Pages 10 and 11 - Chapter
One:"Many Sufis reduce the basic archetypes for all plurality and
multiplicity to two divine attributes - beauty and majesty, or mercy and wrath, or
gentleness and severity. The created traces of mercy and wrath can be pictured in terms of
the yin-yang symbol. Just as there is no pure yin or yang (as represented by the black dot
in the white half and the white dot in the black half), so also there is no pure mercy or
pure wrath in the created domain. Wherever mercy displays its signs and traces within
creation, there will also be manifestations of wrath and vice versa. In the world as we
experience it, certain things display the attribute of wrath more directly, and others are
dominated by mercy. In general, things pertaining to the external and material realms tend
to manifest wrath, whereas the closer we move to the spiritual world, the closer we
approach pure mercy. As Rumi puts it, "This world is the house of God’s
severity," which is to say that the other world is the house of God’s gentleness
and mercy.
"Given that
God’s wrath is associated with the world’s distance from God, it is also closely
associated with the Sharia - which concerns itself with the outermost human domain, that
of bodily activity. However, the wrath that shows its face in the Sharia derives from
God’s mercy and leads back to it. Although mercy and wrath have a yin-yang sort of
relationship in this world, the two do not have equal weight with God. A famous prophetic
saying tells us that God’s mercy takes precedence over His wrath, which is to say
that God’s essential nature is mercy and gentleness, and that wrath and severity
pertain to the domain of created things. The rather stern and forbidding face of the
Sharia, which demands that people follow its commandments or taste the chastisement of
Hell, displays God’s majesty and severity, but lurking beneath its surface is the
promise of the precedent mercy. All things come forth from mercy, and all will return to
mercy in the end."
Commentary: The
author starts out on the wrong foot when he says: "Many Sufi reduce the basic
archetypes for all plurality and multiplicity to two divine attributes - beauty and
majesty, or mercy and wrath, or gentleness and severity." The terms which he is
construing in terms of ‘beauty and majesty, or mercy and wrath, or gentleness and
severity" are ‘jamal’ and ‘jalal’, and neither of these terms can
be reduced down in the way the author is suggesting.
‘Jamal’ and
‘jalal’ refer not to specific attributes, but,
rather, to several classes of attributes. Qualities of harmony, love,
compassion, beauty, mercy, ease, friendship, gentleness, beneficence, forgiveness,
expansion, and so on, tend to be subsumed under the category of ‘jamali’
attributes, whereas qualities of rigor, constraint, difficulty, majesty, transcendence,
severity, justice, accountability, wrath, incomparability, and so on, tend to be subsumed
under the category of ‘jalali’ attributes.
The principle of tawhid
or unity encompasses both categories of attributes. Moreover, there is no facet of
‘plurality and multiplicity’ which does not give expression to this principle
which weaves the Divine Names and Attributes together to give expression, at every
‘point’ of the manifest realm, to the Purpose inherent in the Divine Himma which
loved for the ‘Hidden Treasure’ to be known through Creation.
At any given
‘point’ of manifestation, many qualities of ‘jamal’ and many qualities
of ‘jalal’ come together to give expression to the form, properties, nature and
potential of the projected image of a given aspect of the fixed form within the
‘Reality of Muhammad’. At every ‘point’ of manifestation the whole,
original Divine Desire is present and focused on bringing forth Its own purpose. This is
the Will of God.
Not only does the author
confuse specific attributes with categories of attributes, but he compounds this problem
by settling on two specific attributes - namely, mercy and wrath - as his way of
summarizing the whole issue. In the process, this manner of approaching various issues of
importance to Islam, in general, and the Sufi Path, in particular, introduces a
considerable amount of misinformation and misdirection into the ensuing discussion.
The author begins his
outline of "mercy" and "wrath" by referring to a symbol from Chinese
philosophy - the yin-yang relationship. This symbol consists of a circle which is divided
into two, non-linear, curved teardrop-like figures, which have several dimensions of
shared symmetry but are complementary to one another, and also express an inverted, yet
spatially contiguous dynamic with respect to each other.
Although the author
describes one of these teardrop-like figures as being white, while the other is black, the
color scheme of the original symbol is red and black, not white and black. The red
teardrop-like figure represents the realm of ‘yang’ which encompasses the male
element, along with heat, light, and life. The black teardrop-like figure gives expression
to the realm of ‘yin’ which includes the female element, as well as attributes
of cold, darkness, and death.
Within the heart of the
red teardrop-like figure is a black dot, and there is a similar, but red, dot within the
black teardrop-like figure. These dots are intended to convey the idea that there is a
subtle and deeper level of dynamic confluence in which a trace of opposite, but
complementary, elements and forces operates within each set of attributes.
The author mentions the
yin-yang symbol because he believes the relationship between the attributes of
‘mercy’ and ‘wrath’ bear certain similarities to that symbol. More
particularly, he seems to feel that, like the yin-yang dynamic, the relationship between
‘mercy’ and ‘wrath’ is one in which there is an element of mercy
within wrath, as well as an element of wrath within mercy, so that neither of these
attributes comes in a ‘pure’ form.
Citing the yin-yang
symbol as, in part, bearing some sort of analogical resemblance to the Islamic context
being considered is problematic in a number of respects. First of all, the set of
attributes which are encompassed, respectively, by ‘jamal’ and
‘jalal’, are not at all comparable to the set of qualities to which
‘yin’ and ‘yang’ give expression.
In fairness, the author
of Sufism - A Short Introduction is not necessarily stating, or implying,
that such a parallel exists. However, this difference needs to be noted because it carries
over into the features which the author does wish to suggest as being somewhat parallel
between the yin-yang symbol and his discussion of the attributes of Divinity.
As indicated previously,
jamali and jalali attributes are both differentiated expressions of tawhid in action, and
notwithstanding whatever differences there may be between these sets of attributes, the
attributes within these categories are acting in concert with one another to produce a
coherent, unified, harmonious whole. As such, the attributes of jamal and jalal flow
together in order to modulate the realm of manifestation in accordance with
the niyat or intention at the heart of the Divine Himma concerning the ‘Hidden
Treasure’.
All of the attributes are
added together to give expression to the Divine recipe for producing the ‘stew of
manifestation. This ‘stew’ will have appropriate proportions of each
‘ingredient’ or attribute introduced at just the right instant to generate the
flavor, consistency, dynamic, and so on, that is called for by the Original Purpose.
In contrast to the
author’s contention that: "there is no pure mercy or pure wrath in the created
domain", each of the Divine attributes or ‘ingredients’ is pure and
unadulterated, with an array of infinite nuances and possibilities on which to draw from
within the nature of that attribute or ingredient in order to lend just the precise
modulating effect for which the recipe calls at any given point of manifestation.
There could be situations
in which attributes of, say, severity and compassion, are brought together so there is
either severe-compassion or compassionate-severity in evidence within manifestation. Yet,
this involves a dynamic confluence of differentiated attributes modulating the character
of that which is manifested, rather than a situation in which each attribute carries
within it a trace of some opposite attribute as the author’s use of the yin-yang
symbol suggests.
To follow up on the above
example, severe-compassion and compassionate-severity are not necessarily the same -
although in some instances they could be just different ways of saying the same thing. In
the first instance, severity is modulating compassion, whereas in the second instance,
compassion is modulating severity.
There are an infinite
array of combinations in which the attributes of severity and compassion could come
together in some form of modulated dynamic. Moreover, one must keep in mind that not only
are there many, many Divine attributes other than severity and compassion, but any, or
all, of these attributes may be present, from point to point of the manifested universe,
modulating that universe in precise and exacting ways to give expression to the Divine
Himma concerning the ‘Hidden Treasure’ which is to be known, in various ways,
through Creation.
Notwithstanding the
foregoing considerations, the author is incorrect when he maintains that: "wherever
mercy displays its signs and traces within creation, there will also be manifestations of
wrath and vice versa". While it is true that various attributes from within both general
categories of attributes - that is, ‘jamal’ and ‘jalal’ - will be
present at any given locus of manifestation, it is not necessarily true that the jalali
side of things, so to speak, will always be in terms of ‘wrath’.
In fact, depending on circumstances, the attribute of ‘wrath’ may be entirely
absent from a given locus of manifestation, although some other expression of the jalali
category - such as constraint, rigor, justice, and so on - might be present
In addition to the
foregoing considerations, there is, as well, an element of arbitrariness in how the author
of Sufism - A Short Introduction conceptualizes the relationship between,
for example, ‘mercy’ and ‘wrath’. He is assuming human beings can
readily identify what constitutes an instance of ‘mercy’ or ‘wrath’.
Is the granting of
someone’s desire for money, prestige, ease, fame, material goods, and so on, an
expression of ‘mercy’ or ‘wrath’? After all, if the granting of these
desires leads away from fulfilling the purpose of life, then, irrespective of how pleasant
the things and conditions being received may be, they could all be merely variations on a
theme of being given enough rope with which to hang oneself.
On the other hand, can
one necessarily say that the imposition of poverty, difficulty, hardship, constraint, and
so on is a matter of ‘wrath’? If the experience of these conditions leads to
spiritual purification, development, and realization, or if they deny one
‘opportunities’ which could be the means of one’s spiritual ruin, then, in
reality, the presence of such jalali attributes in one’s life is a blessing in
disguise.
Is a slow, painful death
necessarily an expression of God’s displeasure? Is a quick death necessarily
merciful?
Seeking forgiveness for
one’s transgressions against God, others and oneself is an important process on any
spiritual path. A lingering illness, despite all its attendant difficulties, could afford
the opportunity of time through which to try to make some form of restitution - even if
only in words - for the ways in which one may have wronged others or oneself.
If one takes advantage of
this opportunity, then, the illness may be an expression of severe-compassion. If one
fails to take advantage of such an opportunity, then, conceivably, such an illness is -
above and beyond the illness itself - just another face of severity for one has met the
opportunity with denial and rejection.
On the other hand, if one
dies quickly, although one has avoided the pain and difficulty of a long illness, one also
has missed out on having the time to mend fences, or bring past hurts to an amenable form
of resolution, before passing on. Is the glass half full, or half empty, or neither? Is a
quick death a matter of mercy in action or wrath in action or something else?
Going through difficulty,
as well as going through ease, can have a variety of meanings, on a variety of levels.
Everything depends on why Divinity has wished for a given set of modulating attributes to
come together to create a context of manifestation which has, among other features,
properties of difficulty and/or ease.
Consequently, everything
must be referred back to the Divine niyat at the heart of the Original Himma or Aspiration
which underlies and underwrites all of manifested existence. One also would do well to
remember that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have said:
"Hell is veiled in delights, and Heaven is veiled in hardships and miseries" -
although, certainly, not everything which is delightful is necessarily a sign of Hell, and
not everything which is a hardship or misery is a veiled form of Paradise.
Furthermore, maybe, we,
ourselves, have a hand in determining whether a given context turns out to be an
expression of ‘mercy’ or ‘wrath’. More specifically, Divinity might
bring together a confluence of attributes to create a context of challenge or opportunity,
and the manner in which we respond will be the determining factor as to how the situation,
ultimately, will be characterized.
If opportunity is given
and we take advantage of the situation to our own spiritual benefit, then, the opportunity
could be considered a mercy. However, if an opportunity is given and we fail to take
advantage of the chance for spiritual improvement, or if we misuse the opportunity, then,
although the opportunity originally may have been offered as a mercy, we have transgressed
against our own souls, and, in the process, we may have imposed severity on ourselves
through our rejection or wasting of the opportunity
I say "may have
imposed severity on ourselves", for, conceivably, the initial opportunity may have
been given by God with the fore knowledge that we would not be equal to the opportunity,
but, nonetheless, God also intended that the ‘failure’ be an occasion for a
subsequent seeking of forgiveness which would be granted. So, in this case, the severity
which we impose on ourselves through our failure may become an avenue to mercy at some
later juncture in our lives.
To label situations as
exhibiting ‘mercy’ or ‘wrath’ is both simplistic and presumptuous. The
realm of manifestation is complex, layered, subtle, textured, nuanced, deep, non-linear,
rich, and mysterious.
|
