense influence in many parts of the Islamicworld during the last centuries, doctrinal Sufism or theoretical gnosishas also had its opponents over the centuries, including certainscholars of the Quran and H{adth, some of the more exoterist jurists,many of the theologians (mutakallimn), some of the morerationalistic philosophers and even some Sufis associated with Suficenters (khnqh orzwiyah) and established orders. The latter haveopposed the theoretical exposition of truths which they believe should

be kept hidden and which they consider to be associated closely withspiritual practice and inward unveiling (kashf).2 Still, this body of

knowledge has been preserved and has continued to flourish over allthese centuries, exercising immense influence in many domains ofIslamic thought while remaining for many the crown of allknowledge.

A Brief History of the Tradition of Theoretical Gnosis

The Earliest Foundation


3/35

Theoretical Gnosis and Doctrinal Sufism and Their Significance Today 3

Before turning to theoretical gnosis itself and its significancetoday, it is necessary to provide a brief history over the ages in theIslamic tradition of the expressions of this Supreme Science whichitself stands beyond history and temporal development, being at theheart of the philosohia perennis as understood by traditional

authorities,3 and not being bound in its essence by the local coloringof various epochs and places. Of course, the wisdom with which thisSupreme Science deals has always been and will always be, but it hasreceived distinct formulations in the framework of various traditionsat whose heart is to be found this wisdom concerning the nature ofreality. In the Islamic tradition this knowledge was handed down in a

principial manner by the Prophet to a number of his companions,chief among them Al, and in later generations to the Sufi mastersand of course the Shiite Imams, many of whom were in fact also

poles of Sufism of their day.4 Besides being transmitted orally, thisknowledge was often expressed in the form of allusions, ellipticalexpressions, symbolic poems and the like.

Gradually from the 4th/10th century onward some Sufis suchas H{akm Ab Abd Allh Tirmidh(d. circa 320/938) began to writemore systematically on certain aspects of Sufi doctrine. For example,Tirmidhwrote on the central Sufi doctrine ofwalyah/wilyah, thatis, initiatic and spiritual power as well as sanctity. During the centuryafter him, AbH{mid Muh}ammad Ghazzl (d. 505/1111) wrote ondivine knowledge itself in both the I}hyand such shorter treatises asal-Rislat al-laduniyyah (only attributed to him according to somescholars) as well as writing an esoteric commentary on the Light

Verse of the Quran in his Mishkt al-anwr. His brother Ah}mad (d.520/1126) expounded gnosis and metaphysics in the language of lovein his Sawnih}. Shortly afterwards, Ayn al-Qud}t Hamadn (d.525/1131) dealt with the subject of divine knowledge and a

philosophical exposition of certain Sufi teachings in his MaktbtandTamhdtwhile in his Zubdah he criticized the existing rationalisticcurrents in the thought of some philosophers and pointed to anotherway of knowing which is none other than gnosis. These figures in


4/35


5/35


6/35


irfn expressed in sublime poetry, and the subject of severalcommentaries which are themselves seminal texts of irfn.13 Therewere also many important Persian poets such as Fakhr al-Dn Irq(d. 688/1289), Awh}ad al-Dn Kirmn (d. 635/1238), Shams al-DnMaghrib (d. 809/1406-07), Mah}md Shabistar (d. circa 718/1318),and Abd al-Rah}mn Jm (d. 898/1492), not to speak of Turkish

poets and those of the Subcontinent who expressed Ibn Arabianteachings in the medium of poetry but their poems do not belongstrictly to doctrinal texts of the tradition of theoretical gnosis withwhich we are concerned here although some of the commentaries ontheir poetry do, such as Sharh}-i gulshan-i rz of Shams al-Dn Lhj(d. before 900/1494) as do some poetic texts such as Ashiat al-lamatandLawih} ofJm.

Returning to Qnaws students, as far as the subject of thisessay is concerned the most notable and influential for the later

tradition was first of all Sad al-D

n Fargh

n

(d. 695/1296) whocollected the commentaries of his master in Persian on the Tiyyahand on their basis composed a major work in both Persian and Arabic(which contains certain additions) with the title Mashriq al-darrand Muntahal-madrik, respectively.14 Secondly, one must mentionMuayyid al-Dn Jand(d. 700/1300), the author of the first extensivecommentary upon theFus}s}15 which also influenced the very popularcommentary of his student Abd al-Razzq Kshn (d. 730/1330).16Both of these men also wrote other notable works on theoreticalgnosis such as the Persian treatise Nafh}at al-rh} wa tuh}fat al-futh} ofJandand the Arabic Tawl al-qurn of Kshnwhich has been also

mistakenly attributed to Ibn Arab. This work is illustrative of awhole genre of writings which explain the principles of gnosis andmetaphysics on the basis of commentary upon the inner levels ofmeaning of the Quran. During this early period, when the School oftheoretical gnosis was taking shape, there were other figures ofimportance associated with the circle of Ibn Arab and Qnawalthough not the students of the latter such as Sad al-Dn H{amyah(d. 649/1252) and his student Azz al-Dn Nasaf (d. before


7/35


700/1300) who wrote several popular works in Persian based on thedoctrine ofwah}dat al-wujdand al-insn al-kmil. It is not possible,however, in this short historical review to deal with all such figures.

The Arab World

From this early foundation located in Syria and Anatolia theteachings of the School of Ibn Araband theoretical gnosis spread todifferent regions of the Islamic world. In summary fashion we shalltry to deal with some of the most important figures in each region. Letus commence with the Arab world. In the Maghrib a very strong Sufitradition has been preserved over the centuries but MaghribSufism,although devoted to gnosis in its purest form as we see in such figuresas Ab Madyan, Ibn Mashsh and Abul-H{asan al-Shdhil, was notgiven to long theoretical expositions of gnosis as we see in the East.17Most works from this region were concerned with the practice of the

Sufi path and explanation of practical Sufi teachings. One had to waitfor the 12th/18th century to find in the works ofAh}mad ibn Ajbah (d.1224/1809-10) treatises which belong to the genre of theoreticalgnosis. But the oral tradition based on Ibn Arabian teachings waskept alive as we see in the personal instructions and also writtenworks of such celebrated 14th/20th century Sufi masters of theMaghrib as Shaykh al-Alaw(d. 1353/1934) and Shaykh Muh}ammadal-Tdil (d. 1371/1952).18 Maghrib works on gnosis tended,however, to be usually less systematic and philosophical in theirexposition of gnosis than those of the East.

A supreme example of Ibn Arabian teachings emanating

from the Maghrib is to be found in the writings of the celebratedAlgerian amr and Sufi master Abd al-Qdir al-Jazir (d.1300/1883), who taught the works of Ibn Arab when in exile inDamascus. Amr Abd al-Qdir also composed a number ofindependent works on gnosis such as the Kitb al-mawqif.19 To thisday the text of the Fus}s}and the Futh}tare taught in certain Sufienters of the Maghrib especially those associated with theShdhiliyyah Order which has continued to produce over the


8/35


centuries its own distinct genre of Sufi literature going back to the prayers of Abul-H{asan al-Shdhil (d. 656/1258) and especially thetreatises of the third pole of the Order, Ibn At} Allh al-Iskandar(d.709/1309). In later centuries these two currents, the first issuingfrom early Shdhilism and the second from Ibn Arabian gnosis wereto meet in many notable figures of Sufism from that as well as otherregions.

There was greater interest in theoretical gnosis in the eastern part of the Arab world as far as the production of written texts isconcerned. Strangely enough, however, Egypt, which has always

been a major center of Sufism, is an exception. In that ancient landthere has always been more interest in practical Sufism and Sufiethics than in speculative thought and doctrinal Sufism althoughAkbarian teachings had spread to Mamluk Egypt in the 7th/13thcentury. There were also some popularizers of Ibn Arabs teachings

in Egypt, perhaps chief among them Abd al-Wahhb al-Shar

n

(d.973/1565), whose well known works present a more popular versionof the Futh}tand Fus}s}.20 He tried also to link Shdhil teachingswith those of Ibn Arab. There are, however, few notablecommentaries on classical texts of gnosis in Egypt in comparisonwith those one finds in many other lands. Theoretical gnosis was,nevertheless, taught and studied by many Egyptian figures. In thiscontext it is interesting to note that even the modernist reformerMuh}ammad Abduh turned to the study of Ibn Arab later in life.Opposition to these writings has remained, however, strong to thisday in many circles in that land as one sees in the demonstrations in

front of the Egyptian Parliament some years ago on the occasion ofthe publication of the Futh}tby Osman Yahya who had edited thetext critically.

In the Yemen there was great interest in Ibn Arabian gnosisin the School of Zabd especially under the Raslids up to the 9th/15thcentury. Ism al-Jabart (d. 806/1403), Ah}mad ibn al-Raddd (d.821/1417-18) and Abd al-Karm al-Jl (d. 832/1428) were

particularly significant figures of this School in the Yemen.21 Al-Jl,


9/35


who was originally Persian but resided in the Yemen, is particularlyimportant because of his magnum opus, al-Insn al-kmil, a primarywork of gnosis that is used as a text for the instruction of theoreticalgnosis from Morocco to India to this day. It is a more systematicexposition of the teaching of Ibn Arab.22

In the eastern Arab world it was especially in greaterPalestine and Syria that one sees continuous interest in theoreticalgnosis and the writing of important commentaries on Ibn Arabsuchas that of Abd al-Ghanyal-Nbulus (d. 1143/1731) on theFus}s}.23Also, the defense by Ibrhm ibn H{asan al-Kurn (d. 1101/1690), aKurdish scholar who resided in Mecca, of the gnosis of Ibn Arabhad much influence in Syria and adjoining areas. Although, as inEgypt and elsewhere, many jurists and theologians in Syria going

back to Ibn Taymiyyah and students of Sad al-Dn al-Taftzan,opposed the doctrines of Ibn Arabian gnosis, this School remained

very much alive and continues to survive to this day in that region.One of the most remarkable contemporary Sufis who died in Beirut just a few years ago, the woman saint, Sayyidah Ft}imah al-Yashrut}iyyah, gave the title al-Rih}lah ilal-H{aqq to her major workon Sufism on the basis of a dream of Ibn Arab.24

Ottoman TurkeyTurning to the Turkish part of the Ottoman world, we find a

continuous and strong tradition in the study of theoretical gnosisgoing back to al-Qnaw himself and his circle in Konya. Foremostamong these figures after the founding of this School are Dd

Qays}ar (d. 751/1350) and Shams al-Dn Fanr (d. 834/1431). Astudent of Kshn, Qays}ar wrote a number of works on gnosis,including his commentary on the Tiyyah of Ibn al-Frid}, but chiefamong them is his commentary upon the Fus}s}, which is one of themost thorough and remains popular to this day. 25 He also wrote anintroduction to this work called al-Muqaddimah which summarizesthe whole cycle of gnostic doctrines in a masterly fashion and has

been itself the subject of many commentaries including important


10/35


11/35


Although a thorough study has never been made of all theimportant figures associated with the School of Ibn Arab andtheoretical gnosis in the Indian Subcontinent, the research that has

been carried out so far reveals a very widespread influence of thisSchool in that area. Already in the 8 th/14th century Sayyid Al

Hamadn, the Persian Sufi who migrated to Kashmir (d. 786/1385),helped to spread Ibn Arabs ideas in India. He not only wrote aPersian commentary on the Fus}s}, but also composed a number ofindependent treatises on irfn.29 A century later Al al-Dn Al ibnAh}mad Mahim (d. 835/1432) not only commented upon the Fus}s}and QnwsNus}s}, but also wrote several independent expositionsof gnosis of a more philosophical nature in Arabic. These works arerelated in many ways in approach to later works on gnosis written inPersia. He also wrote an Arabic commentary upon Shams al-DnMaghribsJm-i jahnnamy which some believe received much of

its inspiration from the Mash

riq al-dar

r

of Farghn. It isinteresting to note that Maghribs poetry, which like that of many

other poets such as Kirmn, Irq, Shabistar, Shh Nimat AllhWal(d. 834/1431) and Jmwere based on basic gnostic theses suchas wah}dat al-wujd, was especially appreciated by those followers ofthe School of Ibn Arab who were acquainted with the Persianlanguage as was the poetry of Ibn al-Frid} among Arab, Persian,Turkish and Indian followers of that School.

Notable exponents of theoretical gnosis in India are numerousand even the better known ones cannot be mentioned here.30 But it isnecessary to mention one figure who is probably the most profound

master of this School in the Subcontinent. He is Muh}ibb AllhIlhbd (also known as Allhbd) (d. 1058/1648).31 Author of anArabic and even longer Persian commentary on theFus}s} and also anauthoritative commentary on the Futh}t, Ilhbd also wroteindependent treatises on irfn. His writings emphasize intellectionand sapience rather than just spiritual states which many Sufis inIndia as elsewhere claimed as the sole source of divine knowledge.The significance of the works of Muh}ibb Allh Ilhbd in the


12/35


tradition of theoretical gnosis under consideration in this essay andhis later influence in India are immense. He marks one of the major

peaks of the School not only in India, but in the whole of the Islamicworld.

The central thesis of Ibn Arabian gnosis, that is, wah}dat al-wujd had a life of its own in India. While certain Sufis, such asShaykh Ah}mad Sirhind, opposed its usual interpretation, it wasembraced by many Sufis including such great saints as Gs Dirzand Niz}m al-Dn Awliy and many of their disciples. One canhardly imagine the history of Sufism in the Subcontinent without thecentral role played by irfn-i naz}ar. Even notable Indian

philosophers and theologians such as Shh WalAllh (d. 1176/1762)of Delhi wrote works highly inspired by this School whose influencecontinued into the 14th/20th century as we see in some of the works ofMawln Ashraf Al Thanw (d. 1362/1943).32 Moreover, once the

philosophical School of Illumination (ishr

q) and the TranscendentTheosophy or Philosophy (al-h}ikmat al-mutaliyah) reached India,there were many interactions between these Schools and the Schoolofirfn as we also see in Persia itself.

Southeast Asia

Turning to Southeast Asia and the Malay world, here weencounter a unique phenomenon, namely the role of the School of IbnArab, sometimes called wujdiyyah, in the very formation of Malayas an intellectual language suitable for Islamic discourse. H}amzahFans}r(d. 1000/1592), the most important figure of this School, was

a major Malay poet and played a central role in the development ofMalay as an Islamic language while he also had a command of Arabicand Persian. He was, moreover, a master of the doctrines of theSchool of Ibn Arab.33 He was followed in his attachment to thisSchool by Shams al-Dn Sumtrn (d. 1040/1630). Although thisSchool was opposed by certain other Malay Sufis such as Nr al-DnRnir and most Malays paid more attention to the operative ratherthan the doctrinal aspect of Sufism, the School of theoretical gnosis


13/35


continued to be studied in certain places and even today there arecircles in Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia where the teachings ofthis School are followed and many of the classical texts continue to

be studied.34

ChinaA word must also be said about China. Until the 11 th/17th

century Chinese Muslims who dealt with intellectual matters did soon the basis of Arabic and Persian texts. It was only in the 11 th/17thcentury that they began to use classical Chinese and to seek to expressIslamic metaphysics and philosophy in the language of Neo-Confucianism. Henceforth, there developed a significant body ofIslamic thought in Chinese that is being systematically studied onlynow. It is interesting to note that two of the classical Islamic works to

be rendered the earliest into Chinese are firstly theLawih}of Jm,which is a masterly summary ofirfn in Persian, translated by LiuChih (d. circa 1670) as Chen-chao-wei (Displaying the Concealmentof the Real Realm); and secondly the Ashiat al-lamat also byJm and again, as already mentioned, dealing with irfn, translated

by Po Na-chih (d. after 1697) as Chao-yan pi-cheh (TheMysterious Secret of the Original Display).35 Also the first ChineseMuslim thinker to expound Islamic teachings in Chinese, that is,Wang Tai-y (d. 1657 or 1658), who wrote hisReal Commentary onthe True Teachingin 1642 to be followed by several other works, wassteeped in the same irfn tradition. The School of theoretical gnosiswas therefore destined to play a major role in the encounter on the

highest level between the Chinese and the Islamic intellectualtraditions during the past few centuries.

Persia

Persia was destined to become one of the main centers, if notthe central arena, for the later development of theoretical gnosis. Thecircle of Qnawwas already closely connected to the Persian culturalworld and many of its members, including Qnawhimself, wrote in


14/35


Persian. Qnaws student, Fakhr al-Dn Irq is considered one ofthe greatest poets of the Persian language. Among other earlymembers of the School one can mention Sad al-Dn H{amyah, hisdisciple Azz al-Dn Nasaf, who wrote on gnosis in readilyaccessible Persian, Awh}ad al-Dn Balyn (d. 686/1288) from Shiraz,whose famousRislat al-ah}adiyyah was for a long time attributed toIbn Arab,36 and Abd al-Razzq Kshnwho, as already mentioned,is a major figure of the School of theoretical gnosis and a prominentcommentator upon the Fus}s}. From the 8th/14th century onward inPersia we see on the one hand the continuation of the School oftheoretical gnosis through the appearance of prose works in bothArabic and Persian either in the form of commentary upon the Fus}s}and other seminal texts of this School or as independent treatises. Onthe other hand we observe the deep influence of this School in Sufiliterature, especially poetry. A supreme example is the Gulshan-i rz

of Mah}md Shabistar

, one of the greatest masterpieces of PersianSufi poetry which summarizes the principles of Ibn Arabian gnosis

in verses of celestial beauty. That is why its commentary byMuh}ammad Lhj in the 9th/15th century is such a major text oftheoretical gnosis. Here, however, we are only concerned with the

prose and systematic works of theoretical gnosis and not the poeticaltradition but the nexus between the two should not be forgotten as wesee in the works of Irq, Shh Nimat Allh Wal, Jm and manyothers.

Another important event that took place in the 8th/14th centuryand left its deep influence upon the history of the School during the

Safavid, Qajar and Pahlavi periods was the integration of IbnArabian gnosis into Shiism which possesses its own gnosticteachings to which scholars refer as irfn-i sh. These twooutwardly distinct schools are inwardly connected and go back to theoriginal esoteric and gnostic dimension of the Islamic revelation. Itwas most of all Sayyid H{aydar mul (d. 787/1385) who broughtabout a synthesis of these two branches of the tree of gnosis, althoughhe also did make certain criticisms of Ibn Arab, especially


15/35


concerning the question of walyah/wilyah. Many others walkedlater in his footsteps. mul was at once a major Twelve-ImamShiite theologian and a Sufi devoted to the School of Ibn Arab. His

Jmi al-asrris a pivotal text for the gnosis of Ibn Arabin a Shiitecontext.37 He was also the author of a major commentary upon the

Fus}s} as well as independent metaphysical treatises. The laterdevelopment of theoretical gnosis in Persia, as well as the School ofTranscendent Theosophy of MullS{adr cannot be fully understoodwithout consideration ofmuls works.

The 8th/14th to the 10th/15th century marks a period of intenseactivity in the field of theoretical gnosis and the School of Ibn Arabin Persia. Commentaries upon the Fus}s} continued to appear. Thefirst in Persian was most likely that of Rukn al-Dn Masd Shrz,known as Bh Rukn (d. 769/1367).38 But there were many others

by such figures as Tj al-Dn Khwrazm (d. circa 838/1435),39 Shh

Nimat Allh Wal

, Ibn Turkah (d. 830/1437) and J

m, who in asense brings this period to an end. This extensive activity in the

domain of gnosis associated specifically with the School of IbnArabwas in addition to the flowering of the Sufism of the School ofKhurasan and Central Asia and profound gnostic teachings, mostly in

poetic form, of figures such as At}t}rand Rmon the one hand andthe Kubrawiyyah School founded by Najm al-Dn Kubr on the other.We can hardly overemphasize the importance of the Khurasn andCentral Asian Schools and their profound metaphysical teachings, butin this essay we shall not deal with them, being only concerned withirfn-i naz}arin its association with the School of Ibn Arab.

Among the gnostic figures of this period, S{in al-Dn ibnTurkah Is}fahn stands out as far as his later influence is concerned.The author of many independent treatises on metaphysics and thetraditional sciences, he also wrote a commentary upon the Fus}s}which became popular.40 But the work that made him one of the

pillars of the School of theoretical gnosis in Persia during latercenturies is his Tamhd al-qawid.41 This masterly treatment of thecycle of gnosis became a popular textbook for the teaching of the


16/35


subject in Persia especially during the Qajar period and has remainedso to this day as one sees in the extensive recension of it by thecontemporary Persian philosopher and gnostic, Abd Allh Jawdmul.42

The figure, who was given the title of the Seal of Persian

Poets, that is, Abd al-Rah}mn Jm from Herat, was also in a sensethe seal of this period in the history of theoretical gnosis in Persia.One of the greatest poets of the Persian language, he was also amaster of Ibn Arabian gnosis and in a sense synthesized within hisworks the two distinct currents of Islamic spirituality that flowedfrom Ibn Arab and Rm. Jm is the author of a number ofcommentaries upon the works of Ibn Arabsuch as the famousNaqdal-nus}s} fsharh} naqsh al-fus}s.43 He also authored summaries of theteachings of this School in works already mentioned such as the

Lawih} andAshiat al-lamat, both literary masterpieces which are

used as texts for the teaching ofirf

n to this day.

44

The spread of Twelve-Imam Shiism in Persia during theSafavid period transformed the scene as far as the study and teachingofirfn was concerned. During the earlier part of Safavid rule, manySufi orders flourished in Persia whereas from the 11th/17th centuryonward opposition grew against Sufism especially among the class ofShiite scholars who henceforth chose to speak of irfn rather thantas}awwuf.45 Although other types of Sufi and gnostic writingsappeared during this period by members of various Sufi orders suchas the Dhahabs and irfn-i sh also flourished in certain circles,few new works on the subject of theoretical gnosis appeared during

this period in comparison to the previous era. The main influence ofthe School of Ibn Arabcame to be felt through the writings of MullS{adr (d. 1050/1640/41), who was deeply influenced by Shaykh al-Akbar and quoted from him extensively in his Asfrand elsewhere.46But technically speaking the School of MullS{adr is associated withh}ikmatand not irfn, although MullS{adr was also a gnostic anddeeply versed in Ibn Arabian teachings. But he integrated elementsof this teaching into his al-h}ikmat al-mutaliyah (Transcendent


17/35


Theosophy or Philosophy) and did not write separate treatises on puregnosis in the manner of an Ibn Arab or Qnaw. It is highlysignificant that MullS{adr did not leave behind a commentary onthe Fus}s} like that of Kshn or Qays}ar nor write a treatise likeTamhd al-qawidalthough he was well acquainted with Ibn Turkah.

Nor do we find major works devoted purely to theoretical gnosis orirfn-i naz}arby his students such as Fayd} Kshn, who was also agnostic, or Lhj. The School of irfn-i naz}ar certainly continuedduring the Safavid era but the major intellectual thrust of the periodwas in the creation of the School of Transcendent Theosophy, whichhad incorporated major theses ofirfn such as wa}h}dat al-wujdintoits philosophical system, but which was distinct in the structure of itsdoctrines, manner of presentation and method of demonstration fromirfn. Furthermore, the subject ofh}ikmat is being conditioned bynegation (wujd bi-shart}-i l) while the subject of irfn is totally

non-conditioned being (wujd l

bi-shart}).In any case as far as Persia is concerned, one had to wait for

the Qajar period to see a major revival of the teaching of irfn-inaz}ar and the appearance of important commentaries on classicaltexts of this tradition. This revival occurred along with therevivification of the teachings of the School of MullS{adr and manymasters of this period were both h}akm and rif, while irfncontinued to influence philosophy deeply. The first major figure tomention in the context of the School ofirfn during the Qajar periodis Sayyid Rad} Lrjn (d. 1270/1853) who was a student of MullAlNr in h}ikmatbut we know less of his lineage in irfn.47 He is

said to have possessed exalted spiritual states and was given the titleof Possessor of the States of the Inner (bt}in) World by hiscontemporaries.48 We know that he taught the Fus}s} and Tamhd al-qawidin Isfahan and was considered as a saint as well as master ofirfn-i naz}ar.

Sayyid Rad}s most important student was qMuh}ammadRid} Qumsha (d. 1306/1888-9), whom many Persian experts onirfn consider as a second Ibn Arab and the most prominent


18/35


commentator upon gnostic texts such as the Fus}s} since the time ofQnaw. qMuh}ammadRid} studied in Isfahan but later migratedto Tehran which became henceforth perhaps the most important forthe teaching ofirfn-i naz}ar for many decades.49 There, he taughtand trained numerous important students in both irfn and h}ikmat.He also wrote a number of important glosses and commentaries onsuch works as the Tamhd al-qawidand Qays}ars commentary ontheFus}s} as well as some of the works of MullS{adr, in addition toindependent treatises. Like so many masters of irfn-i naz}ar, qMuh}ammad Rid} was also a fine poet and composed poetry under the

pen-name S{ahb. Unfortunately much of his poetry is lost. It is alsoof great significance to note that q Muh}ammad Rid} emphasizedthe importance of spiritual practice and the need for a spiritualmaster.50

One ofq Muh}ammad Rid}s important students was Mrz

Hshim Ashkiwar

Rasht

(d. 1332/1914), commentator upon Mis}b

h}al-uns, who took over the circle of instruction of irfn in Tehran

afterq Muh}ammad Rid}. He was in turn teacher of such famoush}akms and rifs of the past century as Mrz Mahdshtiyn (d.1362/1953), Mrz Ah}mad shtiyn (d. 1359/1940), SayyidMuh}ammad Kz}im As}s}r (d. 1396/1975) and Muh}ammad AlShhbd (d. 1369/1951).51 The latter is particularly important notonly for his own writings on gnosis including his Rashah}t al-bih}r,

but for being the master of Ayatollah Khomeini in irfn-i naz}ar, theperson with whom the latter studied theFus}s} without the presence ofany other student.52 Many of the ideas of Ayatollah Khomeini in his

Talqt, Sharh} du-i sah}ar and Mis}bh} al-hid yah ilal-khilfahwal-walyah/wilyah reflect the interpretations of Shhbdwhomhe revered highly.

The extensive political fame and influence of Ayatollah Rh}Allh Khumayn (Khomeini) (d. 1409/1989) has prevented many

people in the West and even within the Islamic world to pay seriousattention to his gnostic works,53 and his place in the long history oftheoretical gnosis outlined in a summary fashion above. There is no


19/35


doubt that he was attracted to the study of irfn from an early ageand in later years, while he also studied h}ikmat, not to speak of thetransmitted sciences, his great love remained irfn, although he wasalso a recognized master of the School of Mull S{adr.54 In hiswritings he combined the tradition of irfn-i sh55and that of IbnArab. For example his Sharh} du-i sah}arbelongs to the world ofShiite gnosis; the Talqt al sharh} fus}s} il-h}ikam wa mis}bh} il-uns

belong to the tradition of Ibn Arabian gnosis as interpreted over thecenturies by Shiite gnostics and with many new insights into theunderstanding of these classical texts; and Mis}bh} al-hid yah ilal-khil fah wal-walyah/wilyah represent a synthesis of the twoschools of gnosis. Other mystical works of Ayatollah Khomeini suchas Chihil h}adth, Sirr al-s}alh, db al-s}alh and Sharh}-i h}adth-i

jund-i aql wa jahlare also works of a gnostic and esoteric qualityreminiscent of a Fayd} Kshnor Qd}Sad Qummand going back

even earlier, classical Sufi works on such subjects, but they do not fallfully under the category ofirfn-i naz}aras we have defined it in thisessay.56 Ayatollah Khomeini also composed poems of a mystical andgnostic nature.

For many it is interesting to note and might even appear asperplexing that although later in life he entered fully into the arena of politics, earlier in his life Ayatollah Khomeini was very muchinterested not only in theoretical gnosis but also in operative Sufismwith its ascetic dimension and emphasis on detachment from theworld. The key to this riddle should perhaps be sought first of all inthe stages of mans journeys (asfr) to God mentioned by Mull

S{adr at the beginning of the Asfr, stages which include both the journey from creation (al-khalq) to God (al-H{aqq) and return tocreation with God and secondly in Ayatollah Khomeinisunderstanding of the stages of this journey as they applied to him andto what he considered to be his mission in life. In any case althoughthe later part of his life differed greatly outwardly from that ofqMuh}ammad Rid}, his early life was much like that of the figurewhom he called the master of our masters. Also like q


20/35


Muh}ammad Rid}, Ayatollah Khomeini was poetically gifted anddeeply immersed in the tradition of Persian Sufi poetry.

There is need in the future to study more closely the relationbetween the contemplative and active dimensions of life in the case ofAyatollah Khomeini in relation to the teachings of irfn, and moregenerally in the lives of several other major Muslim political figuresof the 14th/20th century such as H{asan al-Bann, the founder of theIkhwn al-muslimn, and Mawln Mawdd, the founder of Jamat-i islmof Pakistan, both of whom were deeply immersed in politicswhile being earlier in life devoted in one way or another to Sufism. Inthe case of none of the major Muslim political figures of the 14 th/20thcentury, however, is there such a close relationship with Sufism andirfn as one finds in the case of Ayatollah Khomeini. Such mattersraise issues of central concern for the understanding of the relation

between Sufism and irfn on the one hand and external political

action on the other. These issues are not, however, our concern here.What is important to note is that irrespective of his political views andactions, and his particular interpretation of walyah/wilyah,Ayatollah Khomeini remains an important figure in the long historyof theoretical gnosis in the Islamic world.

The tradition of irfn-i naz}ar continues to this day inPersia.57 After the generation of such figures as Ayatollah Khomeini,Allmah T{abt}ab (d. 1404/1983), who was a major gnosticwithout writing any commentaries on Ibn Arab, and also one of theimportant masters of irfn, Sayyid Muh}ammad Kz}im As}s}r,notable figures have appeared upon the scene such as Sayyid Jall al-

Dn shtiyan, H{asan-zdah mul, and Jawd mul, of whom thelatter two still teach at Qom. shtiyans commentary upon theintroduction of Qays}ar to the Fus}s} mentioned above, as well as anumber of his other commentaries such as those on Tamhd al-qawid and Naqd al-nus}s}, are major contemporary texts oftheoretical gnosis, while the recent commentary by H{asan-zdahmulon theFus}s} entitled Mumidd al-himam dar sharh}-i fus}s} al-


21/35


h}ikam58 reveals the living nature of this School in Persia as doesJawd muls recension ofTamhd al-qawid.

With What Does Theoretical Gnosis Deal?

Before turning to the significance of theoretical gnosis anddoctrinal Sufism, it is necessary to mention a few words about whatsubjects this Supreme Science treats. And before delineating thesubjects made known through theoretical gnosis, one needs to knowhow one can gain such a knowledge. The knowledge of the SupremeReality or the Supreme Substance is itself the highest knowledge andconstitutes the very substance of principial knowledge. As FrithjofSchuon, one of the foremost contemporary expositors of gnosis andmetaphysics has said, The substance of knowledge is Knowledge ofthe Substance.59 This knowledge is contained deep within theheart/intellect and gaining it is more of a recovery than a discovery. Itis ultimately remembrance, the Platonic anamnesis. The facultyassociated with this knowledge is the intellect (al-aql), the nous, notto be confused with reason. The correct functioning of the intellectwithin man is in most cases in need of that objective manifestation ofthe intellect that is revelation.60 In any case its attainment alwaysrequires intellectual intuition, which is ultimately a Divine gift, andthe ability to taste the truth. In the Islamic tradition this supremeknowledge or gnosis is associated with such qualities as dhawq(taste), h}ads (intuition), ishrq (illumination) and h}ud}r (presence).Those who are able to understand gnosis must possess certainintellective gifts not to be confused with powers of mere

ratiocination. Also in Islam gnosis has always been related to theinner meaning of the revelation and its attainment of the initiatic andesoteric power ofwalyah/wilyah which issues from the fountain of

prophecy and about which so many Muslim gnostics from Ibn Arabto Sayyid H{aydarmuland from q Muh}ammad Rid} QumshatoMuh}ammad AlShhbdto Ayatollah Khomeini have written withdiffering interpretations.


22/35


Turning now to the subjects with which theoretical gnosis anddoctrinal Sufism deal, we must mention that it is not our intentionhere to expound its teachings, but only the subjects which are ofconcern to this School.61 The supreme subject of gnosis may be saidto be the Supreme Principle or Reality which is absolute and infinite

and not even bound by the condition of being absolute and infinite.The gnostics often write that it is Absolute Being without even thelimitation of absoluteness. It is therefore the Reality which is bothBeyond-Being and Absolute Being. Later gnostics called thissupreme subject wujd-i l bi-shart}-i maqsam, the totallyunconditioned Being which is the ground for all divisions anddistinctions. Gnosis, therefore, deals not only with ontology but witha metaphysics that is grounded beyond Being in the Supreme Realityof which Being usually understood is the first determination. It beginswith the Divine Ipseity or Dht that is above all limits and

determinations and that is sometimes referred to as al-H{

aqq (theTruth). It also deals with multiplicity within the Divine Order, that is,the Divine Names and Qualities which are so many Self-Determinations and Self-Disclosures of the Supreme Essence.

This Supreme Science (al-ilm al-al) that is gnosis alsodeals with manifestations of the Principle, with all the levels ofuniversal existence from the archangelic to the material but views allthat exists in the cosmic order in light of the Principle. It descendsfrom the Principle to manifestation and deals with cosmology as ascience of the cosmos in relation to the Principle, as a form ofknowledge that provides maps to guide and orient human beings who

are situated in the confines of cosmic existence to the MetacosmicReality. This Supreme Science also deals of necessity with the humanstate in all its width, breadth, depth and height. It contains a most

profound science of man, which one could call an anthropology ifthis term were to be understood in its traditional and not modernsense, as well as a science of spirit within man or pneumatologywhich is absent from the worldview of the modern world. Finally,gnosis deals with the Principle and all the levels of manifestation


23/35


from the point of view of the unity which dominates over all thatexists and which is especially central to the Islamic perspective. Onemight say that Islamic metaphysics or gnosis is dominated by the two

basic doctrines of the transcendent oneness of Being (wah}dat al-wujd) and the universal man (al-insn al-kmil) which includes notonly a gnostic anthropology but also a symbolic cosmology on the

basis of the correspondence between the microcosm and macrocosm.Theoretical gnosis is also concerned in the deepest sense with

the reality of revelation and religion. The question of the relation between gnosis and esoterism on the one hand and the formal andexoteric aspect of religion on the other is a complicated one intowhich we cannot enter here. What is clear is that in every traditionalsociety gnosis and esoterism have been inextricably tied to thereligious climate in which they have existed. This is as true of Luriaand Jewish esoterism as it is ofankara and Hindu gnosis as well aseverything in between. In any case in this essay, which deals withgnosis in the Islamic tradition, we need to mention the profoundestconcern of the gnostics with the realities of religion and explanationof its teachings on the most profound level as we observe in manySufi treatises on the inner meaning of the Islamic rites. 62

Theoretical gnosis is concerned not only with the practicalaspects of religion, but also with basic Islamic doctrines such ascreation, prophecy, eschatology, etc. Islamic masters of gnosis speakof both the why and the how of creation. They speak of creation inGod as well as creation by God.63 They expound the doctrine of theimmutable archetypes (al-ayn al-thbitah) and the breathing of

existence upon them associated with the Divine Mercy which bringsabout the created order. They see creation itself as the Self-Disclosureof God.64 They also discuss the renewal of creation (tajdd al-khalq)at every moment.65 Furthermore, theoretical gnosis speaksextensively about the end as well as the beginning of things. Thedeepest explanation of Islamic eschatology based on the Quran andH{adth is found in such writings as theFuth}t al-makkiyyah of IbnArab.


24/35


In all traditional religions and cultural climes gnosis also provides the basis for the science of forms including artistic formsand makes comprehensible the language of symbolism. Althoughdealing at the highest level with the Formless, it is gnosis andmetaphysics that provide the basis for the science of symbols

especially in a world where the symbolist spirit has been lost.66 InIslam treatises on theoretical gnosis do not usually deal explicitly in aseparate section with forms and symbols but expound the principlesof this science which are then applied when necessary. The writingsof Ibn Araband Rmare replete with such examples. Such masters

provide the science of spiritual hermenetics (tawl) as well as apply itto diverse religious and artistic forms, symbols and myths includingof course those found in the Quran itself.

Gnosis is illuminative and unitive knowledge and therefore itis natural that theoretical gnosis be concerned with knowledge assuch, primarily sacred knowledge and knowledge of the sacred butalso with the grades and the hierarchy of knowledge.67 It is true thatmost traditional philosophies, including the Islamic, also deal withthis issue, but it is only in works on theoretical gnosis that one findsthe most universal treatment of this subject including of coursesupreme knowledge that is gnosis itself. Theoretical gnosis orscientia

sacra is also the metaphysics that lies at the heart of perennial philosophy understood traditionally. It has been sometimes calledtheosophy, as this term was understood before its modern distortion,and is also related to what is called mystical theology and mystical

philosophy in Western languages. In the Islamic tradition it has

provided the ultimate criteria for the judgment of what constitutesphilosophia vera. It has been foundational in the development of bothtraditional philosophy and the traditional sciences and is key to thedeepest understanding of all traditional cosmological sciencesincluding the hidden sciences (al-ulm al-khafiyyah orgharbah).The later traditional schools of philosophy that have persisted in theIslamic world to this day, chief among the School of Illuminationfounded by Suhraward (d. 587/1191) and the Transcendent


25/35


Theosophy/Philosophy established by Mull S{adr, are closelyassociated with irfn. One might in fact say that while after theMiddle Ages and the Renaissance in the West philosophy becamemore and more wedded and also subservient to modern science, as wesee so clearly in Kant, in the Islamic world philosophy became evermore closely associated with irfn from which it drew its sustenanceand whose vision of reality served as basis for its philosophizing. Oneneeds only read the works of MullS{adr such as his al-Shawhid al-rubbiyyah or the treatises ofq AlMudarris such as hisBadyial-h}ikam to ascertain the truth of this assertion. Many of the works ofthe later Islamic philosophers are at the borderline between h}ikmatand irfn although the two disciplines remain quite distinct from oneanother.

The Present Day Significance of Theoretical Gnosis

Today the Islamic world suffers greatly from the neglect ofits own intellectual tradition and yet there are some contemporarymodernized Muslim philosophers, especially in the Arab world and tosome extent Turkey, who dismiss later Islamic philosophy precisely

because of its association with irfn which they criticize pejorativelyas mere mysticism. At the other end of the spectrum there are thoseso-called fundamentalists who are opposed to both reason and gnosisand turn their backs on and moreover criticize the Islamic intellectualtradition, at whose heart stands gnosis, on the pretext of wanting tosave Islam. They are blind to the fact that it is precisely thisintellectual tradition of which Islam is in the direst need today, faced

as it is with the challenges of the modern world that are primarilyintellectual.Some of the greatest problems facing Islam on an intellectual

level today are the invasion of a secularist worldview and secular philosophies; the spread of a science and technology based on asecular view of nature and of knowledge of nature; the environmentalcrisis which is closely related to the spread of modern technology;religious pluralism and the need to comprehend in depth other


26/35


religions; the need to defend religion itself against all the secularist orexclusivist Christian attacks against it emanating primarily from theWest; the need to understand the principles of Islamic art andarchitecture and to apply these principles to creating authentic Islamicart and architecture today; to provide an authentic Islamic answer to

the relation between religion and science; to formulate an Islamicscience of the soul or psychology; and to establish a firm foundationfor the harmony between faith and reason. The role ofirfn is centralto the solution of all of these problems. It is only in gnosis that theunifying principle of faith and reason can be found. If one were onlyto understand irfn, one would realize its supreme significance forMuslims today. Furthermore, irfn is not enmeshed in the syllogisticform of reasoning to be found in Islamic philosophy, a form ofreasoning that is alien to many people today. Paradoxically, therefore,it is in a sense more accessible to those possessing intellectualintuition than traditional schools of Islamic philosophy which canalso play and in fact must play an important role in the contemporaryintellectual life of the Islamic world.

As already mentioned, in the traditional Islamic worldtheoretical gnosis was not only opposed by certain, but certainly notall, jurists, theologians and philosophers; it was also opposed bycertain Sufis who claimed that gnosis is the result of what is attainedthrough spiritual states and not through reading books on gnosis.Titus Burckhardt once told us that when he first went to Fez as ayoung man, one day he took theFus}s}with him to a great teacher tostudy this basic text ofmarifah orirfn with him. The teacher asked

him what book he was carrying under his arm. He said it was theFus}s}. The teacher smiled and said, Those who are intelligentenough to understand the Fus}s} do not need to study it, and thosewho are not intelligent enough are not competent to study it anyway.The master nevertheless went on to teach the young S. Ibrhm (TitusBurckhardt) the Fus}s} but he was alluding to the significance ofrealized gnosis and not only its theoretical understanding, aknowledge that once realized delivers man from the bondage of


27/35


ignorance, being by definition salvific knowledge. Burckhardt wenton to translate a summary of the Fus}s} into French, a translationwhich played a seminal role in the introduction of the School oftheoretical gnosis and Ibn Arab to the West. In fact, although themagisterial exposition of gnosis and metaphysics by traditionalmasters such as Ren Gunon, Frithjof Schuon, Burckhardt himselfand others were directly related to inner inspiration and intellection aswell as teachings of non-Islamic origin, they were also inextricablylinked with the tradition ofirfn discussed in this essay.

Of course, one does not become a saint simply by readingtexts of irfn or even understanding them mentally. One has torealize their truths and be what one knows. Nevertheless, the bodyof knowledge contained in works of theoretical gnosis and doctrinalSufism are a most precious science which Muslims must cherish as agift from Heaven. This vast body of writings from Ibn Arab and

Q

naw

to

q

Muh}ammad Rid}

Qumsha

and Amr Abd al-Q

dirand in the contemporary period from Mawln Thanw, Muh}ammad

Al Shhbd and Ayatollah Khomeini to Sayyid Jall al-Dnshtiyn and H{asan-zdah mul contain a body of knowledge ofvast richness, a knowledge which alone can provide the deepestanswers to the most acute contemporary intellectual, spiritual andeven practical questions. But above all this tradition alone can

provide for those Muslims capable of understanding it the SupremeScience of the Real, the science whose realization is the highest goalof human existence.68

Endnotes

1 We use this Latin term to distinguish it from sacred science which possesses amore general meaning and includes also traditional cosmological sciences.2 As far as opposition to Ibn Arabs doctrines are concerned, see for example,Alexander Knysh, Ibn Arab in the Later Islamic TraditionThe Making of a


28/35


Polemical Image in Medieval Islam (Albany, NY: State University of New YorkPress, 1999).3 On the traditional understanding of the perennial philosophy see Nasr,Knowledgeand the Sacred(Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1989), pp. 68ff.See also Frithjof Schuon, Tracing the Notion of Philosophy, in his SufismVeiland Quintessence, trans. William Stoddart (Bloomington (IN): World WisdomBooks, 1981), Chap. 5, pp. 115-128.4 The relation between Shiite gnosis and Sufism is a fascinating and at the sametime crucially important subject with which we cannot deal here. A number ofWestern scholars, chief among them Henry Corbin, have treated this issuemetaphysically and historically. See for example hisEn Islam iranien, Vol. III,Les Fidles damourShiism et soufisme (Paris: Gallimard, 1972), especially pp.149ff. See also Mohammad Ali Amir Moezzi and David Streight, The DivineGuide in Early Shiism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam (Albany, NY: StateUniversity of New York Press, 1994); and S. H. Nasr, Sufi Essays (Chicago: ABCInternational Group, 1999), pp. 104-120.5 Unfortunately there is no complete or even nearly complete history of eitherSufism itself nor doctrinal Sufism. Even the details of the School of Ibn Arabarefar from being known. At the present stage of scholarship we know but a few majorpeaks of this majestic range and much remains to be discussed and brought to lightin the arena of international scholarship.6 As an example of the relation between Ibn Arab and earlier gnostics one cancompare his treatment of walyah/wilyah discussed by many scholars such asMichel Chodkiewicz and William Chittick (see for example works cited below) andthe writings ofH{akm Tirmidh. For the views of the latter see Tirmidh, Kitbkhatm al-awliy, ed. Osman Yahya (Beirut: Imprimerie Catholique, 1965); alsoBernd Radtke, Drei Schriften des Theosophen Tirmid(Beirut: In Kommissein beiFranz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, 1992).There is now a substantial body of works in European languages on Ibn Arab aswell as translations of many of his writings especially in French. On Ibn Arabs

life and works see Claude Addas, Quest for the Red Sulphur: The Life of Ibn Arab

,trans. Peter Kingsley (Cambridge (UK): Islamic Texts Society, 1993); and StephenHirtenstein, The Unlimited Mercifier: The Spiritual Life and Thought of Ibn Arab(Ashland, OR: White Cloud Press, 1999). For an introduction to his teachings seeWilliam Chittick, Ibn Arab: Heir to the Prophets (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005). Forhis works see Osman Yahya, Histoire et classification de loeuvre dIbn Arab(Damascus: Institut Franais de Damas, 1964). For Ibn Arabs gnostic teachingssee W. Chittick, The Sufi Path of Knowledge (Albany, NY: State University of NewYork Press, 1989); his The Self-Disclosure of God(Albany, NY: State University of


29/35


New York Press, 1998; Michel Chodkiewicz,An Ocean without Shore: Ibn Arab,the Book and the Law, trans. David Streight, (Albany, NY: State University of NewYork Press, 1993); idem. Seal of the SaintsProphethood and Sainthood in theDoctrine of Ibn Arab, trans. Liadain Sherrard (Cambridge, UK: The Islamic TextsSociety, 1993); Henry Corbin, Alone with the Alone: Creative Imagination in theSufism of Ibn Arab (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997); andToshihiko Izutsu, Sufism and Taoism: A Comparative Study of Key PhilosophicalConcepts (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1984), Part I, pp. 7-283.7 See The Wisdom of the Prophets of Ibn Arab, trans. from the Arabic to Frenchwith notes by Titus Burchkhardt, trans. from French to English by Angela Culme-Seymour (Aldsworth (UK): Beshara Publications, 1975). This work has penetratingcomments on the metaphysics of Ibn Arabby Burckhardt. The latest and the mostsuccessful translation of theFus}s} in English is by Caner Dagli, The Ringstones ofWisdom (Fus}s} al-h{ikam) (Chicago: Kazi Publications, Great Books of the IslamicWorld, 2004). See also Charles-Andr Gilis, Le Livre des chatons des sagesse(Beirut: Al-Bouraq ditions, 1997).8 See Ibn Arab,Les Illuminations de la MecqueThe Meccan Illuminations, trans.

under the direction of Michel Chodkiewicz (Paris: Sindbad, 1988).9 On the history of the School of Ibn Araband theoretical gnosis see W. Chittick,The School of Ibn Arab, in Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Oliver Leaman (eds.),History of Islamic Philosophy (London: Routledge, 2001), pp. 510-523; S. H. Nasr,Seventh Century Sufism and the School of Ibn Arab, in his Sufi Essays(Chicago: ABC International Group, 1999), pp. 97-103; and Annemarie Schimmel,Theosophical Sufism in herMystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel Hill, NC: TheUniversity of North Carolina Press, 1978), pp. 259-286. There are also importantreferences to this School in several introductions of Sayyid Jall al-Dn shtiyntovarious philosophical and Sufi works edited by himself such as his edition ofSharh}fus}s}al-h{ikam of Qays}ar (Tehran: Shirkat-i Intishrt-i Ilm wa Farhang, 1375[A.H. solar]). See also A. Knysh, op. cit.10 See W. Chittick, Faith and Practice of Islam (Albany, NY: State University of

New York Press, 1992); Chittick, The Five Divine Presences: From al-Qnaw

toal- Qays}ar, Muslim World, vol. 72, 1982, pp. 107-128; and Chittick, The Last

Will and Testament of Ibn Arabs Foremost Disciple and Some Notes on itsAuthor, Sophia perennis, vol. 4, no. 1, 1978, pp. 43-58. See also Muh}ammadKhwjaw, Daw S{adr al-Dn (Tehran, Intishrt-i Mawl, 1378 [A.H. solar]), pp.17-114, containing one of the best summaries of the life, works and thought ofQnaw.


30/35


11 SeeKitb al-fukk, ed. by M. Khwjaw (Tehran: Intishrt-i Mawl, 1371 [A.H.solar]).12 See the edition of M. Khwjaw (Tehran: Intishrt-i Mawl, 1374 [A.H. solar]).This large volume includes, besides the texts of Qnawand Fanr, glosses by latermembers of the School of theoretical gnosis in Persia from q Muh}ammad Rid}Qumsha, Mrz Hshim Ashkiwar, and Sayyid Muh}ammad Qumm to AyatollahRh} Allh Khumayn(Khomeini) and H{asanzdah mul. There are also numerouscommentaries on this text by Turkish authors.13 This work was studied and translated by Arthur J. Arberry along with otherpoems of Ibn al-Frid} in The Mystical Poems of Ibn al- Frid} (London: E. Walker,1952 and Dublin: E. Walker, 1956). See also Emil Homerin, The Wine of Love andLife (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005).14 See S. J. shtiyns edition with commentary and introduction upon Mashriqal-darr(Mashhad: Chpkhna-yi Dnishgh-i Firdaws, 1398 [A.H. solar]).15 See his Sharh}fus}s}al-h{ikam (Qom: Bstn-i kitb, 2002).16 See Kashn, Sharh} fus}s} al-h}ikam, (Cairo: Mus}t}af al-Bb al-H{alab, 1966);also his Majmat al-rasil wal-mus}annaft, ed. Majd Hd-zdah (Tehran:

Mrth-i makt

b, 2000); and his Trait sur la prdestination et le libre arbitre,trans. Omar Guyard (Beirut: Al-Bouraq, 2005).

17 On Maghrib Sufism see Vincent Cornell, The Realm of the SaintPower andAuthority in Moroccan Sufism (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1998).18 When Titus Burckhardt was in Morocco in the 1930s, he experienced directlythe presence of these teachings. We shall turn to this matter later in this essay.19 See Michel Chodkiewicz, Spiritual Writings of Amir Abd al-Kader, trans. byteam under James Chrestensen and Tom Manning (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1995); and Le Livre des haltes, edited and trans. by MichelLagande (Leiden: Brill, 2000).20 See Michael Winter, Society and Religion in Early Ottoman Egypt: Studies in theWritings of Abd al-Wahhb al-Sharn (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books,1982).21

See A. Knysh, op.cit., pp. 225ff.22 See al-Jl, Universal Man, extracts translated with commentary by TitusBurckhardt, English. English translation from the French by Angela Culme-Seymour (Sherborne, Glos.: Beshara Press, 1983); and Reynold A. Nicholson,Studies in Islamic Mysticism (Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1978),Chapter II, pp. 77ff.


31/35


23 See Nbulus, Sharh} dwn ibn al-Frid} (Beirut: Dr al-Turth, 196?); andElizabeth Sirriyeh, Sufi Visionary of Ottoman Damascus: Abd al-Ghan al-Nbulus, 1641-1731 (London: Routledge Curzon, 2005).24 See Leslie Cadavid (ed. and trans.), Two Who Attained (Louisville, KY: FonsVitae, in press).25 In light of our discussion of the significance of theoretical gnosis it is importantto note that this master of irfn was the first rector of a university, to use acontemporary term, in the Ottoman Empire. On Qays}arsee the introduction of S. J.shtiyn to Rasil-i Qays}ar (Tehran: Imperial Iranian Academy of Philosophy,1357 [A.H. solar]); Mehmet Bayraktar (ed.), Dwd Qays}arRasil (Kayseri:Metroplitan Municipality, 1997); and also Emil Homerin, op. cit.Many glosses have been written to this day on Qays}ars commentary includingthat of Ayatollah Khomeini. See yat Allh al-uz}m al-Imm al-Khumayn,Talqt al sharh} fus}s} al-h}ikam wa mis}bh} al-uns (Qom: Daftar-i tablght-iislm. 1410 [A.H. lunar]). There were also numerous Ottoman glosses andcommentaries on Qays}ar.26 See his Commentary upon the Introduction of Qays}ar to the Fus}s}al-H{ikam of

Ibn Arab, with introductions in French and English by Henry Corbin and SeyyedHossein Nasr (Mashhad: Meshed University Press, 1966).

27 See ft. nt. 12.28 See Ibrahim Kalins entries to these figures in Oliver Leaman (ed.), Dictionary ofIslamic Philosophy (forthcoming).29 See W. Chittick, The School of Ibn Arab, in S. H. Nasr and Oliver Leaman(eds.),History of Islamic Philosophy , p. 520.On the history of this School in India in general see W. Chittick, Notes on IbnArabs Influence in the Subcontinent, in The Muslim World, vol. LXXXII, no. 3-4, July-October, 1992, pp. 218-241; and Sayyid Al Abbs Rizvi, A History ofSufism in India (2 vols.) (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1978), in passim.30 Chittick discusses many of these figures in his Notes on Ibn ArabsInfluence31

See Chittick, Notes on Ibn Arabs Influence , pp. 233ff.32 See for example, Shah Waliullah of Delhi, Sufism and the Islamic Tradition,trans. G. N. Jalbani, ed. D. B. Fry (London: Octagon Press, 1980). This workcontains the translation of both the Lamah}t, one of Shh Wal Allhs mainphilosophical texts, and the Satat. Both texts, and especially the first, reveal theinfluence of theoretical gnosis on this major intellectual figure.


32/35


On Thanvi see Fuad Nadeem, A Traditional Islamic Response to the Rise ofModernism, in Joseph Lumbard (ed.), Islam Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal ofTradition (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom Books, 2004), pp. 79-116.33 See Syed Muhaammad Naquib al-Attas, The Mysticism of H{amzah Fans}r(Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press, 1970).34 See Zailan Moris, South-east Asia, in Nasr and Leaman (eds.), History ofIslamic Philosophy, pp. 1134ff.35 Sachiko Murata, Chinese Gleams of Sufi Light: Wang Tai-Ys Great Learning ofthe Pure and Real and Liu Chihs Displaying the Concealment of the Real Realm(Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2000), pp. 32ff. See also ZviBen-Dor Benite, The Dao of Muhammad: A Cultural History of Muslims in LateImperial China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005).36 See Balyn,ptre sur lUnicit absolue, trans. Michel Chodkiewicz (Paris: LesDeux Ocans, 1982).37 See Henry Corbin and Osman Yahya, La Philosophie shiite (Paris-Tehran:Andrien-Maisonneuve and Departement dIranologie, 1969); and (same authors)LeTexte des textes (Paris-Tehran: Andrien-Maisonneuve and Departement

dIranologie, 1975). This work contains

muls commentary on the Fus}

s}. Seealso HenryCorbin,En Islam iranien, Vol. III, pp. 149ff.

38 Edited by Rajab AlMaz}lm(Tehran: McGill University and Tehran UniversityPress, 1980).39 This long work has been studied and edited by Myil Hiraw as Sharh}fus}s}al-h{ikam (Tehran: Intishrt-i Mawl, 1368 [A.H. solar]).40 Edited by Muh}sin Bddfar (Qom: Intishrt-i Bdr, 1378 [A. H. solar]).41 Edited with introduction and commentary by S. J. shtiyn (Tehran: ImperialIranian Academy of Philosophy, 1976). On Ibn Turkah see H. Corbin, En Islamiranien, vol. III, pp. 233ff.; and S. H. Nasr,Islamic PhilosophyFrom Its Origin toTodayPhilosophy in the Land of Prophecy (Albany, NY: State University of NewYork Press, forthcoming), Chapter 10.42 See mul, Tah}rr tamhd al-qawid(Tehran: Intishrt-i al-Zahr, 1372 [A.H.

solar]). This voluminous text is one of the major works on theoretical gnosis toappear in recent times.43 Edited by W. Chittick (Tehran: The Imperial Academy of Philosophy, 1977).This edition contains a major introduction by shtiyn dealing with some of themost delicate issues ofirfn.44 We were privileged to study the Ashiat al-lamat over a several year periodwith Sayyid Muh}ammad Kz}im As}s}r who expounded the major themes of gnosisthrough this beautifully written text.


33/35


45 On Shiism in Safavid Persia see, S. H. Nasr, Traditional Islam in the ModernWorld(London: KPI, 1987), Chapter 4, pp. 59-72.46 See S. H. Nasr, S{adr al-Dn Shrz and his Transcendent Theosophy (Tehran:Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, 1997), Chapter 4, pp. 69-82.47 See Yahya Christian Bonaud, LImam Khomeyni, un gnostique mconnu du XXesicle (Beirut: Les ditions Al-Bouraq, 1997), pp. 80-81. Bonaud mentions in thisconnection a number of names such as MullH{asan Lunbn (d. 1094/1683) andMuh}ammad AlMuz}affar (d. 1198/1783-84) as does S. J. shtiyn, but the historyofirfn-i naz}arfrom the Safavid period to Sayyid Rad} is far from clear. As far asirfn is concerned, Sayyid Rad} possibly studied with Mull Muh}ammad Jafarbda.48 On him see ManchihrS{adq Suh, Trkh-i h}ukam wa uraf-yi mutaakhkhir(Tehran: Intishrt-i h}ikmat, 1381 [A.H. solar]), pp. 261-262.49 On q Muh}ammad Rid} see S{adq Suh, op.cit., p. 259ff. On him and othermajor figures of the School of Tehran see also Nasr, Islamic Philosophy from itsOrigin to Today, Chapter 13. See also the introductions of S. J. shtiyn to Sharh}al-mashir of Lhj (Mashhad: Mashhad University Press, 1964); and to Mull

S{adrs al-Shaw

hid al-rub

biyyah (Mashhad: Mashhad University Press, 1967),concerning q Muh}ammad Rid} and the whole history ofirfn in Persia from the

end of the Safavid period onward.50 See S{adqSuh, op.cit., p. 267.51 These figures are discussed by Suh. See also our Islamic Philosophy . ForShahbdsee Bonaud, op.cit., pp. 82-87.52 Bonaud, op.cit., p. 87.53 The major study of Bonaud, cited above, is an exception. Nothing comparableexists in English.54 One day in the 1960s when we were discussing the philosophical ideas ofAyatollah Khomeini with our eminent teacher, Allmah T{abt}ab, who was hisfriend, we asked the Allmah what philosophical schools most attracted AyatollahKhomeini. He answered that Ayatollah Khomeini had little patience (h}aws}ilah) for

the logical arguments of Peripatetic philosophy but was more interested in MullS{adr and Ibn Arab. The same view is confirmed by Mrz MahdH{ir whostudied with Ayatollah Khomeini and who says,He [Imam Khomeini] did not have much interest in Peripatetic philosophy andlogic. His teaching of the Asfrhad more of a gnostic attraction. He had studiedirfn well with q-yi Shhbdand was busy all the time reading the books ofIbn Arab. Therefore, he also looked at the Asfr from the point of view of IbnArab and not from the perspective of Ibn Sn and Frb. When he came to the


34/35


words of Ibn Sn and Frb, he would become completely uncomfortable andwould escape from philosophical constraints through the rich power ofirfn.

Khirad-nma-yi hamshahr, June 1, 2005, p. 1755 On the different gnostic currents in Shiism see our foreword to H{usaynT{ihrn,Kernel of the Kernel(Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2003), pp.xiii-xix.56 On the gnostic works of Ayatollah Khomeini see Bonaud, op.cit., Chapter 2, pp.103ff. The institution called Muassisa-yi tanz}m wa nashr-i thr-i al-Imm al-Khumayn in Tehran has published all of his works including those concerned withgnosis as well as the dwn of his poetry.57 This is not only true of Persia but also of Shiite circles in Iraq such as the one in Najaf, at least until a few years ago. During the Qajar and early Pahlavi periods,Tehran was better known forirfn-i naz}arand Najaf for operative irfn, althoughtexts such as theFus}s} were also taught in Najaf by remarkable masters with whomsuch luminaries as Allmah T{abt}abstudied this seminal text.58 Tehran, Szimn-i ch p wa intishrt-i Wizrt-i Farhang wa Irshd-i islm,1378 [A.H. solar].59

To quote the original French, La substance de la connaissance est laConnaissance de la Substance. F. Schuon, Formes et substance dans les religions(Paris: Dervy-Livres, 1975, p. 35).60 We have dealt with this issue extensively in ourKnowledge and the Sacred; seealso F. Schuon, Stations of Wisdom (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom Books,1995), pp. 1-42.61 We have dealt with the teachings of this Supreme Science in ourKnowledge andthe Sacred, Chapter 4, pp. 130ff. This Supreme Science is of course alsometaphysics as traditionally understood. See Ren Gunon, OrientalMetaphysics, in Jacob Needleman (ed.), The Sword of Gnosis (Boston: Arkana,1986), pp. 40-56. Schuon has also written many illuminating pages on this subjectincluding his book Survey of Metaphysics and Esoterism, trans. Gustavo Polit(Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom Books, 1986). See also S. H. Nasr (ed.), The

Essential Frithjof Schuon (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom Books, 2005),especially pp. 309ff.62 See for example, Martin Lings, A Sufi Saint of the Twentieth Century (Berkeley,CA: University of California Press, 1973), Chapter X, pp. 176ff; and Henry Corbin,Temple and Contemplation, trans. Philip and Liadain Sherrard (London: KPI,1986), pp. 183ff.


35/35


63 Metaphysically speaking, creation must take place in God before the external actof creation takes place. On this important doctrine across many religious boundariessee Leo Schaya,La Cration en Dieu (Paris, Dervy-Livres, 1983).64 See W. Chittick, The Self-Disclosure of God: Principles of Ibn al-ArabsCosmology (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1998).65 See Toshihiko Tzutsu, Creation and the Timeless Order of Things (Ashland, OR:White Cloud Press, 1984).66 For outstanding examples of this function of metaphysics and gnosis see RenGunon,Fundamental Symbols: The Universal Language of Sacred Science, trans.Alvin Moore, ed. Martin Lings (Cambridge, UK: Quinta Essentia, 1995); andMartin Lings, Symbol and Archetype: A Study of the Meaning of Existence (Cambridge (UK): Quinta Essentia, 1991).67 We have dealt with this issue extensively in ourKnowledge and the Sacred.68 See ourIn the Garden of Truth (San Francisco, CA: Harper, forthcoming).

Documents

Sayyed Hossein Nasr - Theoretical Gnosis and Doctrinal-Sufism