THE TÁ’IYYA (iv) — vv. 600–761

(600) Such is the soul: if she cast off her desires, her faculties are multiplied and endow every atom with the (entire) activity of the soul.

(601) Union suffices thee (as an explanation of these miracles); they are not produced by a separation consisting in two extensions, namely, measurable space and finite time.

After enumerating some miracles of pre-Islamic prophets—Noah, Solomon, Abraham, Moses, Jacob and Jesus—the poet explains the unique position of Mohammed as the spiritual father of all prophets and saints and the real author of all miracles past, present and future.

(614) The inward notion that produced (miraculous) effects in outward things is that (oneness) which, by (Divine) permission, my moulded speech communicated to thine ear,

(615) And the notions underlying all (the effects) that belonged to them (the former prophets) were brought (together) by him (Mohammed) who caused them to stream over us, thereby putting the seal upon a time when no prophets arise;

(616) And there was none of them (the former prophets) but had called his people to the Truth by grace of Mohammed and because he was Mohammed’s follower.

(617) And a divine of ours is one of those prophets, while any one of us that calls (the people) to the Truth performs the office of apostle;

(618) And in our Mohammedan era our gnostic is (like) one of the old prophets, one who clave to the commandment and was firm (in obedience to the religious law).

(619) After him, the evidentiary miracles of the prophets became acts of Divine grace towards his saints and vicegerents.

(620) His family and his Companions and the religious leaders of the next generation sufficed mankind instead of the apostles.

(621) Their miracles form part of what he conferred on them exclusively, in bequeathing to them a share of every excellence (of his).

(627) And the saints who believe in him, though they never saw him, are elect in virtue of their affinity: they are near (to him) as brother to brother.

(628) And his being near them in spirit resembles his yearning towards them in form. Marvel, then, at a presence in absence!

The mystical union of the saints with the Logos expresses itself in language that might easily be mistaken for blasphemy.

(629) They (the prophets) who received the Spirit called (their peoples) to my way in my name and vanquished the miscreants by my argument;

(630) And in consequence of the priority of my essence they all revolve in my circle or descend from my watering-place,

(631) For albeit I am outwardly a son of Adam, yet in him is a spirit of mine that bears witness I am his father.

(637) Do not deem that this matter lies outside of me, for none gained lordship (as a prophet or a saint) except he entered my service,

(638) Since, but for me, no existence would have come into being, nor would there have been a contemplation (of God), nor would any secure covenants have been known.

(639) None lives but his life is from mine, and every willing soul is obedient to my will;

(640) And there is no speaker but tells his tale with my words, nor any seer but sees with the sight of mine eye;

(641) And no silent (listener) but hears with my hearing, nor any one that grasps but with my strength and might;

(642) And in the whole creation there is none save me that speaks or sees or hears.

(643) And in the world of composition (the sensible world) I manifested in every (phenomenal) form a reality whereby that form was made fair;

(644) And in every reality that was not revealed by my phenomena I was imaged, but not in a corporeal shape;

(645) And in that which the spirit beholds by clairvoyance I was hidden from fatigued thought by my subtlety.

The clairvoyant spirit contemplates itself as the Whole that pervades every aspect of reality and as the Identical in which all contraries are united.

(646) In the mercy of “expansion” the whole of me is a wish whereby the hopes of all the world are expanded;

(647) And in the terror (wrath) of “contraction” the whole of me is an awe, and o’er whatsoever I let mine eye range, it reveres me;

(648) And in the union of both these attributes the whole of me is a nearness. Come, then, draw near to my beauteous qualities!

(649) In the place where “in” ends I ceased not to feel, through myself, the majesty of contemplating myself—an experience arising from the perfection of my nature;

(650) And where is no “in” I ceased not to contemplate in myself the beauty of my Being, not with the sight of mine eye.

Perception of reality is impossible so long as sense-impressions, which affirm that things exist by themselves, are allowed to stand in the way.

(651) So if thou art of me, seek union with me and efface the distinction of my separation and be not turned aside by the darkness of Nature,

(652) And receive the signs of my inspired wisdom which will remove from thee the false judgments of opinion formed through sensation.

Ibnu ’l-Fáriḍ naturally condemns metempsychosis, a special form of the already repudiated doctrine of incarnation (ḥulúl).

(653) Have nothing to do with one that believes in naskh (the transmigration of souls into human bodies)—for his is a case of maskh (the transmigration of souls into the bodies of animals)—and hold aloof from his doctrine;

(654) And let him alone with his assertion of faskh (the transmigration of souls into plants)—for if raskh (the transmigration of souls into minerals) were true, he deserves to suffer it everlastingly in every cycle.

If we scorn the notion of a spirit doomed to perpetual confinement in matter, how shall we represent the true monistic relation between them? Our minds can never know that relation as it really is: like all mystical truth, it is unseizable by thought. But mystics have their own ways and means of communicating with each other, and the poet has just announced himself as a hierophant (v. 652), bidding his readers attend to “the signs of his inspired wisdom.” The best commentary on this phrase is Ibnu ’l-‘Arabí’s remark that mystical “states” cannot be explained, but can only be indicated symbolically to those who have begun to experience the like.

(655) My coining parables for thee time after time concerning my state is a favour from me to thee.

(656) Consider the Maqámát of the Sarújite and draw a lesson from his variety (of disguise)—then wilt thou deem it good to have taken my advice,

(657) And thou wilt perceive that the soul in whatever form and shape she appears, inwardly masks herself in sensation;

(658) And if his (Ḥarírí’s) work is fiction, yet the Truth makes of it a parable, for the soul labours not in earnest.

(659) Therefore be understanding, and while doing justice to thy soul look upon thy phenomenal actions with thy (faculty of) sense;

(660) And wouldst thou have thy soul unveil herself, contemplate what thou seest without doubt in the burnished mirrors.

(661) Was it another that appeared in them? Or didst thou behold thyself by means of them when the rays were refracted?

(662) And listen how the sound of thy voice, when it dies away, is returned to thee by the walls of lofty buildings.

(663) He that talked with thee there, was he some one else? Or didst thou hear words uttered by thy voiceful echo?

(664) And tell me, when thy senses had been hushed in slumber, who imparted to thee his lore?

(665) Ere to-day thou didst not know what happened yesterday or what shall happen to-morrow,

(666) And now thou art acquainted with the histories of them that are past and with the secrets of them that shall come after—and the knowledge makes thee proud.

(667) Think’st thou it was another, not thyself, that conversed with thee in the drowsiness of sleep touching diverse sorts of noble knowledge?

(668) ’Twas none but thy soul, what time she was busied with her own world and disengaged from the theatre of humanity.

(669) She unveiled herself to herself in the invisible world in the form of a sage that led her to the apprehension of wondrous meanings;

(670) For already had the sciences been imprinted on her, and she was anciently taught the names (realities) thereof through the inspiration of fatherhood,

(671) Not by knowledge derived from the “separation” of otherness was she blest; nay, she enjoyed that which she dictated to herself.

(672) Had she become naked (detached from the body) before thy dream, thou wouldst have beheld her, as I do, with an eye that sees true (in a waking vision).

(673) And her being normally detached (in sleep) in the first place confirms her being detached in the eternal world (of mystical contemplation) in the second place; therefore be steadfast,

(674) And be not one whom his studies made foolish, so that they enfeebled and unsettled his mind;

(675) For there, beyond tradition, lies a knowledge too subtle to be apprehended by the farthest reach of sound understandings.

(676) I received it from myself and derived it from myself: ’twas with mine own bounty my soul was replenishing me.

One of the most amazing things in Von Hammer’s version of the Tá’iyya is his translation of vv. 677-8. Their language could scarcely be plainer; they introduce a passage in which the poet dwells on the relative value of sense-perception viewed as an illustration of the nature of reality—and this is how Von Hammer translates them:

Du spiele nicht mit Scherz and fasle nicht im Leben,
Du sei den Possen nicht, dem Ernste sei ergeben!
O hüte dich and wend’ dich ab von allen Bildern,
Von allen Fantasei’n, die nur Geträumtes schildern.

In a different context Ibnu ’l-Fáriḍ might have said this or something like it; but here, as it happens, he says just the opposite.

(677) Be not wholly neglectful of the play (illusion), for the jest of the playthings (phenomena) is the earnestness of a soul in earnest,

(678) And beware of turning thy back on every tinselled form or unreal and fantastic case;

(679) For in the sleep of illusion the apparition of the shadow-phantom brings thee to that which is shown through the thin (semi-transparent) curtains.

Here Ibnu ’l-Fáriḍ refers to the shadow-lantern by means of which leathern figures, moved by wands against a muslin curtain, are illuminated and made visible to the spectators on the other side. The verses immediately following (680-706) have been translated above. They describe how the showman, standing behind the screen, displays his figures in every variety of action and causes the spectators to sympathise with the representation; yet when the screen is taken away, he alone is seen to be the real actor. This analogy guides us to the truth of things. The showman is the soul, the shadowy figures are the phenomena of sensation, the screen is the body: remove it and the soul is one with God.

(707) Even thus (like the showman) I was letting down between me and myself the curtain that obscures the soul in the light of darkness,

(708) That in producing my actions at intervals I might appear to my sensation gradually, thereby accustoming it (and preparing it for complete illumination).

(709) I joined the play (illusion) thereof to my work (reality), in order to bring near to thy understanding the ends of my far-off purposes.

(710) Although his (the showman’s) case is not (essentially) like mine, there is a resemblance between us in regard to the two forms of manifestation:

(711) His figures (puppets) were the forms in which, with the aid of a screen, he displayed his action: they became naught and withdrew when he revealed himself;

(712) And my soul resembles him in action, for my sensation is like the figures (puppets), and the (bodily) vesture is my screen.

(713) When I removed the screen from me, as he removed it (from him), so that my soul appeared to me without any veiling

(714) And already the sun of contemplation had risen, and all existence was illumined, and through myself the knots of the tethering-rope (of sense-perception) were untied

(715) I slew the youth, my soul, while on the one hand I was setting up the wall (of consciousness) to safeguard my laws and on the other staving in my (bodily) boat,

(716) And turned to shed my replenishing grace over every created being according to my actions at every time;

(717) And were I not veiled by my attributes, the objects in which I manifest myself would be consumed by the splendour of my glory.

Once the illusion of selfhood is destroyed, nothing remains but “the Master of the Show,” the one real person in the drama

Which, for the Pastime of Eternity,
He doth Himself contrive, enact, behold.

(718) The tongues of all beings, wilt thou but hearken, bear eloquent witness to my unity.

(719) And touching my oneness (ittiḥád) there hath come down a sure Tradition, whose transmission by (oral) relation (from the Prophet) is not infirm,

(720) Declaring that God loves (His creatures) after they draw nigh unto Him by voluntary works of devotion or by the observance of that which is obligatory;

(721) And the point that the doctrine bids us mark is made as clear as the light of noon by the words “I am to him an ear.”

(722) I used the (religious and devotional) means to reach unification until I found it (unification), and the agency of the means was one of my guides (thereto);

(723) And I unified in respect of the means until I lost them, and the link of (this) unification was the way of approach (to unity) that availed me best;

(724) And I stripped my soul of them both, and she became single (detached from the world of relations)—yet had she never at any time been other than single (in her real nature);

(725) And I dived into the seas of union, nay, I plunged into them in my aloneness and brought out many a peerless pearl,

(726) That I might hear mine acts with a seeing ear and behold my words with a hearing eye.

(727) So if the nightingale lament in the grove, whilst the birds in every tree warble a response to her,

(728) And if the flute-player make music in accord with the strings touched by the hand of a singing-girl

(729) Who chants tender poetry, so that the souls (of the hearers) mount to their Paradisal lote-tree at each trill—

(730) I take delight in the effects of mine own art, and I ever declare my union and society to be free from partnership with others.

It follows from the doctrine of ittiḥád that all forms of worship are essentially divine. Even dualism and polytheism represent certain aspects in which God expresses Himself. This passage (vv. 731-49) should be compared with the views set forth by Ibnu ’l-‘Arabí and Jílí (see pp. 130 foll. and 157 foll.).

(731) Through me the assembly of them that praise my name is (attentive like) the ear of one reading (a book), and for my sake the wine-seller’s shop is (open like) the eye of a scout;

(732) And virtually no hand but mine tied the infidels’ girdle; and if it be loosed in acknowledgement of me, ’twas my hand that loosed it.

(733) And if the niche of a mosque is illuminated by the Koran, yet is no altar of a church made vain by the Gospel;

(734) Nor vain are the books of the Torah revealed to Moses for his people, whereby the Rabbis converse with God every night.

(735) And if a devotee fall down before the stones in an idol-temple, there is no reason for religious zeal to take offence;

(736) For many a one who is clear of the shame of associating others with God by means of idolatry is in spirit a worshipper of money.

(737) The warning from me hath reached those whom it sought, and I am the cause of the excuses put forward in every faith.

(738) Not in any religion have men’s eyes been awry, not in any sect have their thoughts been perverse.

(739) They that heedlessly fell in love with the sun lost not the way, forasmuch as its brightness is from the light of my unveiled splendour;

(740) And if the Magians adored the Fire—which, as history tells, was not quenched for a thousand years—

(741) They intended none but me, although they took another direction and did not declare the purpose they had formed.

(742) They had once seen the radiance of my light and deemed it a fire, so that they were led away from the true light by the rays.

(743) And but for the screen of existence, I should have said it out: only my observance of the laws imposed on phenomena doth keep me silent.

(744) So this is no aimless sport, nor were the creatures created to stray at random, albeit their actions are not right.

(745) Their affairs take a course according to the brand of the Names; and the wisdom which endowed the Essence with (diverse) attributes caused them to take that course in consequence of the Divine decree,

(746) Disposing them in two handfuls—“and I care not…and I care not”—one destined for happiness and one for misery.

(747) Oh, let the soul know that the case stands thus, or else let her not (seek to) know (at all), for according to this the Koran is recited every morning.

(748) And her knowledge arises from herself: ’twas she that dictated to my senses what I hoped (of mystic knowledge).

(749) Had I singled, I should have swerved (from the truth) and been stripped of the signs of my union (jam’) through associating my handiwork (as an equal partner) with myself.

Protesting that he is not to be blamed for having divulged the sublime mysteries with which the grace of God illuminated him, the poet bids his disciple farewell. Let him follow in his master’s footsteps and be one with the Essence, even as he is one.

(759) In the world of reminiscence the soul hath her ancient knowledge—my disciples beg it of me as a boon.

(760) Do thou, therefore, make haste to enjoy my eternal union, in virtue of which I found the full-grown men of the tribe (of Sufis no wiser than) little babes.

(761) For my contemporaries drink only the dregs of what I left; and as for those before me, their (vaunted) merits are my superfluity.