The Key Concepts of Al-Farghån 'S Commentary On Ibn Al-Fåri 'S Sufi Poem, Al-Tå Iyyat Al-Kubrå
The Key Concepts of Al-Farghån 'S Commentary On Ibn Al-Fåri 'S Sufi Poem, Al-Tå Iyyat Al-Kubrå
The Key Concepts of Al-Farghån 'S Commentary On Ibn Al-Fåri 'S Sufi Poem, Al-Tå Iyyat Al-Kubrå
Giuseppe Scattolin
1. INTRODUCTION
5. Mashåriq al-darår¨ Shar¢ Tå¤iyya Ibn al-Fåri‰; ta¤l¨f Sa¡¨d al-D¨n Ía¡¨d
Farghån¨, translated and commented on by Sayyid Jalål al-D¨n Ashtiyån¨
(Mashhad, Iran: Anjuman-i Falsafah-i wa-¡Irfån-i Islam, 1398/1978): Intro-
duction, pp. 127–30.
6. William C. Chittick, “The Five Presences: from al-Q¬naw¨ to al-Qayßar¨”,
The Muslim World 72/2 (1982), p. 108.
other hand, their way of interpretation does betray the letter and
the intent of the Egyptian Sufi poet, forcing into his language
foreign concepts and terms, taken from a different Sufi vision,
the Akbarian philosophical sufism.
3. AL-FARGHÅNÔ’S MUQADDIMA12
17. For this reason I prefer to translate them, following Chittick’s trans-
lation, as Absolute Unity and Related Unity, instead of Exclusive Unity and
Inclusive Unity, as found in other translations.
18. This particular usage of the terms (jåmi¡, jam¡iyya) in al-Farghån¨’s
vocabulary is of great value for a comparison with Ibn-Fåri‰’s vocabulary. In
fact, in my semantic study, I have pointed to the centrality of the term jam¡
(universal, all-comprehensive union) in Ibn-Fåri‰’s poem.
a¢adiyya wå¢idiyya
(the main qualifications of each aspect of Oneness)
says, it was love that broke the balance and made the Essence’s
inclination toward manifestation (™uh¬r) prevail over its intrinsic
inclination toward non-manifestation (lå-™uh¬r). This concept
occurs many a time throughout al-Farghån¨’s Introduction and
is always referred to the above quoted hadith kuntu kanz-an …,
in which it is said that: “I loved to be known” (a¢bab-tu an u¡raf),
“therefore I created the world …”. Thus, love is, in al-Farghån¨’s
vision, the inner power lying at the origin of the movement of
self-manifestation of the Essence, driving it toward its full mani-
festation, in all its possible aspects. He says:
The influence (athar) of Speech (¢ad¨th) and Love (ma¢abba) and the
essential inclination (al-mayl al-dhåt¨) made the order of manifesta-
tion (¢ukm al-™uh¬r) prevail over the order of non-manifestation
(¢ukm lå-™uh¬r), thus [that influence] decided the antecedence of
that [¢ukm al-™uh¬r] over this [¢ukm lå-™uh¬r]. Consequently, the
transcendent Essence (al-dhåt al-aqdas) manifested itself to itself
(tajallat ¡alå nafsi-ha), because of that influence and that prevalence
and that antecedence. Thus, it [the Essence] became manifest to it-
self in itself (™aharat li-nafsi-ha f¨ nafsi-ha), I mean, in that very First
Determination (al-ta¡ayyun al-awwal) and that very First Receptivity
(al-qåbiliyyat al-¬lå); so the Essence perceived (wajadat, lit. found,
became present to) itself in this First Self-disclosure (tajall¨) and
Manifestation (™uh¬r) and according to its order.21
Thus the Original Love, coming from the depths of the Ab-
solute Mystery, was the original impulse that drove it towards
the completion of the process of manifestation (kamål al-™uh¬r).
Consequently, all the following stages of manifestation must be
seen as effects of that Original Love. Such a process is compared
by al-Farghån¨ to the flowing of the breath (nafas) in the act of
breathing. The different sounds and words are but articulations
of the same breath. In a similar way, all the aspects (i¡tibåråt)
and the qualities (ßifåt) that will appear at the Second Level as
distinct (mutamayyaza) and differentiated (mutaghåyara), are al-
ready present, though not distinct and not differentiated in this
First Level, which is the origin of them all.
Therefore, each created being perceives the things that are present
at the level of its determination (ta¡ayyun).
First group
This comprises some general designations that are correlated and
opposite to the corresponding ones of the First Manifestation;
they are:
(a) The Second Manifestation: (al-tajall¨ al-thån¨)
(b) The Second Determination: (al-ta¡ayyun al-thån¨)
(c) The Second Level: (al-martabat, al-rutbat al-thåniya)
(d) The Level of the Related Unity: (martabat al-wå¢idiyya)
Second group
This comprises a number of designations related to some particu-
lar Sufi or philosophical conceptions, such as:
(a) The level of Divinity (martabat al-ul¬ha), because at this
level the name God (Allåh) is manifested.
(b) The world of meanings or ideas (¡ålam al-ma¡ån¨), because
at this level the ideas and meanings of all realities, general
and particular, are present in the Divine knowledge.
(c) The presence of the Cloud (al-¢a‰rat al-¡amå¤iyya, from
¡amå¤, i.e. Cloud), because the Second Manifestation is the
linking isthmus (barzakh) between Oneness and multiplicity.
(d) The Perfect Human Reality (al-¢aq¨qat al-insåniyyat al-
kamåliyya), because the Second Manifestation is the perfect
realization of the human essence, conceived as the most uni-
versal and comprehensive reality, including and encompass-
ing all the other realities.
(e) The station of “the distance of the two extremes of the bow”
(qåb qawsayni), because the Second Manifestation is the
station of the prophets and the saints next to the station
of Mu¢ammad, designated as the station of the “nearest”
(aw adnå).
and through the return of them all unto Himself, because of His
own word: “Unto Him every thing will be returned” (Q. 11: 123).36
is the one that encompasses all the other levels: this is the Perfect
Man (insån kåmil). Thus, al-Farghån¨’s vision can be outlined in
the following pattern:
The Transcendent Mystery (al-ghayb) or the Divine Essence
(dhåt) manifests itself:
(a) At the Real, eternal, uncreated level (al-¢aqq) as Absolute
Oneness (wa¢da) which includes:
1. The Absolute Unity (al-a¢adiyya): with no relation to
multiplicity
2. The Related Unity (al-wå¢idiyya): with the display of the
Divine Names.
(b) At the created level (al-khalq), as part of the Related Unity
(al-wå¢idiyya) there are:
3. The Level of Spirits (martabat al-arwå¢)
4. The Level of Images–Archetypes (martabat al-mithål)
5. The Level of Corporeal Bodies (martabat al-ajsåm).
(c) At an all-comprehensive level (al-jåmi¡), which is the sum-
mary of the whole process of manifestation, there is:
6. The Level of the Perfect Man (martabat al-insån al-kåmil).
These six levels are the manifestation of the same Divine Essence
and can be summarized as follows:
43. This hadith, important for Sufis, is reported by al-Bukhår¨ and Ibn
±anbal, see Wensinck, Concordance I, p. 806b. Some Sufi reports add “...
and He is now as He was”, cf. al-±ikma, n. 34 of Ibn ¡A†å¤ Allåh al-Sakandar¨
(d.709/1309).
45. For more about the differences between the two Sufis, see Chittick,
“The Five Presences”, pp. 109–16; idem, “Introduction” to Fakhruddin ¡Iraqi,
Divine Flashes, translated and introduced by William C. Chittick and Peter
Lamborn Wilson (Classics of Western Spirituality, New York: Paulist Press,
1982), pp. 3–32; idem, “Ibn al-¡Arab¨ and his School”, pp. 60–8; The Sufi
Path, pp. 12–30, 112–43.
61. The D¨wån of Ibn al-Fåri‰, op. cit. (English text), p. 18.
basic movements, one coming from and the other going back
to it:
(a) The first is the movement from the One to the Multiple, or
from Oneness to multiplicity. This movement is called the
self-manifestation (™uh¬r, tajall¨) of the Divine Essence (al-
dhåt) in its attributes (ßifåt) and acts (af¡ål), and goes through
six levels of self-manifestation.
(b) The second is the movement from the Multiple to the One,
or from multiplicity to Oneness. This movement is called
return (ruj¬¡) and self-vision (istijlå¤), and goes through the
four stages of self-disclosures (tajalliyåt).
On such a basic pattern of thought al-Farghån¨ builds his whole
commentary and understanding of Ibn al-Fåri‰’s language and
vision. Such an ontological pattern is based essentially on the
Neoplatonic philosophy largely adopted by Muslim philosophers
and Sufi thinkers like Ibn ¡Arab¨. It seems that al-Farghån¨ takes
for granted that Ibn al-Fåri‰ has the same ontological vision and,
on this presumption, he projects into the Faridian verses the
Akbarian philosophy. Such a method is surely questionable.
One can easily point out that in Ibn al-Fåri‰’s actual text there is
very little of all that complicated ontological, cosmological and
anthropological Sufi vision and elaborated terminology that is
expounded in al-Farghån¨’s Introduction. Ibn al-Fåri‰’s pattern
of thought seems to be on the whole rather simpler, based on
lived experience rather than on theoretical speculation, though
he does not ignore a number of Sufi technical terms. Thus one
can point to a number of clear dissimilarities and similarities
between Ibn al-Fåri‰’s text and al-Farghån¨’s commentary that
should be taken into consideration.
4.4.1. DISSIMILARITIES
Ibn al-Fåri‰ explicitly mentions only three basic stages of his
mystical journey. I could assess this on the basis of an accurate
semantic analysis of the poem. The three stages are expressly
named by the poet himself, as:
(a) The stage of division (called al-farq), in which the poet ex-
periences the separation from his Beloved. At this stage the
erotic language is prevalent.
(b) The stage of absolute unity and identity (called al-itti¢åd),
in which the poet experiences the absolute unity with his
Beloved ending in self-identity, expressed in the formulas: “I
am She (anå iyyå-hå)”, “She is I” (hiya iyyå-ya), “I am My-self”
(anå iyyå-ya).63
(c) The stage of universal union (called al-jam¡) in which the
poet experiences the universal union, i.e. the merging of his
own “Self” (anå) into the whole universe, in which the One
and the Many are united.
Ibn al-Fåri‰ ignores all the complicated divisions and sub-divi-
sions found in al-Farghån¨’s commentary and its philosophical
vocabulary. In particular, the important technical expression,
namely “The Level of the All-comprehensive Unity” (martabat
al-a¢adiyya al-jam¡iyya), a term which is at the centre of al-
Farghån¨’s Sufi vision and continuously repeated in his commen-
tary, representing in his view the highest stage of unity, never
occurs as such in Ibn al-Fåri‰’s poetical vocabulary. The nearest
concept to it could be that of the Mu¢ammadan Light (al-n¬r
al-mu¢ammad¨), which is alluded to at the end of the poem (vv.
751–2) and with which the poet clearly identifies himself. This
notion is parallel to other Sufi concepts such as that of the Perfect
Man (al-insån al-kåmil) and of the Mu¢ammadan Reality (al-
¢aq¨qat al-mu¢ammadiyya), mentioned at length by al-Farghån¨,
but never mentioned as such by Ibn al-Fåri‰ in his text. In my
analysis, I have shown that Ibn al-Fåri‰ hints at such a lofty real-
ity only in two instances and only with two designations: al-qu†b
(the Pole) in vv. 500–1, and the muf¨‰ al-jam¡ (the bestower of
union) in v. 751 (which corresponds to the muf¨‰ al-asrår, i.e. the
bestower of spiritual powers, explicitly said of Mu¢ammad in v.
625). I have also pointed out that Ibn al-Fåri‰ clearly identifies
himself with such a supreme Reality, but without providing any
definition or explanation of such designations.64 It seems that
63. It is interesting to note that the term itti¢åd, which surely is a key
term in the Tå¤iyya, never appears as such in al-Farghån¨’s vocabulary.
64. G. Scattolin, L’esperienza mistica, vol. II, pp. 407–24.
the poet took for granted that such terms were quite familiar
to the Sufi circles he was addressing. In fact, the term “pole”
(qu†b) had a long history before Ibn al-Fåri‰, and has been used
since al-±ak¨m al-Tirmidh¨ (d.285/898) to designate the highest
degree of sainthood (walåya), having its source in the so-called
Mu¢ammadan Reality (al-¢aq¨qat al-mu¢ammadiyya). This was
thought of as the “Islamic Logos”, that is the first manifestation
of the Divine Essence, the eternal principle and goal of the whole
creation, and the sum of all the Divine Qualities.65 But Ibn al-
Fåri‰’s language proves to be, on the whole, quite alien to such
a complicated terminology.
In conclusion one can say that, compared with Ibn al-Fåri‰’s
poetical language, al-Farghån¨’s philosophical vocabulary appears
to be quite artificial, and in many instances misleading and for-
eign to it, lacking the inspiration of Ibn al-Fåri‰’s poetry. In my
semantic analysis, I have pointed out that even some technical
terms, such as wuj¬‰ (existence), r¬¢ (spirit), nafs (soul), dhåt
(essence), which I called “pivotal terms” in the Faridian vocabu-
lary, do not have the philosophical overtones they have in Ibn
¡Arab¨’s vocabulary.
4.4.2. SIMILARITIES
However, in spite of all these differences between the two Sufis’
visions and vocabulary, one finds also some similarities. Both
visions are rooted in a common Sufi background and herit-
age, coming down from a long Sufi tradition and centred, in
the end, on the concept of the Perfect Man. At the conclusion
of my research, it appeared to me that the very notion of Per-
fect Man (al-insån al-kåmil) must have had the deepest influ-
ence in shaping Ibn al-Fåri‰’s mystical vision. Such a notion
had already found full development in the Sufi literature by the
sixth–seventh/twelfth–thirteenth centuries, and reached in Ibn
¡Arab¨’s philosophy its most systematic exposition. The Perfect
Man was seen as the ultimate goal of the Sufi path. It was thought
of as the perfect image of God, the mirror of his Divine quali-
ties, the supreme synthesis between the Divine Essence and its
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS
3. But now, after all, a new approach to Ibn al-Fårid’s Sufi poetry
is surely needed, going beyond what has been done in the past.
We now possess better tools for research and criticism, and I
have dedicated some of my efforts to this end, going from the
linguistic analysis of Ibn al-Fårid’s language to a critical edition
of his text. Others, such as Thomas Emil Homerin, have delved
more into the historical field.68 All such work should now pro-
duce a new and, one hopes, truer picture of Ibn al-Fårid’s Sufi
spiritual world, adding something new to our knowledge of the
history of Sufism.
In the end, however, one should always be aware that when
dealing with a mystical experience one has to cross over into
the world of silence, the mystical silence, since a true experi-
ence of the Absolute can never be really and totally expressed
in human words. Human words and linguistic expressions are
perceived by mystics as just traces of, and pointers to, a Reality
always transcending all human understanding and expression.
For this reason, I concluded my first research on Ibn al-Fåri‰’s
Sufi experience with the reminder that:
In the end, we are simply called to follow his path towards that
Reality.
68. Thomas Emil Homerin, From Arab Poet to Muslim Saint: Ibn al-Fåri‰,
His Verse and His Shrine (Columbia, USA: University of South Carolina Press,
1994; 2nd edn, Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo
Press, 2001).
69. The D¨wån of Ibn al-Fåri‰, p. 11.