Page 28 - Chapter
Two: [a further example of the differences between Sufi sobriety and intoxication]
"can be found in the contrast between the two literary high points of the Sufi
tradition, Ibn Arabi and Jalal ad-Din Rumi. The former wrote voluminously in Arabic prose
and addressed every theoretical issue that arises in the context of Islamic thought and
practice. His works are enormously erudite and exceedingly difficult, and only the most
learned of Muslims, those already trained in jurisprudence, Kalam, and other Islamic
sciences, could have hoped to read and understand them. In contrast, Rumi wrote over
70,000 verses of intoxicating poetry in a language that any Persian-speaking Muslim could
understand."
Commentary: The
author is quite misleading, if not incorrect, when he claims that Rumi wrote "poetry
in a language that any Persian-speaking Muslim could understand." While
Persian-speaking Muslims might have been able to read the words of Rumi’s poetry, and
while they may have been able to understand, on certain levels, some of the truth being
conveyed through various verses, only someone who shared the same, or a similar, spiritual
plateau as Rumi could have understood, and fully appreciated, what was being communicated
through his poetry.
If this were not the
case, then, in effect, the author is maintaining that anyone, irrespective of their
spiritual condition, could understand the depths of Rumi’s spiritual wisdom just by
reading his poetry. There would be no need for Revelation, or the Prophetic tradition, or
a shaykh, or a silsilah, or a process of purification, or a discipline, or practices, or
anything else.
Rumi would not have
agreed with this. Yet, if one tries to argue that "any Persian-speaking Muslim could
understand" the language of Rumi’s poetry, one tends to end up with a position
which says that all one needs is a copy of the Divan or Mathnawi, and one can understand
even the most subtle of mystical conditions, stations, states, and realms.
The author of Sufism
- A Short Introduction is also misleading, if not incorrect, when he contends that
the writings of ibn al-‘Arabi (especially Futuhat al-Makkiyya - Meccan
Openings - and Fusus al-hikam - Bezels of Wisdom) consists of material which
is "enormously erudite and exceedingly difficult, and only the most learned of
Muslims, those already trained in jurisprudence, Kalam, and other Islamic sciences, could
have hoped to read and understand them." Although the writings of ibn al-‘Arabi
(may Allah sanctify his soul) can be characterized, quite correctly, as "enormously
erudite" - especially the two aforementioned works - the aspect of difficulty tends
to be encountered by those who lack those spiritual stations which enable an individual to
understand the meaning and significance of what is being said.
Furthermore, to say that
"only the most learned of Muslims, those already trained in jurisprudence, Kalam, and
other Islamic sciences could have hoped to read and understand them" is completely
wrong. In fact, quite the opposite is true.
Ibn al-‘Arabi (may
Allah sanctify his soul) was not only extremely well-versed in all of the usual
disciplines that are taught by jurists, clerics, and theologians, but he also understood
the limitations of both the approach in which such disciplines were couched., as well as
the mentality that often accompanied such discourse. Consequently, he sometimes wrote in a
way that, on the one hand, was intended to camouflage certain aspects of the truth in
relation to those who were trained in disciplines such as jurisprudence and Kalam, while,
on the other hand, still providing the commentary, allusions, and explanations which would
benefit those who were sincere seekers after the sort of essential truths which were being
communicated through ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify his soul).
People - irrespective of
how scholastically well-trained or knowledgeable they might be, could derive spiritual
benefit from his works. His works explored themes such as the essential meaning of Deen,
along with the purpose and potential of human existence - themes in which everyone had an
interest, to one degree or another.
He provided the relevant
ideas, observations, experiences, commentaries, elaborations, issues, problems, and so on
as he went along. If a person was not familiar with some facet of Deen before reading ibn
al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify his soul), then, such an individual knew about that
facet after reading him. At the same time, if someone was familiar with the traditional
perspectives of philosophers, jurists, and theologians, then, ibn al-‘Arabi (may
Allah sanctify his soul) analyzed those perspectives in a way that shed new light on old
issues and introduced readers to dimensions of possibility in the Qur’an and the
teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) which had been ignored, buried,
misunderstood, or distorted by many forms of traditional scholarship.
If ibn al-‘Arabi
(may Allah sanctify his soul) "addressed every theoretical issue that arises in the
context of Islamic thought and practice", this is not because he was a theoretician.
Instead, he was an advocate and practitioner of the sciences of experiential unveiling,
and he was using the shortcomings and problems inherent in theoretical perspectives -
which were devoid of any direct experience of the Real - as so many staging areas for the
construction of the sort of conceptual scaffolding that would permit individuals to build
a launching pad for exploration of the Self and which, eventually, could be left behind
when concepts were replaced by the ‘realities’ for which the various conceptual
place-holders were helping to prepare the individual for the time of mystical
‘lift-off’.
Oftentimes, the people
who have the most difficulty with the work of ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify his
soul) are those who are unwilling to believe there could be any processes of understanding
or knowing which are not a function of rational reasoning processes. Meccan Openings
and Bezels of Wisdom are both expressions of direct, spiritual unveiling,
and they contain the kind of insights, understanding, and wisdom which can never be
generated by, or grasped through, purely rational modalities.
A theoretician is caught
up in, and limited to, the form of imagination - discussed previously - which is
‘fiction oriented’, and tends to fashion plausible story-lines drawn from this
or that combination of interpreted information. There may be various points of congruence
between such a theory and those aspects of experience and phenomenology to which the
theory is making reference, and there may be different elements of truth or reality which
are reflected in, or given expression through, the structural character of the theory,
but, for the most part, a theory is a forced imposition upon reality rather than a process
of apprehension concerning some facet of imaginal truth which is characteristic of the
spiritual understanding that arises out of experiential unveiling.
In fact, this theoretical
sort of imagination can never access imaginal or spiritual worlds. At most, this approach
can take this or that item of someone else’s direct experience of such spiritual
realms and incorporate those features into a fiction-based framework which, then, is
projected onto spirituality while, simultaneously, assuming that the former is an accurate
depiction of the latter.
Just as it was
exceedingly difficult for scholastic philosophers to accept the idea that thought must be
answerable to the rigors of empirical observation and experiment, so too, those who are
dependent on lower-order, creative, fiction-oriented imagination have difficulty in
accepting the proposal that theoretical constructions are answerable to the rigors of
direct, experiential unveiling of spiritual truths. Indeed, this proposal is so difficult
for some of these individuals to accept, that they tend to project their own condition
onto people like ibn al-‘Arabi and believe he is doing nothing more than engaging in
an exercise of lower-order, fiction-oriented, creative imagination.
The poetry of Rumi (may
Allah sanctify his soul) is rooted in the experiences of unveiling. The prose of ibn
al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify his soul) arises, as well, from the same source. In
fact, both authors can be likened, somewhat, to a loon - a bird which is known for, among
other things, its haunting call in the dark of night, as well as its capacity to disappear
beneath the surface of a body of water and stay down for long periods of time, only to
re-surface quite some distance away.
Each of these authors is
calling to those who are, relatively speaking, in spiritual darkness but who are willing
to listen to the plaintive cry of the mystical quest. Each of these authors writes in such
a way that although, for a time, some of their meanings are visible and accessible,
suddenly, without warning, the meanings have disappeared beneath the surface - no longer
visible and accessible.
To discover these
meanings, one must develop the capacities of a loon. One must learn how to dive into the
depths of spirituality.
For someone of the
requisite spiritual experience and insight, the works of ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah
sanctify his soul) are no more difficult to understand than are the writings of Rumi (may
Allah sanctify his soul). Moreover, contrary to what the author of Sufism - A Short
Introduction maintains, the key issue here is neither linguistic style, nor is it
a matter of how much one knows about such things as Kalam, Hadith, jurisprudence, and the
like.
The Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him) is reported to have said: "He who knows himself, knows his
Lord." The works of both Rumi, as well as ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify
their souls) are detailed explorations into the question of what it means to know oneself
- and through oneself, one’s Lord.
If you want to understand
Rumi (may Allah sanctify his soul), find your Shams (may Allah sanctify his soul) and fall
in love. If you want to understand ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify his soul), then,
go through the lived experience of your own version of ‘Meccan Openings’, and
become intoxicated with the Truth. If one has done neither of the foregoing, then,
irrespective of one’s facility with Persian or Arabic, and irrespective of one’s
knowledge of jurisprudence and theology, one will not understand the essence of what is
being said by either Rumi or ibn al-‘Arabi (may Allah sanctify their souls) -
although one might enjoy this or that verse, or find, of interest, one, or another,
discussion.
|
